Jump to content

TheRealBeowulf

Alpha Tester
  • Content Count

    66
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About TheRealBeowulf

  • Rank
    Advanced Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling
  • backer_title
    Gold Founder
  1. @xplosiv I don't think it'll be like in NMS, because it would most likely make it a bit complicated to land on player made constructs, like on landing pads or even in hangars. But being able to come close to the surface doesn't necessarily mean that your ship will take damage if it crashes...
  2. For the "crash" questions: There already is a topic with a good amount of info, suggestions and opinions on this matter: https://board.dualthegame.com/index.php?/topic/10055-collision-damage-workaround-suggestions I would like to invite you to join the discussion Physically correct crash damage like in SE won't be a thing in DU, but NQ said that they remain open for workaround suggestions. Besides the technical limitations, balancing would be a not-to-underestimate task, and there are a lot of different opinions about the possible gameplay effects of this matter (battle ta
  3. Okay, but how does the game engine know that the hitboxes are overlapping, if it doesn't know where they are overlapping? I mean, the game has to keep track of the exact position of the hitbox to determine if there is a collision ir not, and it only stops the construct when it actually touches something - how does that work if the engine doesn't know where the intersection is? Also, the weapon damage model does take the firing angle into account, so it has to know where exactly the firing weapon is, and where the impact point is. Isn't that also calculation heavy? Sorry if I missed s
  4. @shynras: I get your point, but isn't that pretty much the same for calculating the impact point of a weapon?
  5. @wizardoftrash: Okay I get your points. I didn't mean to offend you, I'm just discussing things. In my opinion this discussion is getting more in the "personal taste" direction. I don't say that collision damage is something that has to be in the game, for me personally it would just be nice to have. I must admit that I'm more into the building and simulation / survival aspect and don't care so much about the classic MMO mechanics. It's just that DU gives you to freedom to build and engineer a construct and after that actually put it to a good (or bad ) use. Instead of just staring a
  6. @shynras: Okay don't know how exactly that works too, but if it's a voxel construct, I would assume that the collision box would have to be pretty much the same shape. I don't know how they could use predefined collision boxes with custom built voxel constructs. So, if the engine knows that for example a wingtip, or a landing gear touches a surface, that would be a pretty precise point - at least precise enough to generate an area of effect - or am I missing something?
  7. @shynras: But the game engine already does the collision calculation, that's nothing I want to add, It's already there. Without collision checks you couldn't land or walk on anything... My idea was to just combine the weapon damage with the collision checks.
  8. @velenka: You are making a good point, but I think if they would use the weapon damage model, there would be a limit to the possible size of the damaged area. Otherwise it would take too much calculation power to do all the voxel damage. This workaround has it's limits, and the possible max. amount of damage is one. If there are shields against collision damage, you would be able to avoid getting damaged even if you collide - It's just that this would take some effort. Also, if you are disconnected, I would assume that the ship control unit would just stop your ship if not piloted. I
  9. Btw: Server hiccups in battle can also lead to some hits not being counted, leading to ships that would usually already have been destroyed still firing at you, and so on. In a MMO of this scale you can't expect everything to be perfectly fair at any time. Edit: In an MMO, that is nearly completely player driven without too much story, I would say that immersion is a top priority - immersion is what keeps you going further, explore, build, create new content - I would not underestimate the immersion factor as fuel for players and emergent story.
  10. I'm sorry to say, but your argumentation seems a bit pointless to me... Look at racing games for example: Does Need for Speed expect you to know how an engine works? Not really - still you are able to tune it. Does any Formula 1 game expect you to be able to drive a F1 race car in real life? I would also say no. But do they expect you to stay on the track and avoid collisions? Definitely yes! Why? Because those are games about racecars. So why should a game about scifi civilization and spaceships not expect you to learn how to properly fly a spaceship? DU also expects you to be ab
  11. @sualtrev: I agree on that one. @wizardoftrash: I understand your point and I respect your opinion, but I don't agree. Damage that is caused by weapons is not necessarily caused with intention. What if, for example, you have an auto defense script running on your ship that shoots at basically everything, and you forget to turn it of while entering the territory of another org? Would be hard to explain... On the other hand, if you accidentally crash into someone's construct and cause damage, then you should stay to clarify things and pay for the damage, or at least conta
  12. @falstaf: No need to apologize at all I'm just trying to explain my point. It's just that a lot of the "technically not possible"- posts seem to refer to more realistic models, maybe even some kind of almost physically correct, simulation-like collision model, which NQ has already said will not be in the game at any time soon after release. I'm just looking for a more basic workaround which would (in my opinion) add some features to gameplay - in the first place reasons to avoid collisions, for example hard crashs on a planet's surface. About the gameplay reasons: Disclaimer
  13. @falstaf: If they would use the weapon damage system, this could be easily balanced, because you would also be able to have shields against that. Maybe they have some kind of kinetic damage weapon type, then this could also be used as damage type for collisions. Shields that are effective against kinetic weapon damage would then also be effective against collisions. I really don't think this system would lead to amounts of ramming ships that are really worth mentioning, because if you put the same effort and resources into building a standard ship with moderate weapons, you would mos
  14. @falstaf: The idea on how to use that for collision basically the following: JC said, that the damage-AoE will be generated around a point (-> coordinate) that the gun is aiming at. A collision point is basically also just a point (coordinate) So why shouldn't they be able to generate the AoE there? The only difference is, that instead of using weapon stats and player skills to define the amount of damage that the AoE can deal, you could use construct speed and mass. This means that a heavier or faster ship would deal more damage on impact.
×
×
  • Create New...