These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Inconsistencies in EVE

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Kuronaga
The Dead Parrot Shoppe Inc.
The Chicken Coop
#61 - 2011-12-27 12:54:15 UTC  |  Edited by: Kuronaga
All systems that allow the use of warp drive are supposed to be binary.

They are not.

It is therefore assumed that warp drives only work outside of wormhole space because of magic.
Skydell
Bad Girl Posse
#62 - 2011-12-27 13:03:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Skydell
We can clone human DNA but still need to manufacture ships.

- If I can lock a ship with a Scan res array at .2 seconds, why would I put an inferior system in a more expensive ship?
- If we have laser based weapons, why don;t we have laser based tracking systems?
- If I'm a criminal why don't I need to go to a criminal group to have my clone insured?
- If the Gallente had drone technology and they wanted to stop Minmatar slavery, why didnt they just trade drone technology with the Amarr for Minmatar freedom?
- Why did we just give up on getting back to Earth?
- If Concord is so tough, why are all the races that back it and develop it so weak?
Velicitia
XS Tech
#63 - 2011-12-27 13:21:50 UTC
ASadOldGit wrote:
Velicitia wrote:
Barkaial Starfinder wrote:
Ships are harder to hit when they are close, because tracking a battleship at 1 km distance is really hard.
Yet you can hit cruisers with ease if they are 50 km away Roll



Oh, and tracking shouldn't be hard for the ship that is orbiting the target, because the guns don't need to move at all if the orbit is right. I actually thought it worked that way when I was a noob =P





small movements are magnified over distance.

A ship orbiting you at a distance of 2km, and a speed of 200 metres per second means that your guns have to track at approximately 0.1 rad/sec.

circumference circle = 2r * pi = 12.56 KM
time to travel 12.56 km @ 0.2 km/sec = 62.8 sec
Tracking (rad/sec) = 2pi / 62.8 = 0.100...

now, at 20km, it's 10x easier for your guns to track that target.

circumference = 2r * pi = 125.66KM
time to travel 125.66 km @ 0.2 km/sec = 628.3 sec
Tracking (rad/sec) = 2pi / 628.3 = 0.01 rad/sec


And this is going relatively slow -- 200 m/sec is essentially the slower frigates without an AB.


I think the point he was making was that, assuming the target is stationary, the ship is turning at the same rate as it's orbiting, so the guns are always pointing at the centre of the orbit - the tracking is technically being handled by the alignment speed of the ship. And, if the orbit is too tight for the ship to stay aligned to its orbit at speed, the ship slows down, so tracking shouldn't be an issue. It would get real messy, naturally, once the other ship starts moving.

Also, a frigate shooting a battleship at 1000m shouldn't have tracking issues, as the damn thing fills the guns field of view - it could fire anywhere within its firing arc and still hit it. But strangely, EVE considers a BS as a single point that needs pinpoint accuracy. Ugh A frigate should technically be able to do a strafing run all along a BS's hull, stem to stern.


there were two points

1. tracking a BS at 1km is "hard" whilst tracking a cruiser at 50km is "easy"

This is the formula and stuff I posted were related to this point. A frigate should nearly always hit a BS at 1000 meters, even it your tracking is "low", because the sig radius of the ship is significantly larger than the sig res of the guns. Keep in mind though that there is a point where you can be going "too fast" and still miss (though, IIRC this has to be somewhere above 2-3 km/sec).

2. tracking something whilst orbiting is "hard"


IF the target at the centre of your orbit is stationary (I've only seen this if you're shooting a corpie sitting there on purpose) then the second point is valid. If we're talking about rats, they're practically never standing still, so your ship/guns have to continually re-adjust.

One of the bitter points of a good bittervet is the realisation that all those SP don't really do much, and that the newbie is having much more fun with what little he has. - Tippia
Zimmy Zeta
Perkone
Caldari State
#64 - 2011-12-27 15:34:19 UTC
Our lovely capacitor. It may be so empty that your ship cannot get a single little railgun shot squeezed out. But initiating warp by folding space and time around the ship to propell its mass at FTL-speed? No problem, we don't need much energy for that ....Roll

I'd like to apologize for the poor quality of the post above and sincerely hope you didn't waste your time reading it. Yes, I do feel bad about it.
Corina Jarr
en Welle Shipping Inc.
#65 - 2011-12-27 15:52:48 UTC
Explosive: seems to act more like a chemical reaction than an explosion (ie rapid restructuring of the armor on an atomic/molecular level). Maybe it should be renamed to chemical.

