open All Channels
seplocked Ships and Modules
blankseplocked Why do larger ships lock slower?
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: [1] 2

Author Topic

Ghandis Vhero
Posted - 2010.02.06 22:28:00 - [1]
 

I know about scan res and sig rad and all that lovely stuff. But if you lock a battleship with a frigate, you'll lock it faster than if you were in a battleship, why? Surely if you're in a battleship you'll have a larger, more advanced sensors array therefore you could lock everything faster. I can't any reason why larger ships should lock slower.

I'm talking about this from more of a roleplay view than game balance view, of course.

Diomidis
Pod Liberation Authority
Posted - 2010.02.06 22:47:00 - [2]
 

Originally by: Ghandis Vhero
I know about scan res and sig rad and all that lovely stuff. But if you lock a battleship with a frigate, you'll lock it faster than if you were in a battleship, why? Surely if you're in a battleship you'll have a larger, more advanced sensors array therefore you could lock everything faster. I can't any reason why larger ships should lock slower.

I'm talking about this from more of a roleplay view than game balance view, of course.


Just like you wouldn't have only large weapons but also lotsa small guns on a BS, more energy available to warp faster and blah-blah...
Large ships should not make smaller obsolete - so smaller ships have some advantages that make sense only game-play wise.

Ghandis Vhero
Posted - 2010.02.06 22:52:00 - [3]
 

I do understand it from a game balance view. It's more of an rp reason I'm looking for, mainly out of curiosity.

Sumelar
Posted - 2010.02.06 22:55:00 - [4]
 

Battleships are built to kill other large targets. Navy designers can either use the space available in the hull to pack in better defenses or weapons systems, or a more powerful sensors to make it easier to target ships they aren't even designed to fight.

Which would you choose?

And smaller ships being harder to target is an RP reason. It works the same way in real life.

Sokratesz
Rionnag Alba
Northern Coalition.
Posted - 2010.02.06 23:05:00 - [5]
 

Originally by: Ghandis Vhero
I do understand it from a game balance view. It's more of an rp reason I'm looking for, mainly out of curiosity.


there isn't one

larger ships have a lot more room for sensitive electronics so they 'should' probably lock awhole lot faster

XXSketchxx
Gallente
Remote Soviet Industries
Posted - 2010.02.06 23:13:00 - [6]
 

balancing around rp is generally considered a bad idea

Taua Roqa
Minmatar
Sebiestor Tribe
Posted - 2010.02.06 23:24:00 - [7]
 

Edited by: Taua Roqa on 06/02/2010 23:30:39
random nonsense;

An integral part of every ship in eves sensor subsystem is actually far more primative than the airless voids through which they peer would suggest. Fundamentally, the mexallon used in the alloyed construction of any ships hull imbues the ship with a very slight magnetic field and skin surface current, this is continually monitored by a ships sensor CPU; the reason being any other object within the field will distort it in a very precise and specific way, smaller fields being vastly more sensitive and easier to analyse than larger ones, and likewise larger fields interacting with smaller ones only magnify a smaller fields spatial accuracy. The four empires use very similiar yet crucially different computer technologies to analyse the magnetic field interactions and extrapolate an accurate spatial modelling, in conjunction with optical, furthermore enchanced with ############Classified############ to provide usable, stable locks on other targets to be fed into the weaponry subsystems.



Asuka Smith
Gallente
Royal Black Watch Highlanders
Posted - 2010.02.06 23:43:00 - [8]
 

You lock ships with your willpower and raw pod concentration, and in a bigger ship more of your concentration is dedicated to maintaining all the complicated systems. That is why NPC battleships lock so quickly (They are piloted by a crew and instead of replacing electronics with pod-pilot goo chambers etc they have all the advanced stuff still in the ship).

Does that work? I completely made it all up but it sounds reasonable enough to satisfy someones RP considerations.

