Ship "sinking" animation

[CocoCincinnati]

The funny thing is that I never even paid the animation a second thought until this thread. I do see the OP's point but for me it's extremely minor and not something I'm going to worry about. If they did want to change it so the ship just blows up and disappears immediately, instead of drifting downward and then disappearing, then I would be fine with that. But, like I said, I'm not at all worried about it.

 

[stumason]

Haha, I am not bothered by it to be honest, but it reminds me of the destruction of the Executor in Return of the Jedi...

Massive, 8 Km ship take a hit on the Bridge from an A-wing.. Subsequently barrel rolls over and crashes into the Death Star...

Why? It would have simply carried on as normal in real life, bridge or no bridge. Most modern warships have auxiliary controls etc anyway and with no gravity to speak of (well, the Death Star probably had a decent gravity well...) why would it go down like an aeroplane?

Sometimes, you just have to let things slide for artistic license.

 

[Susarian]

Put me in the "doesn't bother me" category. I thought i was different way of getting a ship out of the way.

 

[Ziffallo]

The funny thing is that I never even paid the animation a second thought until this thread. I do see the OP's point but for me it's extremely minor and not something I'm going to worry about. If they did want to change it so the ship just blows up and disappears immediately, instead of drifting downward and then disappearing, then I would be fine with that. But, like I said, I'm not at all worried about it.

Agreed

 

[small.cpu]

The "sinking" is fine imo, them immediately loosing their momentum looks a bit silly though but as has been mentioned the battles are too messy to look at them closely anyway.

I mean besides looking at the fleets strength number there isn't any way to tell how the battle is going since they're so chaotic.

 

[Salatmander]

OP Im pretty sure there was a long long thread of this.... or is this necro post?

With ships sinking in Star wars, Starship Troopers and some others... I don't sink its a problem

was there ? Sorry then, was more active in the HoI4 Forum and came that way to stellaris some weeks ago. watched shortly for a thread but didn t find one on the first sight, so i thought why not throw it in and see what other people think about it. Didn t wanted to bring up "dead" discussions again ^^`

 

[Cruxador]

Yeah, the game doesn't make good use of the 3D space, and this particular animation is especially bad.

It's not sinking, the sub light engines went off and the ship couldn't resist anymore to the system's gravity. Therfore it was pulled in direction of the heaviest object (probably the star) and gave you the illusion of sinking. Explanation working great for me

Except the new trajectory is transverse to the system's orbital plane, and in fact pulls it AWAY from sources of gravity. If what you've described happened, that would be cool. But I don't think the game models gravity at all.

Didn't say that it should stop, I said it was attracted in direction to the nearest star. Like the international space station iss which has to continually make little corrections in order to keep in orbit and not sinking towards planet surface

The ISS is way closer to earth than these battles would generally be to a planet, you know. It would take a while of the ship swinging about the system before any gravity would take over. I'd be willing to ignore that if they made an animation like this which looked cool, but I think that's beyond the level of improvement we can realistically expect.

 

[VirtualCube]

From https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/index.php?threads/the-animation-quality.914018/

Hello, I am K-vald, animator on Stellaris, and it's nice to see a thread about what I'm doing here as there's mostly feedback about other matters than graphics/animation here (which is also why I feel that this is a perfect opportunity for me to comment on it!)

I understand your concern about the ships going "downwards" in space, which in all fairness, as you point out, might not come off as too realistic. However, realism vs. gameplay is a very old topic that I think all of us are too familiar with around here..
The reason we chose to go with the "gameplay" approach to this is simply that it will get the destroyed ships out of the way and it shows which ships are destroyed. We deemed it to be best to not have exploding ships and next-to-stationary ships in the middle of combat, which would look horrible when other ships and projectiles would clip though them.
It can also be mentioned that what you see in the video is only one of many different kind of destroyed animations!

I appreciate everyones feedback on the matter, in whatever form (even if the more constructive the better ).

 

[Cruxador]

From https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/index.php?threads/the-animation-quality.914018/

That has already been mentioned. The fact that it has a gameplay reason doesn't change that the implementation of this idea looks dumb.

 

[VirtualCube]

That has already been mentioned. The fact that it has a gameplay reason doesn't change that the implementation of this idea looks dumb.

Ok.

 

[Atlantians]

I like it.

What annoys me is the instant teleportation of pops from one planet to another.

 

[BrokenSky]

Except the new trajectory is transverse to the system's orbital plane, and in fact pulls it AWAY from sources of gravity. If what you've described happened, that would be cool. But I don't think the game models gravity at all.

This actually. Having them "sink" but have it be towards the center of the system would be a reasonable option. I wonder how difficult it would be to take the current animation and turn it 90 degrees? (Probably the hard part would be making sure the game knew where the "center of the system" was though).

 

[FlavourBeans]

You know that a space ship doesn't stop flying or is even getting slower if you stop the engine? In fact, it can't stop or slow down without engine!

Real physics are simply unpractical for such a game, though, so it's fine for me if they "sink".

Hey now, sending scientists to study debris would be a lot more exciting if it's zooming across systems after being launched by reactor detonation.

 

[EvilTom]

The ships, after being destroyed, could just enter orbit as debris rather then being stationary. Wouldn't that retain some kind of reality/momentum being as more than likely these ships would be in some kind of orbit anyway (unless they are that powerful they can remain stationary without being in orbit and falling into the nearest gravity well).