Why I currently think combat and Ramming is rubbish

[Ben Ryder]

I would say that their are a few good reasons for not ramming...but in the scheme of this game, it is allowed and a valid tactic. The main reasons for not ramming in real life are:

1. Unknowable outcome.
2. Cost of ship warrants returning rather than winning.

That said...if a battle is pivotal to a war effort...I can see a reason to ram..rather than run away...or worse, sink. Cost is a RL issue we do not have to deal with here.

This really comes down to a discussion of fair play...and the devs feel that ramming in fights is considered such. This became obvious when ramming was declared illegal in the game around stations. It could be made illegal everywhere...but the game was coded to allow it outside the 'no fire zone'.

I guess, the players could try to influence the devs with a change to make ramming illegal every where...but the outrage to the tactic would need to be near universal for this to occur.

Well said Sir!

They could just make ramming ships with shields up pointless or highly ineffective. This would mean that you would have to use the fancy high tech weapons to fight it out rather than just bashing in to each other like drunks with no co-oridnation

 

[newman1702]

The craft we fly are much smaller and nimbler than Star Destroyers. As for the comparison to actual fighter jets, last I checked fighter jets don't operate in space where they can't fall to the ground if they lose too much speed, and I'm also fairly sure F/A-18D Hornets aren't flying around with shield generators. Ramming would work quite differently in weightless space than it does in atmo with planes that are 1000 years behind technologically to our sci fi ships. Relative speed differences between our sci fi ships aren't that great, and with all that modern armor and shielding it would actually kind of be bumper car-like. Try bumping stuff a bit in KSP. Unless you hit something with a vast speed difference things will bounce off. Now give those same ships 1000 year more advanced tech, and there you go.

Frankly, I don't see much of a problem with ramming. I actually enjoy it when a FDS that I'm melting with my lasers does a 180 with FA off, then boosts right for me trying to ram me. It's one more thing to watch out for. In a space game like this, I prefer having it in there. It's not like the flight model is realistic, anyway..

 

[Banana's_Are_Good_For_You]

I would say that their are a few good reasons for not ramming...but in the scheme of this game, it is allowed and a valid tactic. The main reasons for not ramming in real life are:

1. Unknowable outcome.
2. Cost of ship warrants returning rather than winning.

That said...if a battle is pivotal to a war effort...I can see a reason to ram..rather than run away...or worse, sink. Cost is a RL issue we do not have to deal with here.

This really comes down to a discussion of fair play...and the devs feel that ramming in fights is considered such. This became obvious when ramming was declared illegal in the game around stations. It could be made illegal everywhere...but the game was coded to allow it outside the 'no fire zone'.

I guess, the players could try to influence the devs with a change to make ramming illegal every where...but the outrage to the tactic would need to be near universal for this to occur.

There are ways to deal with it beyond the nuclear option of punish every time you ram.

The secret would be in it not being able to damage when a Ships shields are up. I've watched plenty of vids of SCB spamming couriers using it to their advantage against much bigger ships. It shouldn't really work that way at all.

If it's to change then the core fundamentals of shield vs shield ship collision need to change.
As it currently stands, the ability to stack SCB's does nothing more that make it more of a problem and drive PvP further down into a one dimensional play style where ramming is just far too easy and favourable, especially in a more manoeuvrable ship with multi-stacked SCB's and that destabilizes the game and makes a nonsense of it.

 

[Ben Ryder]

The craft we fly are much smaller and nimbler than Star Destroyers. As for the comparison to actual fighter jets, last I checked fighter jets don't operate in space where they can't fall to the ground if they lose too much speed, and I'm also fairly sure F/A-18D Hornets aren't flying around with shield generators. Ramming would work quite differently in weightless space than it does in atmo with planes that are 1000 years behind technologically to our sci fi ships. Relative speed differences between our sci fi ships aren't that great, and with all that modern armor and shielding it would actually kind of be bumper car-like. Try bumping stuff a bit in KSP. Unless you hit something with a vast speed difference things will bounce off. Now give those same ships 1000 year more advanced tech, and there you go.

Frankly, I don't see much of a problem with ramming. I actually enjoy it when a FDS that I'm melting with my lasers does a 180 with FA off, then boosts right for me trying to ram me. It's one more thing to watch out for. In a space game like this, I prefer having it in there. It's not like the flight model is realistic, anyway..

So you discount reality, realism, and poor flight mechanics and sum up by saying you like it even though its nonsense and a poorly implemented game mechanic as an rationale argument? Sorry if I misunderstood you bu that's the essence that came across to me> I do not mean to deliberately misinterpret you or put words in your mouth.