Glarion Garnier
Thermal reaction
Posted - 2010.02.07 04:42:00 - [9]
 

Eve lacks so much reality in many of it's aspects that when you start to think of it it might hurt your head. But the point is to have playable game with it's own system of how stuff works and how it's balanced. That is what provides interesting game mechanic. And the working mechanic is what makes a good game.

Think for Race for the galaxy card game for instance. A good working game mechanic = towards a good game.






Culmen
Caldari
Culmenation
Posted - 2010.02.07 04:51:00 - [10]
 

Role play reason give two possibilities.
Maybe battleship sensors are geared towards long range targeting.
Thus the radar analogy is they use longer wave lengths giving them increased targeting range at the cost of accurarcy.
In radar, longer wave lengths result in lower resolution, same with eve.

Or it could be their reactors are interfering with scanners.

Lance Fighter
Amarr
Posted - 2010.02.07 04:52:00 - [11]
 

Because thicker armor and shields create sensor interference.. Like in nexus. Your sensors worked far better when you and your targets shields were offline. as a matter of fact, the first thing your scientist does when your shields go online is 'oh **** my sensors are screwed up'...

That doesnt explain why they lock farther though, so I am going to assume that a larger surface to conduct signals from yields better distance, but worse accuracy.

Calx Pugnus
Posted - 2010.02.07 05:24:00 - [12]
 

Originally by: Ghandis Vhero
I do understand it from a game balance view. It's more of an rp reason I'm looking for, mainly out of curiosity.


You answered your own question. This is completely about game balance which, rightly so, takes priority over lolRP issues.

William Hamilton
Caldari
Endless Destruction
Imperial 0rder
Posted - 2010.02.07 07:04:00 - [13]
 

All ships in EvE are constantly putting out low-level electronic counter-measures designed to prevent locks from being attained on them at all. THis has the effect of causing sensors that could normally lock from across a solar system to be limited to a minuscule range of less than a hundred meters.

In order to overcome these ECM systems all vessels have advanced counter-ECM algorithms built in to their sensor net. In order to get these to work effectively they MUST be built at a very low level, software emulation will not do. Larger ships have longer ranged weapons and requirements to use them at their longer ranges, because of this they use much fancier algorithms that massively increase the range through which they can battle passive ECM, but drastically slow-down the locking procedure. Switching this out "on the fly" for faster short ranged locks is simply too slow, and would break all current locks.

On the bright side, these stronger algorithms also help defend against the Caldari directed-ECM-weapons.

Chainsaw Plankton
IDLE GUNS
IDLE EMPIRE
Posted - 2010.02.07 07:21:00 - [14]
 

Originally by: Taua Roqa
Edited by: Taua Roqa on 06/02/2010 23:30:39
random nonsense;

An integral part of every ship in eves sensor subsystem is actually far more primative than the airless voids through which they peer would suggest. Fundamentally, the mexallon used in the alloyed construction of any ships hull imbues the ship with a very slight magnetic field and skin surface current, this is continually monitored by a ships sensor CPU; the reason being any other object within the field will distort it in a very precise and specific way, smaller fields being vastly more sensitive and easier to analyse than larger ones, and likewise larger fields interacting with smaller ones only magnify a smaller fields spatial accuracy. The four empires use very similiar yet crucially different computer technologies to analyse the magnetic field interactions and extrapolate an accurate spatial modelling, in conjunction with optical, furthermore enchanced with ############Classified############ to provide usable, stable locks on other targets to be fed into the weaponry subsystems.





so basically warping into an asteroid belt should really **** up your sensors?

Marine HK4861
Caldari
State Protectorate
Posted - 2010.02.07 09:23:00 - [15]
 

How about getting a lock isn't actually acquiring the target (you do that almost instantly as the target shows up on your overview) but calculating a firing solution for your weapons?

Thus small ships would need less calculation time, while larger ships would need more (more turrets in dispersed locations).

Furb Killer
Gallente
Posted - 2010.02.07 09:33:00 - [16]
 

That would be a decent one.

Alternatively the higher locking range of large ships hurt the scan resolution.

