These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

EVE Fiction

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
12Next page
 

Are eve weapons so short ranged ?

Author
solrac lara
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#1 - 2015-04-13 21:55:57 UTC  |  Edited by: solrac lara
So i wanted to ask to the more versed people in eve lore are eve sweapons so short ranged ? i know we have short ranges in game because game mechanics is understandable and makes the game enjoyable for me at least but in lore weapons are so short ranged too ? its 23k century and 10 kms sounds a bit short ranged for me so anyone have any source short history or anything baut eve ship ranges.
Also a question when you bomb a dust district with your ship is that range cannon becaus ei watch some videos and ships where able to orbital bombin from thousans of kms away or thats just game mechanics
Teinyhr
Ourumur
#2 - 2015-04-13 22:58:14 UTC  |  Edited by: Teinyhr
As far as I know, yes, the weapons are relatively short ranged even in lore. The only exception I can think of is the weapons of the Jove Mothership in Vak'Atioth that was firing from "seemingly out of nowhere" (whether this means it could cloak and fire when cloaked, or simply just really far away is up to debate I guess). But there is a seemingly logical explanation for this, I might be mixing up some other franchises technobabble in my head, but there would be something like a "lightspeed barrier" meaning that your sensors could not accurately tell where enemy vessels were in space beyond certain ranges, and of course with space being 3 dimensional this means predicting where your enemy will be is harder than it would be on land or the surface of the sea.

Other factor is that aside from certain missiles, all other weapon systems are "dumb-fire" and cannot correct their trajectory after firing. Lasers cannot keep their beams coherent enough to do noticeable damage beyond certain ranges. depending on the focusing crystal they use.

As for the orbital bombardment thing, I'm not sure either what's up with the planetary ranges. To me it would seem the beacon that tells your range from an orbital body is infact somewhere in the middle of the planet's core or at least lower mantle, not anywhere near the ground level at least.
Samira Kernher
Cail Avetatu
#3 - 2015-04-14 10:02:04 UTC
Compared to a lot of other sci-fi universes, EVE weapons actually have fairly extensive ranges.
solrac lara
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#4 - 2015-04-14 14:31:25 UTC
Samira Kernher wrote:
Compared to a lot of other sci-fi universes, EVE weapons actually have fairly extensive ranges.

Its 200 km considered extensive maybe against star trek where most of the battles happen at visual range haha but excluding that idk
Ibrahim Tash-Murkon
Itsukame-Zainou Hyperspatial Inquiries Ltd.
Arataka Research Consortium
#5 - 2015-04-14 18:15:59 UTC
Lots of science fiction, especially of a visual medium, has engagements occurring very close because it looks way cooler than reality. If space combat ever occurs the ranges involved are going to be mind mindbogglingly huge, tens of thousands to millions of miles huge. Like any game Eve has to sometimes sacrifice realism for awesomism.

"I give you the destiny of Faith, and you will bring its message to every planet of every star in the heavens: Go forth, conquer in my Name, and reclaim that which I have given." - Book of Reclaiming 22:13

Teinyhr
Ourumur
#6 - 2015-04-14 19:10:19 UTC
Star Trek weapon ranges wary greatly, but actually are several thousands to several hundred thousand kilometers. Of course at these ranges the combat wouldn't be very visually engaging which is why we almost always see knife-fight standoffs in the series and movies.
solrac lara
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#7 - 2015-04-14 20:55:51 UTC
Teinyhr wrote:
Star Trek weapon ranges wary greatly, but actually are several thousands to several hundred thousand kilometers. Of course at these ranges the combat wouldn't be very visually engaging which is why we almost always see knife-fight standoffs in the series and movies.

I though it was the same with eve close ranges in game to make it more practical and funny and big ranges in fluff railguns should in theory have infinite ranges there is no friction in space so the projectile could travel forever or until it crash with something
Tavin Aikisen
Phoenix Naval Operations
Phoenix Naval Systems
#8 - 2015-04-15 01:02:00 UTC
solrac lara wrote:
Samira Kernher wrote:
Compared to a lot of other sci-fi universes, EVE weapons actually have fairly extensive ranges.

Its 200 km considered extensive maybe against star trek where most of the battles happen at visual range haha but excluding that idk


Don't forget speeds! In the original series the Enterprise would engage enemies at warp speeds and sometimes from hundreds or thousands of kilometres away as they closed in.

"Remember this. Trust your eyes, you will kill each other. Trust your veins, you can all go home."

-Cold Wind

Enya Sparhawk
Black Tea and Talons
#9 - 2015-04-15 16:27:58 UTC
Of course, in star trek when a ship explodes beside you, you feel it...

Fíorghrá: Grá na fírinne

Maireann croí éadrom i bhfad.

Bíonn súil le muir ach ní bhíonn súil le tír.

Is maith an scéalaí an aimsir.

When the lost ships of Greece finally return home...