Debris is invincible. Some ships leave wrecks (ours and NPCs we shoot). Others leave invincible pieces (mission generic debris).


There is no way my rookie frigate is gong to warp before being locked and popped by the navies, yet somehow random pirates in the same ship can show up over and over and over... lazy Navies.
Wolf Kruol
Suicide Squad Gamma
#66 - 2011-12-27 16:21:31 UTC
Stations! Jezz seriously how does all those ships find parking in jita 4-4..? I think ccp should fix this.. More traffic in a station, larger the station should be. And ccp not some cheap station enlargment add some new station models or addon's to show that stations are adapting to the demands of activities.

Or have those who payed for offices have privaliges in who gets to park there ships in station. Rest wait outside or dish out isk for parking. Twisted

I find is strange to see freighters exit while I'm suck in its hull in my frigate... What?

CCP fix this pls its a big inconsistency.

“If you're very very stupid? How can you possibly realize you're very very stupid?

You have to be relatively intelligent to realize how stupid you really are!”
Krixtal Icefluxor
INLAND EMPIRE Galactic
#67 - 2011-12-27 16:40:32 UTC
Corollary to my first post (I believe the 4th one here):

Reverse "Asteroid Magick" on Ice Asteroids................

You can mine your life away and they are still there !!!!

(I know....they just deplete REALLY slowly, but STILL)

Ice should be SCANNABLE ONLY !!

"He has mounted his hind-legs, and blown crass vapidities through the bowel of his neck."  - Ambrose Bierce on Oscar Wilde's Lecture in San Francisco 1882
Barkaial Starfinder
Brazilian Vultures
Ferrata Victrix
#68 - 2011-12-27 17:21:22 UTC
Velicitia wrote:

small movements are magnified over distance.

A ship orbiting you at a distance of 2km, and a speed of 200 metres per second means that your guns have to track at approximately 0.1 rad/sec.

circumference circle = 2r * pi = 12.56 KM
time to travel 12.56 km @ 0.2 km/sec = 62.8 sec
Tracking (rad/sec) = 2pi / 62.8 = 0.100...

now, at 20km, it's 10x easier for your guns to track that target.

circumference = 2r * pi = 125.66KM
time to travel 125.66 km @ 0.2 km/sec = 628.3 sec
Tracking (rad/sec) = 2pi / 628.3 = 0.01 rad/sec


And this is going relatively slow -- 200 m/sec is essentially the slower frigates without an AB.

Before we continue this, I hope you know I'm not saying EVE should work with extreme realism Bear

That much about rad/sec is understandable, but it does not take into account that the ships are BIG. If a big ship is next to you, you don't need to track perfectly, and your precision can be off. It should hit.
When targets are far away, the trackingturrets will turn slower, but the precision to actually hit would need to be enormous. This is assuming no travel time for the shots.
Even the ship could help the tracking, keeping the plane of turrets perperdicular to the radius (ship trying to face target).

Also, when you are orbiting your target, assuming near ideal orbit, the speed of your target is irrelevant because the target would have zero V to your referencial. Of course, no orbit is perfect and targets chance direction, but you get the idea.
Xtover
Cold Moon Destruction.
#69 - 2011-12-27 18:49:31 UTC
Jerera wrote:
Why are all stargates 50000 times HEAVIER than the sun? This doesn't make any sense. Considering the volume of your average stargate, it is so dense it can't actually physically exist as it is.

[NB: I did the math.]


You are mixing up mass and weight.

gates create supermassive black holes. hence, the mass.

I believe it was also that they were put in before anchoring so they were given a huge mass to keep from being bumped?
Cearain
Plus 10 NV
#70 - 2011-12-27 19:15:17 UTC
Eve is a game to be social and make friends.

Eve is a game to backstab others.

Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
Velicitia
XS Tech
#71 - 2011-12-27 19:39:14 UTC  |  Edited by: Velicitia
Barkaial Starfinder wrote:
Velicitia wrote:

small movements are magnified over distance.