Baneken
Gallente
The New Knighthood
Apocalypse Now.
Posted - 2010.02.07 10:45:00 - [17]
 

Actually your ships targeting computer 'locks' in to a signature from enemy ship ergo smaller signature is harder to track in order to gain a lock for targeting computer.


tehSiner
Abnormal Experience
Posted - 2010.02.07 12:20:00 - [18]
 

your signature radius also produces interference, which scales with size.

Mr McFail
Posted - 2010.02.07 13:43:00 - [19]
 

Originally by: XXSketchxx
balancing around rp is generally considered a bad idea


No one has ever tried it and I for one think it would work very well.

It's pretty stupid being able to solo a bs in a frigate/cruiser when most of us grew up seeing battleships as iconic vessels able to handle all threats and take massive amounts of punishment.

Darek Castigatus
Immortalis Inc.
Shadow Cartel
Posted - 2010.02.07 14:30:00 - [20]
 

Originally by: Mr McFail
Originally by: XXSketchxx
balancing around rp is generally considered a bad idea


No one has ever tried it and I for one think it would work very well.

It's pretty stupid being able to solo a bs in a frigate/cruiser when most of us grew up seeing battleships as iconic vessels able to handle all threats and take massive amounts of punishment.


dont know what battleships you grew up watching but the ones i saw carried huge guns for shelling things that didnt move very much and were ****ed over by airpower, read loads of small fast targets, so in terms of rl comparisons id say its pretty spot on.

Irida Mershkov
Gallente
The Reformed
Chaos Theory Alliance
Posted - 2010.02.07 14:41:00 - [21]
 

Originally by: Sokratesz
Originally by: Ghandis Vhero
I do understand it from a game balance view. It's more of an rp reason I'm looking for, mainly out of curiosity.


there isn't one

larger ships have a lot more room for sensitive electronics so they 'should' probably lock awhole lot faster

They also probably require much larger powerplant systems to keep a ship that size 'afloat', so in the end, it probably balances out once coupled with the engines etc.

Taua Roqa
Minmatar
Sebiestor Tribe
Posted - 2010.02.07 14:44:00 - [22]
 

Edited by: Taua Roqa on 07/02/2010 14:44:20
That's pretty true about how they are iconic, but battleships (any large gunned ship) are also totally obsolete now - offensive weapons have totally outstripped defensive counters making battleships naught but giant targets - see the falklands war and how the british sunk the argentinian cruiser Belgrano in a heartbeat with a nuclear submarine - the belgrano never stood a chance - a massive loss of life and a harsh lesson. Even a modern day frigate would likely take out the mightiest of the ww2 battleships, HMS Hood, IJN Yamato, the Bismarck, with complete ease using massively superior weaponry.

Last time a battleship was used was i think by the Americans in the first iraq war, and that was more of a 'look at our big ship pounding 'ur cities GO AMERICA!' than because it was sensible. That's how useless they are now, no modern navy uses them.

I'd love to see gameplay and RP balanced, but i don't see how it's possible, ccps trailers are blatant expamples of an idealised 'RP' eve. Ion cannons on carriers, say no more :P

Kaian Voskhod
Posted - 2010.02.10 22:53:00 - [23]
 

In real life (tm)

Interceptors have "pursuit radar" in the nose of the aircraft that are ultra efficient at locking targets.

Cruisers, frigates and so on doesn't have that kind of stuff... If they have some, it's mounted on CIWS systems.

I wish to see hard kill systems on a eve BS =)

Xavier Maroquin
Dvice Shipyards
Posted - 2010.02.10 23:01:00 - [24]
 

Edited by: Xavier Maroquin on 10/02/2010 23:09:08
Because BIG ships have BIG sensor arrays that are designed to lock other BIG things and not SMALL things.

Take this example:

Would you try to find an ant with a handheld magnifying glass or a telescope? The magnifying glass obviously, and it compares to a Frigates sensor systems. The telescope compares to a BS's sensors. Its really easy to find something big with a magnifying glass, but average for something small, and also you don't have very much range. Now, if you have a telescope, you can find really big things and at much greater range, but trying to find an ant is a lot harder.

