Lightning Test Drive

[JHendy]

Originally Posted by elfailo

Subjective mostly. Not my fault that you lack imagination.

Don't do that...

A heavy vehicle should not appear to handle like a light one. It looks bad, and players shouldn't have to concoct a multi-tiered theoretical back story to give reason to an animation looking like crap.

Originally Posted by elfailo

I'm arguing because I think it would be a lot more fun to drive a lightning that behaves that way

You're blowing this so far out of proportion. No one said that the Lightning's handing needs to be redone. The turning speed appears too abrupt and responds too quickly to acceleration, it just needs to be made to look slightly more gradual. It'd be a minor tweak and it wouldn't drastically affect the way tracked vehicles handle.

[KTNApollo]

Originally Posted by JHendy

Don't be an idiot.

A heavy vehicle should not appear to handle like a light one. It looks bad, and players shouldn't have to concoct a multi-tiered scientific back story to give reason to an animation being poorly done.

It has 4 independent treads, allowing it to turn on a dime. It looks fine.

[JHendy]

Originally Posted by elfailo

Alright, in an extreme example you would have a point, it would look stupid. If they would move as if they're 5kg instead of 35,000. That's because of the game's overall setting. But what I've seen so far honestly doesn't look that improbable in this game's setting. We've already got magnetically lifted hovertanks with plasma cannons, jetpacks the size of hairdryers and magic beams that heal 3rd degree burns in half a second, so a tank that has exaggerated handling characteristics really doesn't look that stupid here to me.

Dude, it's not about it looking inexplicable or out of place in the game world, it's about it just looking bad.

I'm absolutely not saying that it needs to be scientifically justifiable, I just want it to look good and feel satisfyingly weighty.

Edited my last post after you replied to me:

You're blowing this out of proportion. No one said that the Lightning's handing needs to be redone. The turning speed appears too abrupt and responds too quickly to acceleration, it just needs to be made to look slightly more gradual. It'd be a minor tweak and it wouldn't drastically affect the way tracked vehicles handle.

[JHendy]

Originally Posted by elfailo

I genuinely think it looks awesome. Do you understand why I said it's subjective now?

I understood before. I totally appreciate that you and others may like it. I'm not trying to convince you otherwise to be honest mate, just putting across my opinion.

[Blackwolf]

Originally Posted by elfailo

Nope. Their engines are just way more powerful than you're used to, because they're not based on fossil fuel combustion. They also have more traction caused by locational gravity manipulators built into the tracks, and they're made out of elements that don't exist on Earth. One of these is naturally much stronger as well as lighter than titanium.

There is only room for 3 or 4 more elements on the periodic table of elements. And that is based on theory. It's possible that such elements might exist on Auraxis, but chances are they exist on worlds with atmospheres that are unlike Earth's. More volcanic, acidic, or even toxic or radioactive. The odds of finding elements not of earth on a gaia like planet are probably very very slim.

And titanium is actually a pretty weak element, the alloy is strong because of the bonding properties that come into effect when the element is combined with iron I think it is.

And "locational gravity manipulators" would probably slow the whole thing down, not speed it up. As weight increases, so does mass. And mass tends to resist changes in movement. About the only thing you listed that made plausible sense is the engine. But again, defying physics is not so easy as "it's got a hemi 6 in it".

Originally Posted by Mechzz

My own hope is that we will see a strategic retreat by the devs on this one. I still haven't seen a convincing reason to not have 3pv despite following several threads on the subject.

Hard to convince the unconvincable. I hope the DEVs stick with their statements because I really don't want to see a game designed by the players.

[2coolforu]

Originally Posted by Blackwolf

There is only room for 3 or 4 more elements on the periodic table of elements. And that is based on theory. It's possible that such elements might exist on Auraxis, but chances are they exist on worlds with atmospheres that are unlike Earth's. More volcanic, acidic, or even toxic or radioactive. The odds of finding elements not of earth on a gaia like planet are probably very very slim.

And titanium is actually a pretty weak element, the alloy is strong because of the bonding properties that come into effect when the element is combined with iron I think it is.

And "locational gravity manipulators" would probably slow the whole thing down, not speed it up. As weight increases, so does mass. And mass tends to resist changes in movement. About the only thing you listed that made plausible sense is the engine. But again, defying physics is not so easy as "it's got a hemi 6 in it".



Hard to convince the unconvincable. I hope the DEVs stick with their statements because I really don't want to see a game designed by the players.