A ship orbiting you at a distance of 2km, and a speed of 200 metres per second means that your guns have to track at approximately 0.1 rad/sec.

circumference circle = 2r * pi = 12.56 KM
time to travel 12.56 km @ 0.2 km/sec = 62.8 sec
Tracking (rad/sec) = 2pi / 62.8 = 0.100...

now, at 20km, it's 10x easier for your guns to track that target.

circumference = 2r * pi = 125.66KM
time to travel 125.66 km @ 0.2 km/sec = 628.3 sec
Tracking (rad/sec) = 2pi / 628.3 = 0.01 rad/sec


And this is going relatively slow -- 200 m/sec is essentially the slower frigates without an AB.

Before we continue this, I hope you know I'm not saying EVE should work with extreme realism Bear

That much about rad/sec is understandable, but it does not take into account that the ships are BIG. If a big ship is next to you, you don't need to track perfectly, and your precision can be off. It should hit.
When targets are far away, the trackingturrets will turn slower, but the precision to actually hit would need to be enormous. This is assuming no travel time for the shots.
Even the ship could help the tracking, keeping the plane of turrets perperdicular to the radius (ship trying to face target).

Also, when you are orbiting your target, assuming near ideal orbit, the speed of your target is irrelevant because the target would have zero V to your referencial. Of course, no orbit is perfect and targets chance direction, but you get the idea.



No, the rad/sec formula I gave doesn't take that into account -- I was just pointing out the tracking needed to keep a turret "on point". The full turret tracking/chance to hit formula does though.


ChanceToHit = 0.5 ^ ((((Transversal speed/(Range to target * Turret Tracking))*(Turret Signature Resolution / Target Signature Radius))^2) + ((max(0, Range To Target - Turret Optimal Range))/Turret Falloff)^2)

from here --> http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Turret_damage

In order to determine a hit, the game takes the result of the "chance to hit" formula, and compares it with a randomised number from 0 to 1. If (Random < chanceToHit) then you hit.


So, using the numbers I used above for the 2km range, as well as a few more numbers from specific ships/guns -- let's say a Atron with a 125mm prototype gauss gun loaded with antimatter. The target is a Thorax (it has 170 m/sec base .. we'll say it's moving 200 anyway)

Transversal Speed = 0.10000... (stuff)
Range to target = 2000 (meters)
Turret Tracking = 0.085
Turret_sig = 40 (meters)
Target_sig = 140 (meters)
Optimal = 5400 (meters)
Falloff = 5500 (meters) (5000 base, with +10% from the Atron, assuming Gallente Frigate 1)


so, putting that all together

0.5 ^ (((( 0.1 ( 2000 * 0.085 ) ) * ( 40 / 140 ) ) ^2 ) + ( (max (0, 2000 - 5400) ) / 5000) ^ 2)

( 0.1 / ( 2000 * 0.085 ) ) * ( 40 / 140 ) ) ^2 )

2000 * 0.085 = 170
40 / 140 = 0.28

0.1 / 170 * 0.28 = 1.647 (we'll round to 1.65)

1.65 ^ 2 = 2.7225

(max (0, 2000 - 5400) ) / 5500) ^ 2

2k - 5400 = -3400

max (0,-3400) = 0
0/5500 = 0
0^2 = 0

0.5 ^ (2.7225 + 0) = 0.15

We all know rails suck at tracking, so let's swap over to a Modal Neutron Blaster, and lead ammo (so we're ever so barely in falloff):

Transversal Speed = 0.10000... (stuff)
Range to target = 2000 (meters)
Turret Tracking = 0.3165
Turret_sig = 40 (meters)
Target_sig = 140 (meters)
Optimal = 1800 (meters)
Falloff = 2750 (meters) (2500 base, plus 10% for the Atron at Gallente Frig 1)


0.5 ^ (((( 0.1 ( 2000 * 0.3165 ) ) * ( 40 / 140 ) ) ^2 ) + ( (max (0, 2000 - 1800) ) / 2750) ^ 2)

( 0.1 ( 2000 * 0.3165 ) ) * ( 40 / 140 ) ) ^2 )

2000 * 0.3165 = 633
40 / 140 = 0.28
0.1 / 633 * 0.28 = 1.95 * e^-9 (might as well be zero)

(max (0, 2000 - 1800) ) / 2500) ^ 2

2000 - 1800 = 200
200/2750 = 0.08
0.08 ^ 2 = 0.0053

0.5 ^ 0.0053 = 0.996



swapping to Iridium (+20% range) puts us into optimal (1800 * 1.2 = 2160), so we'll essentially have 100% chance to hit with the blasters.


edit -- forgot the 10% falloff from the Atron.