Why they cant put put frigate sized sensors on a BS I don't know... Maybe they need the space for those doughnuts...

Kijo Rikki
Caldari
Point of No Return
Waterboard
Posted - 2010.02.10 23:40:00 - [25]
 

Someone nailed it with firing solutions. And despite the capacity for state of the art electronics, these days we can fit alot of power into a small package. I read some report from MIT on the possibilities nanites and how they could be used to create diamond, and in turn bore the carbon pathways into the diamond needed to make a much smaller, insanely powerful (by todays standards) computer that simply does not overheat. So small ships in the future should have more than enough electronic oomph to quickly lock onto other ships.

Besides, it always seemed common sense to me, always easier for a computer to lock onto a slow moving barn than a fast moving fighter.

Also, as a passing thought, you know the Bismark for all its awesome tracking capability was sank by an obsolete and insanely slow fighter plane? I'm not wikiing it, i remember this from Discovery years back.

stoicfaux
Gallente
Posted - 2010.02.11 01:03:00 - [26]
 

Eve propulsion systems use some very esoteric physics. For all we know, Eve ships warp space and push themselves along: Imagine sitting on a trampoline. Just by sitting still you create a depression in the trampoline. In order to move, you create a new depression (with your feet) and 'fall' into the new depression.

If Eve engines have the ability to warp space, then you could say that Eve engines contain a massive gravity generator in order to bend space (the trampoline.) Which means Eve ships are constantly warping the space around them (unless they completely kill their engines.) Larger ships have larger drives with larger gravity generators/wells that interfere with their own sensors. Looking through this warped space is like looking through blurry glass.

It could also be that since the gravity generator systems warp space, it's harder to see into the warped space around a ship. So a large ship is peering through blurry glass (its own warped space) into a blurry blob (the small ship which is also warping space) and trying to pinpoint it well enough to generate a firing solution.


This post brought you by the Pseudo Science Out My Butt in Support of the Suspension of Disbelief society.

Benito M
Posted - 2010.02.11 02:47:00 - [27]
 

Quote:
Actually your ships targeting computer 'locks' in to a signature from enemy ship ergo smaller signature is harder to track in order to gain a lock for targeting computer.


/Thread

This topic was pointless Laughing

stoicfaux
Gallente
Posted - 2010.02.11 04:52:00 - [28]
 

Originally by: Kijo Rikki
Besides, it always seemed common sense to me, always easier for a computer to lock onto a slow moving barn than a fast moving fighter.


Other way around. Why can a frigate lock onto a frigate faster than a battleship can lock onto a frigate? Same target...



Quote:
Also, as a passing thought, you know the Bismark for all its awesome tracking capability was sank by an obsolete and insanely slow fighter plane? I'm not wikiing it, i remember this from Discovery years back.


The British were desperate to sink the Bismark, so they threw everything at it, including some obsolete *bi-plane* torpedo bombers (Swordfish, IIRC) that could travel at something painfully slow (60 knots IIRC.) The sights on the AA guns weren't designed to hit such a slow moving target, so the gunners lead the Swordfish too much.

However, the bi-planes were flying slow and low to the point that the Bismark fired its main guns near the swordfish. The splash created by the shells hitting the water was high enough and powerful enough that it could take down a bi-plane.

In the end, one of the Swordfish got a very lucky torpedo hit on the Bismark and damaged its rudder (it could only go in a circle.) The British fleet eventually caught up to the Bismark and sunk it (or the Germans scuttled it, depending on who you ask.)

Pistrik
Minmatar
Noir.
Noir. Mercenary Group
Posted - 2010.02.11 08:40:00 - [29]
 

Because this is EVE, not Star Trek.

Commoner
Caldari
The Tuskers
Posted - 2010.02.11 08:53:00 - [30]
 

I take it that there are alot more systems which needs to be readied on bigger ships, to get a shooting solution. For smaller craft it's usuallly just fly towards target, use joystick to pull trigger and fire.


Pages: [1] 2

This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only