Orbit mechanics for improved tactics and academies

(Escriba Solette) #1

A simple change to the orbit mechanics I think can significantly open up tactical possibilities (as well as a few business opportunities): It would be nice if the orbit direction would match the incoming vector: i.e. if I am coming in on the left side of something within a certain plane, then have the orbit establish going clockwise within that plane; if I am coming in on the right side, have the orbit establish counterclockwise within that plane. Just for definition, if the current direction intersects the desired orbit in a chord, then establish the approach curve from the initiation point to 1/3 of the way around the circumference between the two chord intersections. Hope that makes sense. Combining this with the ability for teammates to mark beacon locations at random I think would be a great addition. Academies, Races./Slolem courses, and of course strategy/tactics approaching an enemy base or a mining location behind ‘enemy lines’.

(Lugh Crow-Slave) #2

or rather than making the crutch stronger learn to fly without it

(Alopex-Lagopus) #3

While it is possible and necessary in some cases to manually pilot a ships course for tactical advantage.
It is tedious and a pain in the ass with EVE manual flight mechanics.
One word that makes it less than ideal.


Ever try to play MMO FPS flight simulation games?
If all players are in the same region, it’s not too bad, other side of the world?
That lag is the difference between pulling of a precise maneuver near a cliff face… and smashing into that cliff face.
Or in the case of EVE

Failing to avoid an asteroid or collidable object results in velocity loss and immediately enemy tracking becomes perfect lock and FK your life pod time.
Also failing to prevent a perpendicular flight path towards or away from the enemy due to too steep an angle with auto orbit sucks if you don’t manually correct it.

Works well in attack too to catch the enemy either from behind or the front of there orbit by cutting them off and following the orbit in a smaller orbit on the same plane of travel.

These mechanics could use a little upgrading.

Like being able to chose to orbit on the same plane and follow the same path continuously or follow a atom orbit (like now) or a clock wise or counter clockwise path from targeted orbit point and prevention of approach of a targeted object at any steeper a angle than inserted value.

(Lugh Crow-Slave) #4

considering how ticks work in eve unless you have a really really ■■■■ connection lag does not play a part in manual piloting. but as i have come to notice with your posts you don’t have the strongest grasp on how eve works. all your idea does is give the server more to manage during large fights

(Alopex-Lagopus) #5

So flying manually in a light spiraling arc instead of at a single curving angle to avoid being headed off and still close with the enemy to engage with blasters… I will tell you lag plays a H U G E FING roll in weather you get in close with multiple contacts bearing down on you or you get smeared instantly without ever getting close.

(Lugh Crow-Slave) #6

not unless you are lagging so bad you are missing ticks and if you are lagging that bad you have bigger problems

(Alopex-Lagopus) #7

The bigger problem is is this thing called https://whatis.techtarget.com/definition/latency the distance from point A server to point B my internet and back.

Nothing you can do about that, except live closer to CCPs servers.

Or give commands to the client ahead of time or preemptively.

and then lag shows it’s ugly face on occasion.

(Lugh Crow-Slave) #8

and that’s how ticks work…

so long as your ping is sub 1000ms you have no lag

(Escriba Solette) #9

So my idea is not about purely manual flying, it is stringing together a course based on centers and orbits. I completely understand the lag/latency issues. Yes, I do have bigger problems (not close enough to a CO to even contract for better than 1 mbps, let alone consistently actual speeds of better than 300kbps.

(Lugh Crow-Slave) #10

thats what i’m talking about we don’t need to waist dev time pushing a crutch further that only makes it easier for an FC to fly an entire fleet and adds just extra stuff for the server to calculate when you hit orbit

(Alopex-Lagopus) #11

Think we are on the same page. :slight_smile:
I only used lag as a reason for using the orbit selection you mentioned to overcome lag and still acomplish awesome maneuvers.

You are irrelevant at this point.

(Lugh Crow-Slave) #12

healthy. at least i understand how the engine works…

(Alopex-Lagopus) #13

The fact that you are arguing so strongly to not let the introduction of variations in the basic orbital mechanics come into existence coupled with your compleat understanding of lag and how the laws of physics on this planet “Terra firma” cause lag to intensify no mater what you do the further away from the server you are.

Implicates your agenda clear as a bright sunny day.

You do not want the change because of your proximity to CCP’s server, which gives you an edge over any players further away from the server than yourself.



I rest my case.

(Escriba Solette) #14

Alopex-Lagopus, those are good ideas! I was thinking the ‘simple’ version of a same path continual orbit. (along the circle defined by the intersection of the plane defined by the approach vector and the center of the sphere as it intersects with the sphere, approached at the 1/3 point of the arc from the entry point of the approach vector to the exit point, and the curve defined by the approach vector and the vector of the tangent at that 1/3 point at whatever speed is used for orbits.) This could all be calculated from the client at the time where we request the orbit, and only the control points of the approach curve and orbit sent to the server. But if that is still significant CPU drain on the servers to calculate the orbits, then it could ‘peg’ to a predefined set of orbits sort of like old bitmap games would do rotation. The odd thing is that I’m usually not even slightly a visual thinker, so somehow this game got me to ‘visualize’ this from a kinesthetic process.

(Alopex-Lagopus) #15

One thing that slips by most players is that EVE IS a physics simulation engine with predefined parameters to save CPU power and as a result you can have stationary targets be easily locked onto and moving targets not so easily locked onto with velocity, orientation and signature playing the variables as the targetie.

Anything is possible with enough number crunching.
Some things just don’t take all that much. :slight_smile:

We already have the basic framework of an orbit and distance from target, coupled with a randomized orbital path.

Lock the randomization to “False” and you have one of the desired objectives.
Add deflection for collidable objects and you have another part.
Add deflection for hostiles, another still.
Add basic aerial combat maneuvers, such as the Barrel Roll

Add planetary gravity and planetary hit boxes.
Add collision damage
Add tractor beams ability to aid fellow ships in slingshot maneuvers.
Now we have the makings of REAL action being introduced into the game!

…I need to stop. :smiley:

(Escriba Solette) #16

Lugh, as far as I’m concerned you are welcome to say that you don’t like the idea and suggest why it might be problematic to the game, all good input to make good priority decisions. But, just to get something clear, do you speak for the developers or the people who decide what they take up for development? If so, I have some suggestions for you to consider about interacting with customers. If not, please don’t presume to say what is worth spending their time on. I’ve been a computer professional for nearly 25 years, and had been programming computers for 12 year before that (4th grade), so let me say it more clearly: I understand more about lag and latency than most people who develop computer software today, and there is no boasting in that. (most people really don’t need to understand it at that level, so it doesn’t make me better than anyone, but it does mean I know what I’m talking about here). The performance issues are worth paying attention to, but not rejecting an idea outright without further exploration. If FCs are running a whole fleet automatically, this increases both the tactics they can use and those that they must deal with. I’m thinking it would improve their experience as well as that of those pitted against them.

(Slayer Liberator) #17

That would make the Jita undock more of a bloodbath than it already is and make dread bombs harder to pull off.

(Uriel the Flame) #18

Can’t complain, more wrecks to loot. :wink:

(Slayer Liberator) #19

But you would likely end up one of them

(Uriel the Flame) #20

Only fly cheap T1 frigs to steal loot so can afford losing hundreds of them and still make a profit. :wink:

Could even downgrade to free corvettes if have to anyway.