Return to “Suggestions”

Post

Re: Capital ships - Carriers and mobile bases?

#76
I'm wondering if by default all stations can be moved or they'll be stationary.

Can't remember if planets were stationary or not, but if they are stationary then I bet stations will be as well.
No reason to build different code for stations when they'll act like planets albeit small.
An idea that is not dangerous is unworthy of being called an idea at all. - Oscar Wilde

We often refuse to accept an idea merely because the tone of voice in which it has been expressed is unsympathetic to us. - Friedrich Nietzsche
Post

Re: Capital ships - Carriers and mobile bases?

#77
Kekasi wrote:I'm wondering if by default all stations can be moved or they'll be stationary.

Can't remember if planets were stationary or not, but if they are stationary then I bet stations will be as well.
No reason to build different code for stations when they'll act like planets albeit small.
This was discussed by Josh and was (still may be) in the FAQ. Stations and planets do not move in LT because of collision issues and the physics engine that LT runs on. So, while planets and stations can be very large, they also must be stationary. Ships on the other hand can move but do have a size cap which hasn't been disclosed to my knowledge.
Image
Post

Re: Capital ships - Carriers and mobile bases?

#78
BFett wrote:Ships on the other hand can move but do have a size cap which hasn't been disclosed to my knowledge.
Well, as absolute sizes are pretty arbitary it doesnt make sense to provide absolute numbers.

The last number i remember was that the size spread between the smallest ship size and the largest one was 1000.
So we can have things between 20meter fighters and 20km supercapitals.

My imagination is trying to tell me that that spread was 10000, but that could just be wishful thinking.
Post

Re: Capital ships - Carriers and mobile bases?

#79
Cornflakes_91 wrote: The last number i remember was that the size spread between the smallest ship size and the largest one was 1000.
So we can have things between 20meter fighters and 20km supercapitals.
Anywhere from a bus to the width of earth... plus some.
Cornflakes_91 wrote: My imagination is trying to tell me that that spread was 10000, but that could just be wishful thinking.
Imagine a ship the width of jupiter.

*Pulls out my 1km ship*
"That's not a ship"
*Aussie pulls out his 200km ship*
"That's a ship."
An idea that is not dangerous is unworthy of being called an idea at all. - Oscar Wilde

We often refuse to accept an idea merely because the tone of voice in which it has been expressed is unsympathetic to us. - Friedrich Nietzsche
Post

Re: Capital ships - Carriers and mobile bases?

#80
Kekasi wrote: *Pulls out my 1km ship*
"That's not a ship"
*Aussie pulls out his 200km ship*
"That's a ship."
Australians will always pull out bigger things than you can. :ghost: !AUSTRALIA!

Anyways, if Josh butchers the physics for massive ships we could possible have very large ships. Make docking like EVE (Proximity based) for super large ships and possibly make them dock based on proximity to a station too (Anchoring to the station?).
Surely the ship colliding with a small object wouldn't bug out the physics though?
I am literally and wholly in love with myself.
Post

Re: Capital ships - Carriers and mobile bases?

#81
BFett wrote:Ships on the other hand can move but do have a size cap which hasn't been disclosed to my knowledge.
At a guess: The size cap will be the max value where the game still works reliably. =P

What the size difference between the smallest and biggest ship will be?
That's a totally different topic and depends on a whole cartload of balancing considerations. But first and foremost it's an issue of what still works in the game engine.
If the smallest ship is 1% the size of the biggest and collisions goes haywire all the time then the difference is too big.
There is no "I" in Tea. That would be gross.
Post

Re: Capital ships - Carriers and mobile bases?

#82
Black--Snow wrote: Surely the ship colliding with a small object wouldn't bug out the physics though?
iirc the problem was something along the lines of the collison mesh resolutions.
the size of the small ship's collision box would be so small that it would glitch through rounding errors in the larger ships mesh.
or at least thats what it sounded like for me.
Post

Re: Capital ships - Carriers and mobile bases?

#83
Cornflakes_91 wrote:
Black--Snow wrote: Surely the ship colliding with a small object wouldn't bug out the physics though?
iirc the problem was something along the lines of the collison mesh resolutions.
the size of the small ship's collision box would be so small that it would glitch through rounding errors in the larger ships mesh.
or at least thats what it sounded like for me.
Hmm I see. That is something I wouldn't have issue with though, so I hope Josh allows that limit to be exploded. :V
I am literally and wholly in love with myself.
Post

Re: Capital ships - Carriers and mobile bases?

#85
Gazz wrote:
Black--Snow wrote:Hmm I see. That is something I wouldn't have issue with though, so I hope Josh allows that limit to be exploded. :V
No issue with a missile (which is a very small ship) glitching through a capital ship without hitting?
I asked Josh and he confirmed the issue is actually with game slowdown, not collision detection. He has also confirmed that the difference in size was 1000x.
I am literally and wholly in love with myself.
Post

Re: Capital ships - Carriers and mobile bases?

#87
Cornflakes_91 wrote:
Black--Snow wrote: I asked Josh and he confirmed the issue is actually with game slowdown, not collision detection. He has also confirmed that the difference in size was 1000x.
*the size spread he aims for with good performance is 1000x
I dont think it was size of ships that was causing issues. But simulation of world and AI in the background.
°˖◝(ಠ‸ಠ)◜˖°
Toba - A Development Dump

Online Now

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

cron