We have yet to touch on Ramming in Elite Lore

 

[CMDR-AD]

Ever see star wars or pretty much any science fiction film? Did star destroyers charge around crashing i to ships? Did Darth Vader say in a strange whispery voice 'ramming speed ahead' as they attacked Alderon or what ever it was called?

Ever watched news footage of real warfare? Do you see planes ramming each other and drones crashing in to enemy troops like pin balls? Soldiers bumping chests and head butting each other before drawing weapons to shoot each at point blank with sniper rifles and bazookas other?

I was hoping that 1.4 would put an end to Elite Bumper Cars.


Fighter pilots you have been warned. In 1.4 you don't even need to score a ranged hit to claim a kill. This is the era of the killer trade bumper car vessel. All hail the blue haired princesses shield

I have often thought that so much untapped potential depth lies in this area.

In my mind, I imagine the shield generators sort of like a microwave oven. Putting a spoon inside does terrible things.

If a shield generator energy field is pierced by another object (ship or docking bay) why not have the shield generator suffer a several percent module damage per second? And the power distributor, too, dealing with the wildly unstable power loading also takes a a few percent module damage per second. And to top it all, the ship as a whole heats up rapidly and significantly.

Extra depth could come into play be weighing the results based on the mass of the ships. So two near equally massive ships would share equal module damage and heating rates. A Sidewinder hitting a big ship would take a proportionally larger share of the heat and module damage.

This way, ramming would still be a tactical choice, but it's place would have to be carefully balanced into the fight due to the consequences shared by both parties.

 

[Kristov]

Someone isn't a very good student of air combat, the Soviets employed taran, 'battering ram', starting in WWI and continued it through WWII were it was used quite a bit and even after WWII it was still a viable tactic. Jet aircraft aren't considered suitable for the taran typically, too fragile, although some ARE well armored enough to pull the taran off, especially the older jets of the Soviets(they loved the tactic, what can I say).

As for space vessels and ramming, well, my Clipper is suitably armored and shielded that it can handle a few ramming attacks against targets of lesser tonnage. My Courier was well suited to ramming smaller craft as well, and thanks to a HAL9000 moment with my docking computer, I know exactly how many ramming hits it takes to reduce it to rubble(A3 shields, 3 shield boosters, military reinforced hull = 2 to take down shields and leave hull at 75%, 3 drops hull to 30%, 4th is destruction). I've had more than a few Sideys, Vipers and other smaller vessels become scrap when they hit my Clipper during docking(coming in or going out) while I was under 100ms, 1 hit for the smallest vessels(sidey/eagle) and 2 for the larger(viper/adder), and that was THEM hitting me mind you, and none of those events took my shields out, although the 2 hit rams always caused some hull damage(typically 10-15%).

I've been taken out by Anacondas ramming my Clipper a few times, and I've taken a few of them out by ramming as well, but it's ALWAYS a costly move, ramming is not without consequences against ships of similar or higher tonnage with shields as you will take hull damage, and without shields it can be suicide even if you do destroy the ship you rammed/got rammed by.

People don't like it because they think it's cheap, it's not something anyone would actually do, whatever, insert YOUR reason here. And that validates absolutely nothing, those are the opinions of people without any combat training or experience. Modern naval vessels still employ ramming, even the British Navy, and they have since mankind first started using the waterways to travel. Space vessels with armored hulls and reinforced interior structures have no reason to not employ ramming, sheer brute kinetic force is deadly. In Elite Dangerous, getting rammed is GENERALLY easy to avoid, provided you can see your opponent coming at you. If you can't see them, you can't avoid them purposely, which is rather the point.

Ramming is used in most sci-fi novels, movies and series, because it's a valid and tactically sound option in space combat, even if your vessel isn't built specifically for it.

 

[Ben Ryder]

I think I've got a fairly good handle on air combat. Taran is an oddity "It is a last-ditch tactic" and was scrapped very shortly after being developed because it was rubbish and not viable. It was created out of desperation in an arms race for air superiority which Russia came close to last in. Picking out historical failures only goes to highlight how nonsensical ramming is and going back to world war one for quirky examples does not support a realistic argument, especially if those examples are of failed technologies.


Yes ramming is used in sci-fi novels etc and only as a last desperate dramatic attempt. I can not think of one novel, film or series where fleets of ships have engaged in a ramming battle.

 

[Roybe]

There are ways to deal with it beyond the nuclear option of punish every time you ram.

The secret would be in it not being able to damage when a Ships shields are up. I've watched plenty of vids of SCB spamming couriers using it to their advantage against much bigger ships. It shouldn't really work that way at all.

If it's to change then the core fundamentals of shield vs shield ship collision need to change.
As it currently stands, the ability to stack SCB's does nothing more that make it more of a problem and drive PvP further down into a one dimensional play style where ramming is just far too easy and favourable, especially in a more manoeuvrable ship with multi-stacked SCB's and that destabilizes the game and makes a nonsense of it.