One of the bitter points of a good bittervet is the realisation that all those SP don't really do much, and that the newbie is having much more fun with what little he has. - Tippia
Ager Agemo
Rainbow Ponies Incorporated
#72 - 2011-12-27 20:08:48 UTC
Zimmy Zeta wrote:
- the fact that you have to go through the same invention process over and over and over again - a society that has developed warp technology has obviously forgotten how a simple pen and paper works, to take some friggin notes that you do not have to repeat the whole invention thing every single time.

- the fact that megacorporations invest billions in the creation and maintenance of capsuleers, but leave them after that completely alone and do not seem to care who they work for.

- the fact that there exists warp technology and torpedoes, yet all battles are fought at about maximum 100 km distance and nobody has ever thought of equipping a torpedo with a warp drive to hit targets several systems away.







Captain picard has some TM issues that he wants to talk with you...
Ager Agemo
Rainbow Ponies Incorporated
#73 - 2011-12-27 20:25:12 UTC
Velicitia wrote:
Barkaial Starfinder wrote:
Velicitia wrote:

small movements are magnified over distance.

A ship orbiting you at a distance of 2km, and a speed of 200 metres per second means that your guns have to track at approximately 0.1 rad/sec.

circumference circle = 2r * pi = 12.56 KM
time to travel 12.56 km @ 0.2 km/sec = 62.8 sec
Tracking (rad/sec) = 2pi / 62.8 = 0.100...

now, at 20km, it's 10x easier for your guns to track that target.

circumference = 2r * pi = 125.66KM
time to travel 125.66 km @ 0.2 km/sec = 628.3 sec
Tracking (rad/sec) = 2pi / 628.3 = 0.01 rad/sec


And this is going relatively slow -- 200 m/sec is essentially the slower frigates without an AB.

Before we continue this, I hope you know I'm not saying EVE should work with extreme realism Bear

That much about rad/sec is understandable, but it does not take into account that the ships are BIG. If a big ship is next to you, you don't need to track perfectly, and your precision can be off. It should hit.
When targets are far away, the trackingturrets will turn slower, but the precision to actually hit would need to be enormous. This is assuming no travel time for the shots.
Even the ship could help the tracking, keeping the plane of turrets perperdicular to the radius (ship trying to face target).

Also, when you are orbiting your target, assuming near ideal orbit, the speed of your target is irrelevant because the target would have zero V to your referencial. Of course, no orbit is perfect and targets chance direction, but you get the idea.



No, the rad/sec formula I gave doesn't take that into account -- I was just pointing out the tracking needed to keep a turret "on point". The full turret tracking/chance to hit formula does though.


ChanceToHit = 0.5 ^ ((((Transversal speed/(Range to target * Turret Tracking))*(Turret Signature Resolution / Target Signature Radius))^2) + ((max(0, Range To Target - Turret Optimal Range))/Turret Falloff)^2)

from here --> http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Turret_damage

In order to determine a hit, the game takes the result of the "chance to hit" formula, and compares it with a randomised number from 0 to 1. If (Random < chanceToHit) then you hit.


So, using the numbers I used above for the 2km range, as well as a few more numbers from specific ships/guns -- let's say a Atron with a 125mm prototype gauss gun loaded with antimatter. The target is a Thorax (it has 170 m/sec base .. we'll say it's moving 200 anyway)

Transversal Speed = 0.10000... (stuff)
Range to target = 2000 (meters)
Turret Tracking = 0.085
Turret_sig = 40 (meters)
Target_sig = 140 (meters)
Optimal = 5400 (meters)
Falloff = 5500 (meters) (5000 base, with +10% from the Atron, assuming Gallente Frigate 1)


so, putting that all together

0.5 ^ (((( 0.1 ( 2000 * 0.085 ) ) * ( 40 / 140 ) ) ^2 ) + ( (max (0, 2000 - 5400) ) / 5000) ^ 2)

( 0.1 / ( 2000 * 0.085 ) ) * ( 40 / 140 ) ) ^2 )

2000 * 0.085 = 170
40 / 140 = 0.28

0.1 / 170 * 0.28 = 1.647 (we'll round to 1.65)

1.65 ^ 2 = 2.7225

(max (0, 2000 - 5400) ) / 5500) ^ 2

2k - 5400 = -3400

max (0,-3400) = 0
0/5500 = 0
0^2 = 0

0.5 ^ (2.7225 + 0) = 0.15

We all know rails suck at tracking, so let's swap over to a Modal Neutron Blaster, and lead ammo (so we're ever so barely in falloff):