Trensk Mikakka
Out of Focus
Odin's Call
#10 - 2015-04-15 23:29:46 UTC
To be fair, the only other Sci-Fi universe i've ever seen with the ranges like EVE has been Warhammer 40,000, which usually has fights from as close as brawling fights in EVE to farther than the farthest snipers in EVE. Otherwise, it doesn't look very cool on screen if you can't even see the other ship when you're shooting at it.
Daerrol
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#11 - 2015-04-16 18:31:57 UTC
Teinyhr wrote:
Star Trek weapon ranges wary greatly, but actually are several thousands to several hundred thousand kilometers. Of course at these ranges the combat wouldn't be very visually engaging which is why we almost always see knife-fight standoffs in the series and movies.

In classic star Trek they frequently engage thigns at extreme range. They just zoom in the screen imensly. I distinctly remember scenes where they were engaging at warp speeds.
Ibrahim Tash-Murkon
Itsukame-Zainou Hyperspatial Inquiries Ltd.
Arataka Research Consortium
#12 - 2015-04-16 20:29:38 UTC
Engaging at warp speeds doesn't necessarily mean they were fighting at great distance or with tracking that had to deal with quickly moving targets. What matters is relative speed to target, for instance chasing someone or being chased while in warp could easily still mean firing taking place over a short distance and at a low relative speed.

"I give you the destiny of Faith, and you will bring its message to every planet of every star in the heavens: Go forth, conquer in my Name, and reclaim that which I have given." - Book of Reclaiming 22:13

YuuKnow
The Scope
#13 - 2015-04-18 15:49:21 UTC
solrac lara wrote:
So i wanted to ask to the more versed people in eve lore are eve sweapons so short ranged ? i know we have short ranges in game because game mechanics is understandable and makes the game enjoyable for me at least but in lore weapons are so short ranged too ? its 23k century and 10 kms sounds a bit short ranged for me so anyone have any source short history or anything baut eve ship ranges.
Also a question when you bomb a dust district with your ship is that range cannon becaus ei watch some videos and ships where able to orbital bombin from thousans of kms away or thats just game mechanics


If you use RL physics and weapon performance yes. Winchell Chung has an excellent website http://www.projectrho.com/public_html/rocket/spacegunintro.php

But pretend that the weapons in the Eve Universe aren't actually like their modern counterparts. Lasers are called 'lasers', but aren't really the same as 20th century lasers, etc.

Implant any cannon you want (Lasers are really subspace photon distruption beams, etc) that have limited range because of x, y, or z.

yk
Michael Takeda
Doomheim
#14 - 2015-04-20 23:08:09 UTC
Mass Effect has an exchange in one of the games which I think might shed some light on the short weapon ranges in EVE:

Quote:

Gunnery Chief: This, recruits, is a 20-kilo ferrous slug. Feel the weight. Every five seconds, the main gun of an Everest-class dreadnought accelerates one to 1.3 percent of light speed. It impacts with the force of a 38-kilotomb bomb. That is three times the yield of the city buster dropped on Hiroshima back on Earth. That means Sir Isaac Newton is the deadliest son-of-a-***** in space. Now! Serviceman Burnside! What is Newton's First Law?

First Recruit: Sir! A object in motion stays in motion, sir!

Gunnery Chief: No credit for partial answers, maggot!

First Recruit: Sir! Unless acted on by an outside force, sir!

Gunnery Chief: Damn straight! I dare to assume you ignorant jackasses know that space is empty. Once you fire this husk of metal, it keeps going till it hits something. That can be a ship, or the planet behind that ship. It might go off into deep space and hit somebody else in ten thousand years. If you pull the trigger on this, you're ruining someone's day, somewhere and sometime. That is why you check your damn targets! That is why you wait for the computer to give you a damn firing solution! That is why, Serviceman Chung, we do not "eyeball it!" This is a weapon of mass destruction. You are not a cowboy shooting from the hip!

Second Recruit: Sir, yes sir!


Considering that EVE ships are very maneuverable and that sensors are limited by the speed of light, it stands to reason that EVE ships may have not be allowed to fire unless a firing solution is 100% accurate to avoid collateral damage.
Kashadin
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#15 - 2015-04-22 05:28:10 UTC
Michael Takeda wrote:
Mass Effect has an exchange in one of the games which I think might shed some light on the short weapon ranges in EVE:

Quote:

Gunnery Chief: This, recruits, is a 20-kilo ferrous slug. Feel the weight. Every five seconds, the main gun of an Everest-class dreadnought accelerates one to 1.3 percent of light speed. It impacts with the force of a 38-kilotomb bomb. That is three times the yield of the city buster dropped on Hiroshima back on Earth. That means Sir Isaac Newton is the deadliest son-of-a-***** in space. Now! Serviceman Burnside! What is Newton's First Law?

First Recruit: Sir! A object in motion stays in motion, sir!

Gunnery Chief: No credit for partial answers, maggot!