Why would gravity effect mass or inertia O.o

[Blackwolf]

Originally Posted by 2coolforu

Why would gravity effect mass or inertia O.o

Like I said before, heavy objects resist movement more then light objects. If you blow on a feather, you drive it further then if you blow on a bowling ball, despite the fact that the bowling ball has less friction on the ground. It goes back to the simple law "an object in motion stays in motion", the opposite is also true.

Making the treads heavier makes it harder to move them despite "better traction". You would end up with a slow moving vehicle that could climb 60 degree slopes, but not turn on a dime in a split second.

Making the treads lighter wouldn't do much better, in fact it would have virtually no effect at all since the rest of the tank is still heavy (meaning the treads would still have significant traction). Making the entire tank lighter per Mass Effect Ezo Magic Rock stuff means impact from explosions could have a much larger effect on the tank, including blowing it away like a feather.

Trust people when they say "it looks wrong". Humans absorb information like a sponge whether or not we realize it. It looks wrong because our brains can't grasp the concept of a massive bulky and heavy object moving like a remote controlled RC fast trax car.

Originally Posted by SGTalon

Ever see an Abrams or Challenger tank maneuver? They are shockingly agile too.

I don't see it as out of the ordinary.

I see it moving significantly slower then the lightning. I don't remember PS1's speeds but I think the lightning in PS1 moved much faster then 40mph, and the MBTs I think were around 50-55?

Besides I think the discussion was about the turn in place and acceleration, and that tank didn't floor me with that demonstration. In fact the movement looked natural.

If you applied enough power behind the vehicle to try and turn it faster, you would tear the pavement to shreds and cause the whole thing to lift upwards rather then apply that power directly to turning. Easier for the treads to dig through the pavement then for them to turn the tank. Hence why there is a turret which is a fraction of the weight and can turn 360 degrees.

[2coolforu]

Originally Posted by Blackwolf

Like I said before, heavy objects resist movement more then light objects. If you blow on a feather, you drive it further then if you blow on a bowling ball, despite the fact that the bowling ball has less friction on the ground. It goes back to the simple law "an object in motion stays in motion", the opposite is also true.
.

Yeah, of course a bowling ball will move less than a feather. Force = dp/dt, there is no element of gravity or weight in that equation, weight has no effect on motion only mass which is a constant.

If you took a tank from the planet earth and moved it to mars and tried to take a corner they would have the same centrifugal force, that fictituous force you identify as an object 'resisting' changes in motion a = v^2/r f = ma so f = mv^2/r. There is no component of gravity or weight in any of the equations of motion because gravity is force per unit mass it generally cancels out as a factor.

The only thing gravity would affect is friction, which is getting overly complex.

The most logical argument is that in the future in 2600 or whatever materials science has advanced to the point where we have extremely strong composite armor made up of plastics/carbon/nanomaterials that are extremely light and extremely tough.

[Blackwolf]

Originally Posted by elfailo

Alright mr. science, then they're Higgs-field manipulators that allow you to control the mass on the fly.

The point is that it doesn't all have to be 100% scientifically justifiable. It just needs to feel good, which isn't restricted by objective laws as far as I'm concerned. If people really objected to 'impossible looking' things, then Star Trek with its colossal space ships that jump to 12x lightspeed in a microsecond would have never become popular either.

You're just limiting your own creativity if you cut everything that seems impossible down.

Jeebus. Mass and weight have virtually no meaning in microgravity. Take into account the warp engines which created a bubble of timespace around the enterprise and propelled it through normal space like food you swallow and yeah it makes sense that it can go 12x light speed. Believe it or not Star Trek has sparked scientific theories on how FTL is possible.

Changing mass isn't your solution, the simple fact is you don't have a viable solution. It changes mass on the fly which means it flies through the air when someone shoots it with a pistol while it's turning in place. Easier to just say "well crap that does look kinda stupid doesn't it?" and make it not look stupid.

Why argue anyway? Even you have to admit it kinda looks dumb.

[2coolforu]

Originally Posted by Blackwolf

Jeebus. Mass and weight have virtually no meaning in microgravity. Take into account the warp engines which created a bubble of timespace around the enterprise and propelled it through normal space like food you swallow and yeah it makes sense that it can go 12x light speed. Believe it or not Star Trek has sparked scientific theories on how FTL is possible.

Changing mass isn't your solution, the simple fact is you don't have a viable solution. It changes mass on the fly which means it flies through the air when someone shoots it with a pistol while it's turning in place. Easier to just say "well crap that does look kinda stupid doesn't it?" and make it not look stupid.