Transversal Speed = 0.10000... (stuff)
Range to target = 2000 (meters)
Turret Tracking = 0.3165
Turret_sig = 40 (meters)
Target_sig = 140 (meters)
Optimal = 1800 (meters)
Falloff = 2750 (meters) (2500 base, plus 10% for the Atron at Gallente Frig 1)


0.5 ^ (((( 0.1 ( 2000 * 0.3165 ) ) * ( 40 / 140 ) ) ^2 ) + ( (max (0, 2000 - 1800) ) / 2750) ^ 2)

( 0.1 ( 2000 * 0.3165 ) ) * ( 40 / 140 ) ) ^2 )

2000 * 0.3165 = 633
40 / 140 = 0.28
0.1 / 633 * 0.28 = 1.95 * e^-9 (might as well be zero)

(max (0, 2000 - 1800) ) / 2500) ^ 2

2000 - 1800 = 200
200/2750 = 0.08
0.08 ^ 2 = 0.0053

0.5 ^ 0.0053 = 0.996



swapping to Iridium (+20% range) puts us into optimal (1800 * 1.2 = 2160), so we'll essentially have 100% chance to hit with the blasters.


edit -- forgot the 10% falloff from the Atron.



still dosnt explains how i can miss hitting a ******* 40km station while flying at 500 meters of it just because i m moving at 2000 m/s
Velicitia
XS Tech
#74 - 2011-12-27 21:05:58 UTC  |  Edited by: Velicitia
station has a reeeeealy small sig radius Bear

or how about you fill in the numbers and see for yourself.

One of the bitter points of a good bittervet is the realisation that all those SP don't really do much, and that the newbie is having much more fun with what little he has. - Tippia
Pink Marshmellow
Caucasian Culture Club
#75 - 2011-12-27 21:34:12 UTC
How come getting close to a sun doesn't melt your ship?

How does having small size and faster moving speed mitigate damage from a large missile warhead after being hit, it certainly doesn't work for modern fighters.

How come a glancing hit from a 1400mm cannon not instantly destroy a frigate?

Why do capital ships and Battleships not have a battery of smaller guns to destroy smaller ships? That is simply a stupid philosophy.

How come battleships barely have larger cargo sizes than cruisers or battlecruisers, while being ten times bigger.

How come you can bubble up on a station or a stargate, but you can't smartbomb, either they allow smartbombing or not allow bubbling.
Telegram Sam
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#76 - 2011-12-27 21:35:47 UTC
Atticus Fynch wrote:
Destination SkillQueue wrote:
Atticus Fynch wrote:
Please dedicate this thread to things you find inconsistent about the world of EVE. Not the game mechanics but the lore more or less.

I for one find it curious that in a society that has mastered cloning we have so many blind and scarred capsuleers around.

Surely, eyeballs can be cloned and if you are ever podded, your clone is a brand spanking tattoo free new version of you with no defects.....right? In fact, you can probably get a younger or older version of you if you want.

Just sayin What?


Those things are alterations made to the clones specifically by the request of the capsuleers themselves and are perfectly consistent with the lore. If anything the real inconsistency is the lack of customization options we have available. Gender changes, artificial body parts and age changes are just a few that should be available according to the lore.


While I dont doubt what you are saying, it does sound a bit like a cop-out when a writer has painted himself into a corner. Positive alterations I can see, but why would anyone want to be blind , scared or limited physically in any way.

Then again, we are talking about a very alien sociiety desended from what we deem as "normal" on earth.

So I pose the queston, if you had the ability to grow a new body would you place physical limitations on it and why?

They're psychologically deranged. No, really... Check out the book Eve: The Burning Life . A whole chapter about a Gallentean service that rich people use to turn perfectly-good bodies into bizarre oddities.
Maizer Rachem
New Eden Exploration and Uprising Syndicate
#77 - 2011-12-27 22:51:54 UTC
The game can't handle actually having the planets orbit, but it doesn't stop me from being very bothered by Kepler's Laws of Planetary Motion not being adhered to. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kepler's_laws_of_planetary_motion
Nova Fox
Novafox Shipyards
#78 - 2011-12-28 01:56:39 UTC
Avensys wrote:
http://www.projectrho.com/rocket/misconceptions.php

EVE manages to hit pretty much every single one of these points


Well eve did it again and ate my post.

