Collision velocity threshold buffer, anything below it will do nothing, problem solved.
yeah lets just undo the last 4 years of changes CCP has implemented to make it harder for FCs to have full control and put more reward into individual piloting 
1 Like
except everyone as a forced one second of âlagâ
okay let me try to explain it to you like i would a child.
two racers are at the starting line and begin to run. they each run to the end of the field pick up a button and run back. the first runner does this in a blinding one millisecond the other one does this in 999 milliseconds. but when they reach the finish line both are told they canât cross until one full second has passed and then they both cross at the same time resulting in a tie.
no my agenda is to promote effort and pilot skill over simply âpush button get candyâ
1 Like
You seem to be very experienced with the game, and have quite a bit of knowledge about what has been going on. I have to wonder though if you are responding to the idea and how it would actually effect things, or to your history with the FC issue causing you to prefer the status quo. I do know that every strategy has both exceptions and a time window after which it has to be adjusted or lose its strategic value. Put another way, the status quo only is good for so long, then it becomes a shackle. I know next to nothing about FCs, and donât understand in the slightest how this change would give FCs any more control than they currently have, or do anything to tilt the balance away from individual flying, as it would apply equally to individual flyers and FCs.
Are you saying that your manual flying relies on the artificial constraints of the way the orbits work now, and that somehow removing that artificial constraint would make your flying not as good as compared to the FCs?
Or that your defenses against FCs are based on the predictability of their paths through these artificial orbit constraints? Sorry, Iâm guessing here, and also allowing a small portion of your attitude to reflect back, because you seem to think thatâs the best way to get through to people.
I also donât see how the skill of holding down an arrow key the right length of time is better than the skill of actually plotting a course and making adjustments mid-flight. The first doesnât particularly interest me as I see very little difference between a space game, first person shooter, rpg, or tron when it comes to that.
I know it would be like the roman legions and the barbar tribes, or the british and the americans in the 1780s, or a intensely drilled well-oiled machine run-the-play football team versus an intuitively clicking fly-by-the-seat-of-the-pants team of superstars. Like any other playbook in any competition ever; youâd have people who overuse it and become predictable in their tactics, and youâd have mavericks who donât use it at all, preferring to try and be completely unpredictable, and youâd have the people who find a great balance. What I donât understand is why you think that this would be worse.
btw, your description of lag and latency does not account for keyboard or other client side command buffering effects and its interaction with the latency to effectively lock out command control or randomly drop intermediate commands (if an attempt is made to clear the buffer coordinated with the tic); especially when someone else on your network segment spikes the traffic so that you end up with random 5 second delays between command processing (and yes, that can happen to people even with 1Gbit connections sitting in the same building as the server hard-wired to a switch with an Ethernet cable). What would you suggest people do about that?
1 Like
no, i donât like the status quo. Most of us donât. thatâs one of the problems with your idea. it re-enforces the status quo we have been asking CCP to remove and that they have been working towards removing. We want to see more people playing rather than two ppl playing while everyone else in the fleet just hits f1
As long as remain at [Distance] [Range] and [Fleet warp] exists you are not going to break the status quo.
At least for what you are talking about.
then why is it already moving away from it even if itâs only little by little?
right now those tools are not powerful enough to replace individual piloting and as more mechanics are added that heavily reward individual piloting the individual pilot becomes more important. that goes out the window if you make those tools stronger
Ummm⌠Iâm not following you.
Could you please clarify or rephrase?
I agree.
Yes
Ummm⌠Not following.
Clarification?
Lugh, you have yet to say how the proposed CHANGE reinforces the status quo. I think the idea that more people will start playing if you make it so that everyone has to hold down the arrow keys is just nonsense. But they might start playing if they could put together a more varied playbook for their team. Please explain why you think that the proposed change would shift the balance.
wait⌠do you not know how to manual pilot?
1 Like
Wait⌠Did I miss something? 
Okay, I will work through this train wreck of a threadâŚ
Learn to pilot manually. That is: double clicking in space. 90% of the time I fly manually, including tight orbits in frigates. It is simply superior in every single way. The automatic orbit can be thrown off by the enemy, but this is not possible when you do it manually. Takes time and skill to learn, but is like driving a bicycle once you got it.
âIt is tedious and a pain in the ass with EVE manual flight mechanics.â No it is not tedious. âTediousnessâ is not an argument whatsoever, because it is highly subjective. Someone on this forum once called âpaying attention to your surroundingsâ tedious as well, just because he got shot down. For over one and a half decades people have learned to use it without issue. You should consider that the issue is you.
So, because you do not like what he has to say he is irrelevant? Do you think that people who disagree with you should just be removed? Would you prefer having people agree with you all day, so you do not have to be around people making you feel bad for bad ideas?
1 Like
Iâll take that under advisement
He posted something incredibly stupid that he later deleted.
Therefore I redact my previous statement.
2 Likes
I feel this whole argument it based off someone wanting eve to have a bit more of the pilot the ship and land cross hairs on the enemy feel to it rather than be the captin and give orders having AI/crew member move the stick and pull the trigger.
excuse me? i have not deleted a single thing
i mean â â â â i canât delete the quote in your post just how hard are you trying to abort?
Iâll try the point and click in space method again, I was not able to get this method to move my ship in the approaches I wanted to use after several months trying last time, and finally gave up and reverted to arrow keys and started orbiting everything during combat, thus running into the limitations that brought about this idea.
That method still doesnât solve the âI want my ship to run a figure eight pattern with the crosspoint at that opening in the asterioid, to balance the impact to my shields, while I try to figure out what the five new ships entering the battle are doing and communicate it to the ad-hoc rogue squadron that I met with who lost the rest of their wings in the battle earlier, and in the mean time, I need them to protect these four strategic points around that crosspoint so the enemy doesnât send someone to sit there and wait for me after a couple of passes.â
Yes, orbits can be thrown off, beacons destroyed or moved, etc. etc. Itâs good that way, because when that happens, it can throw the flight path organization off for any who are not able to notice or make the required adjustments. For a lone ship In a large battle, it can send whole squadrons of ships far enough away from the battle to allow the ship to thread the needle to a target. Or move them to a place that blocks the view of a command ship to hide a maneuver. Those are all tactics and strategies too.
Nico, I appreciate your comment, thatâs kind of how I saw it too.
Obviously Iâm not that experienced with FCs. So Iâll just leave my idea the way it is, appreciate the feedback as I certainly donât want to throw the game balance or throw the companyâs strategic direction off course. The dev team will decide whether or not they want to do anything with the idea. It would have been nice to be greeted with a little less hostility about the new idea. That player to player culture has probably more to do with the success of this game than the mechanics do; but I understand the response when things feel threatening.
Have a great game!
you can do this with manual piloting⌠not sure why you would or how exactly that helps your shields at all
why not have orbital mechanics for all the planets and moons in eve.add to that nav thrusters on active ships.
2 Likes
Yeah, unless I want to get carpal tunnel, or change tactics to always use straight lines, constantly clicking in space to try and get the trajectory to form the curves I want to fly and end up facing the right direction is not better than holding down arrow keys, especially while attempting to do other things like target ships on both sides to fire. Also⌠while I know my initial description talks about beacons and points in space, once a battle is joined, the real focal points of the arcs I need to describe are moving groups of ships. It is like an Escher painting, one needs to be able to map the whole path so that it will match criteria from with the perspective of each local area as you travel through it. (i.e. I want to stay far far away from the really big ship and minefields while getting into position to drop in behind the squadron of ships flying behind them perpendicular to their plane of flight as they approach our decoy to cut them off from the rest of their forces.)
If only mines where still a functional thing. 
2 Likes