Why argue anyway? Even you have to admit it kinda looks dumb.

FTL is not possible, unfortunately. Or at the very, very least we won't see even the groundwork theory for thousands of years. And weight has no meaning outside of gravity, however mass almost certainly does, E = mc^2 for example.

[Blackwolf]

Originally Posted by 2coolforu

FTL is not possible, unfortunately. Or at the very, very least we won't see even the groundwork theory for thousands of years. And weight has no meaning outside of gravity, however mass almost certainly does, E = mc^2 for example.

What you might as well have said is "It's not known how it can be possible, because we don't have the technology to do it".

Mass determines the amount of effect thrust has on the object. The Enterprise is massive, it requires a lot of thrust to propel it at certain speeds. But you could potentially move it with the energy stored in a bottle rocket in microgravity, albeit less then a noticeable amount from a human perspective. Virtually no meaning I believe are the exact words I used.

[Blackwolf]

Originally Posted by elfailo

I'm arguing because I think it would be a lot more fun to drive a lightning that behaves that way, and because I think you underestimate how much unrealism people would be willing to swallow.

Sadly I'm well aware how much unrealism people are willing to swallow, and treat as if it were true. Bullets knocking people backwards (and people believe they actually do that) is an example of what people are willing to swallow. It's just plain ignorance.

Enterprise warping to 12x in a microsecond did spawn theories, but the point is that regardless of how correct it is, it is something that looks unnatural, unintuitive, because people aren't used to seeing large objects with a lot of mass accelerate that fast. Lightnings behaving like they do in this video is something you're not used to, but all you have to do is let go of what you think is possible and it might turn out the be really enjoyable, even in a semi-realistic future setting.

Seems pretty natural looking to me given the circumstances. I imagine that an object traveling outside of normal reality in a field of timespace that it generates would look exactly like that as it exited normal space. Watch the Enterprise in a space battle though, and you see entirely different forces at play on it. Every time it took a hit from lasers or torpedoes or whatever the hell that series had in it, it shifted and rolled. It didn't utilize warp drives to teleport through subspace and out flank enemies, or demonstrate un-natural maneuvering capabilities. It functioned exactly as you would expect a large space ship to function.

All that's really needed is some hypothetical force that gets discovered in the future, a force that governs all other forces and can be manipulated with some technology.

The point your missing is that such things don't exist. If they do it is magic. If it's magic then it doesn't really belong in a non-magical sci-fi technological environment.

Even Mass Effect had limitations on Ezo which was an element that, depending on the electrical charge you sent through it, could increase or decrease the density of matter. It eliminated hundreds of issues, including the need for ammunition (shaving off a sliver from a block of steel and projecting it down a barrel while increasing it's density to match that of a bullet makes for virtually unlimited ammunition). But it in turn created problems, such as weapons overheating. End result was that by ME2, weapons needed heat sinks which were ejected from the gun to immediately cool it while a new one was placed in to allow the gun to fire again.

Using imagination is all well and good, but a bit of logical thought and practical sense goes a lot further to creating a world where immersion is high because it is so damn plausible.

[Blackwolf]

Originally Posted by elfailo

The point you're missing is that you're not bound by what demonstrably exists when you're developing a game. In Space Invaders your spaceship instantly accelerates to its maximum speed. There are only 2 speeds: 0, and fast. That is entirely illogical if you take current understanding of physics into account as well, but it worked fine in that game.

I agree that in a game with a setting like PS2 it shouldn't be completely absurd, but that's not what I'm seeing in this video.

So your point of argument is based on a 2d arcade game. K. I think we've both said about all we can on the subject...

Simple fact is you have to try and explain it with magic. It's easier, more sensible, and probably more balanced to just ask the DEVs to tweak it a bit so it's more realistic. Whether they do or not, is up to them. I kinda hope so because believe it or not a small matter like this could make or break the vehicle.

I guess my mistake was trying to explain why it looks bad/wrong/dumb. It's not even that bad though, reduce acceleration a touch and it would be perfect.

[JHendy]

It's just the side to side movement when not moving forward or backwards that looks odd to me. There needs to be more of a gradual increase in speed and momentum while turning on the spot. The tracks aren't going to be moving at full speed the second you engage the accelerator.

[LegioX]

I say no to third person view. Want a better view of the surrounding area and your blind spots? Have teammates follow you/work together and cover each other!!!

Taking 3rd person out be the best thing.