Either way this guy needs to sit down and update things, rethink and actually be challenged on alot of his points. Though true the examples he pointed out are pertty bad offenders they shouldnt be the sole exclusive why.

Ultimately its all fiction, arguing over that is like arguing over the internet.

1 Space really does has friction, its no where near as empty as anyone would love to think. and at FTL speeds you will wind up full of holes, burned, and possibly a nasty black hole at the end of your travel depending on your realspace FTL methood. The emptiest parts of space youll find is past the point of something not happening yet followed by the massive gaps between galaxies.

http://www.fnal.gov/pub/inquiring/matter/index.html

2 Wings are also Pylons for additional placment of thrusters and more weapons They also do allow for craft to be amphibious (atmospheric) requireing lesser power needs,

See macross series.

3 The skyscraper design is that of a lower scifi tech soceity one that hanst mastered gravity control yet. Any ship of any considerable size needs as many tranversals as possible to help facilitate repairs mainteance and normal operations. Sky scraper design wouldnt survive that long the more you ahve to move about in said ship to get stuff done.

Currently dont know any scifies that exemplifies this cept the first ship able to warp drive in star trek.

4 Mordern Navies already fight 360x360 battles they're pertty good at it, and why woudlnt you want to barrow alot of concepts deisgns and traditions from them?

5 Give a star nation a big enough budget and they will try to make stelathed ships, heat slumps insulation, going in ballisti. This is one of his weakest arguements. True we can see the space shuttles engines past pluto, however on the same hand nasa admits that they have a pertty poor chance of finding the next dinosaur killer asteriod.

The next in line active electronic warfare something eve does present or you wouldnt have signature radius. This is ahcevied by lying to enemy sensors where you are. Which si why most of your smaller ships have a smaller signature verses a capitols ships why even bother trying to hide concepts.

6 No sound in space is one of those No duhs. arguments, but the sounds of your ship massively decompression and its reactor going off is quite real. The rest can be 'synthesized' by computers to increase pilot or captain awareness based on other types of emissions (ie generating a engine sound based on the picked up ionization trail or light pattern of the burns.)

7. I am quite sure weight comes into ALOT of consideration when you start playing sling shot with saturn and jupiter. Also orbital crews can still move massive peices of ships on girders for much easier construction. A hell lot better than the optiosn on earth then trying to launch said ship in the end.

8 last point about aliens .hey could be facing the same doomsday situation we could be 500 years from now, thier planet cannot support them anymore were the next closest able to support them. Or they came here for free labor and food. IE us chances of those aliens being friendly. VERY LOW Dawrin says so.



Dust 514's CPM 1 Iron Wolf Saber Eve mail me about Dust 514 issues.
Zelda Wei
New Horizon Trade Exchange
#79 - 2011-12-29 21:43:57 UTC
Atticus Fynch wrote:
Destination SkillQueue wrote:
Atticus Fynch wrote:
Please dedicate this thread to things you find inconsistent about the world of EVE. Not the game mechanics but the lore more or less.

I for one find it curious that in a society that has mastered cloning we have so many blind and scarred capsuleers around.

Surely, eyeballs can be cloned and if you are ever podded, your clone is a brand spanking tattoo free new version of you with no defects.....right? In fact, you can probably get a younger or older version of you if you want.

Just sayin What?


Those things are alterations made to the clones specifically by the request of the capsuleers themselves and are perfectly consistent with the lore. If anything the real inconsistency is the lack of customization options we have available. Gender changes, artificial body parts and age changes are just a few that should be available according to the lore.


While I dont doubt what you are saying, it does sound a bit like a cop-out when a writer has painted himself into a corner. Positive alterations I can see, but why would anyone want to be blind , scared or limited physically in any way.

Then again, we are talking about a very alien sociiety desended from what we deem as "normal" on earth.

So I pose the queston, if you had the ability to grow a new body would you place physical limitations on it and why?


Clones have to be identical, that is the clone law lore.
FloppieTheBanjoClown
Arcana Imperii Ltd.
#80 - 2011-12-29 22:18:39 UTC
Lasers that can't do damage out past a few kilometers.

We can shoot a laser at the moon and get it to bounce back, but 50,000 (or whatever) years from now our combat lasers won't be able to hit Philadelphia from New York.

Founding member of the Belligerent Undesirables movement.