First Recruit: Sir! Unless acted on by an outside force, sir!

Gunnery Chief: Damn straight! I dare to assume you ignorant jackasses know that space is empty. Once you fire this husk of metal, it keeps going till it hits something. That can be a ship, or the planet behind that ship. It might go off into deep space and hit somebody else in ten thousand years. If you pull the trigger on this, you're ruining someone's day, somewhere and sometime. That is why you check your damn targets! That is why you wait for the computer to give you a damn firing solution! That is why, Serviceman Chung, we do not "eyeball it!" This is a weapon of mass destruction. You are not a cowboy shooting from the hip!

Second Recruit: Sir, yes sir!


Considering that EVE ships are very maneuverable and that sensors are limited by the speed of light, it stands to reason that EVE ships may have not be allowed to fire unless a firing solution is 100% accurate to avoid collateral damage.



Except that we regularly get "misses" in this game.

Also Star trek space combat is more akin to Tall Ship combat than the fighter jet combat that we have in EVE.


The only time I have ever seen a show/game talk about ranges at 100's of km/miles is in this anime movie called "Harlock" or something like that where they were shooting at extreme distances with lasers, tho that show had a ton of other things that were kinda...strange.


I think that the big thing to remember is that even the guns with the smallest range in this game beat out the distances of similar weapon systems that we have today, and I doubt that taking away gravity (for the most part) and friction would really help all that much.
Lost Greybeard
Drunken Yordles
#16 - 2015-04-28 22:55:28 UTC
Firstly, ranges of a kilometer on a frigate-sized platform is a lot longer than modern weapons.

Secondly, ships have things like point defenses and maneuvering that can render any shot useless if given enough travel time, and at far enough ranges can probably foil perfect sensor lock so even lasers aren't necessarily a free hit.

Thirdly, stacking enough predicative AI in your ship to solve the second problem means that it will inevitably turn into a rogue drone, tell you to bugger off, detonate your pod, and fly off to become a Russian miner. Automation == BAD in Eve, that's the entire reason that Capsuleers are a thing. We're the only way to get a decent control system into place without it joining the collective or otherwise divorcing itself from human concerns entirely.

(Yes, capsuleers are actually an improvement over the logical alternative, explaining why the Empires keep making us and put up with so much of our crap beyond the mutually assured destruction aspect.)
Arline Kley
PIE Inc.
Khimi Harar
#17 - 2015-04-29 09:53:20 UTC
Lost Greybeard wrote:
Firstly, ranges of a kilometer on a frigate-sized platform is a lot longer than modern weapons.)


Not really. Modern infantry firearms are capable of reaching that distance, and APCR tank rounds in the Challenger 2 MBT can do nearly 1.5km/s. An EVE frigate is still a fairly substantial vessel - its the same size a 747.

Now, if you are talking about combat ranges, then of course it will be. Most firefights happen within a few hundred metres of each other, and naval combat hasn't been a thing since pretty much the end of the Cold War.

"For it was said they had become like those peculiar demons, which dwell in matter but in whom no light may be found." - Father Grigori, Ravens 3:57

Owen Levanth
Sagittarius Unlimited Exploration
#18 - 2015-05-01 18:42:50 UTC
solrac lara wrote:
Teinyhr wrote:
Star Trek weapon ranges wary greatly, but actually are several thousands to several hundred thousand kilometers. Of course at these ranges the combat wouldn't be very visually engaging which is why we almost always see knife-fight standoffs in the series and movies.

I though it was the same with eve close ranges in game to make it more practical and funny and big ranges in fluff railguns should in theory have infinite ranges there is no friction in space so the projectile could travel forever or until it crash with something


Uh, rail guns in EVE work exactly like that. It's just that that projectiles are missing the other ship and continue onward into the void forever. Remember, at maximum fall-off you have only 50% chance to hit and after that the chance to hit something rushes down to zero at fall-off x2.

The same problem you encounter in EVE would also turn up in real life: How the hell do you want to hit a moving object across stellar distances? Rail guns are even worse than lasers, because energy weapons at least send energy beams at the speed of light.

Rail gun projectiles are far slower and lack any kind of targeting AI you could cram into missiles. One could argue it should be possible to fight at million miles+ ranges, but in truth it could turn out hitting something at those ranges is an unsolvable problem.

Realistically, drones and missiles with their ability to adjust course to the enemy's ship are the only true long-range weapons. Lasers and other direct fire weapons can certainly shoot out far longer than we can see in EVE, but we can't hit anything at those ranges, so the true range is irrelevant.
Cymorn
State Protectorate
Caldari State
#19 - 2015-05-14 03:30:54 UTC
Yeah, the ranges given are likely just the effective engagement ranges; missiles run out of fuel for maneuvering, the resolution on tracking computers can only be so fine, laser weapons lose coherence, etc.
Hotdock
Doomheim
#20 - 2015-05-21 11:15:31 UTC
If shooting from France to England is short ranged.
12Next page