Well...that's a way to look at it. I can see a few different viewpoints related to this. At least the devs are aware there are at least different ways to look at ramming. They get to choose how to address the issue...or make any changes at all.

 

[Banana's_Are_Good_For_You]

Someone isn't a very good student of air combat, the Soviets employed taran, 'battering ram', starting in WWI and continued it through WWII were it was used quite a bit and even after WWII it was still a viable tactic. Jet aircraft aren't considered suitable for the taran typically, too fragile, although some ARE well armored enough to pull the taran off, especially the older jets of the Soviets(they loved the tactic, what can I say).

As for space vessels and ramming, well, my Clipper is suitably armored and shielded that it can handle a few ramming attacks against targets of lesser tonnage. My Courier was well suited to ramming smaller craft as well, and thanks to a HAL9000 moment with my docking computer, I know exactly how many ramming hits it takes to reduce it to rubble(A3 shields, 3 shield boosters, military reinforced hull = 2 to take down shields and leave hull at 75%, 3 drops hull to 30%, 4th is destruction). I've had more than a few Sideys, Vipers and other smaller vessels become scrap when they hit my Clipper during docking(coming in or going out) while I was under 100ms, 1 hit for the smallest vessels(sidey/eagle) and 2 for the larger(viper/adder), and that was THEM hitting me mind you, and none of those events took my shields out, although the 2 hit rams always caused some hull damage(typically 10-15%).

I've been taken out by Anacondas ramming my Clipper a few times, and I've taken a few of them out by ramming as well, but it's ALWAYS a costly move, ramming is not without consequences against ships of similar or higher tonnage with shields as you will take hull damage, and without shields it can be suicide even if you do destroy the ship you rammed/got rammed by.

People don't like it because they think it's cheap, it's not something anyone would actually do, whatever, insert YOUR reason here. And that validates absolutely nothing, those are the opinions of people without any combat training or experience. Modern naval vessels still employ ramming, even the British Navy, and they have since mankind first started using the waterways to travel. Space vessels with armored hulls and reinforced interior structures have no reason to not employ ramming, sheer brute kinetic force is deadly. In Elite Dangerous, getting rammed is GENERALLY easy to avoid, provided you can see your opponent coming at you. If you can't see them, you can't avoid them purposely, which is rather the point.

Ramming is used in most sci-fi novels, movies and series, because it's a valid and tactically sound option in space combat, even if your vessel isn't built specifically for it.

Funny how you completely missed the point with the SCB stacking where players can ram, recharge, ram again, recharge and what does this mean when all it comes down to who has the most SCB's?
Quality game play you're promoting right there.
It's being exploited, players know it's exploitable and that's why it's done so frequently in combat. It takes the game down to it's lowest common denominator which means less about actually flying a ship, more just point, ram and spam.

It doesn't matter if it's used outside the game or not but when it is used and abused to the point where it is a more effective tool to kill ships than actually shooting at them then it should be considered a problem.

Side note:
As for the Star Trek link above, again no shields.

 

[Ben Ryder]

Here you go:

https://youtu.be/bXq3dytL6ZA?t=1m

An desperate situation for dramatic purposes when all is lost, resulting in catastrophic damage to both vessels. Not a regular battle. Do they ram in every encounter?

 

[cluelessforumuser65578]

Modern naval vessels still employ ramming, even the British Navy

give one example of a royal navy ship ramming with the intent to sink the enemy in recent times, and not just a side by side rubbing with the intent to intimidate. this game was supposed to be dog fighting in space, not space dodgems

 

[Ben Ryder]

Funny how you completely missed the point with the SCB stacking where players can ram, recharge, ram again, recharge and what does this mean when all it comes down to who has the most SCB's?
Quality game play you're promoting right there.
It's being exploited, players know it's exploitable and that's why it's done so frequently in combat. It takes the game down to it's lowest common denominator which means less about actually flying a ship, more just point, ram and spam.

It doesn't matter if it's used outside the game or not but when it is used and abused to the point where it is a more effective tool to kill ships than actually shooting at them then it should be considered a problem.

Side note:
As for the Star Trek link above, again no shields.

Bravo. Top Banana.

 

[ianw]

Whilst I agree ramming is kind of cheesy - can't you just get out of the way?

Been practising in CQC and it seems you really have to make an effort to let someone ram you.

 

[CATPAIN KIRK]

Ever see star wars or pretty much any science fiction film? Did star destroyers charge around crashing i to ships? Did Darth Vader say in a strange whispery voice 'ramming speed ahead' as they attacked Alderon or what ever it was called?

Maybe not Vader, but Worf actually did and Picard used the tactic.

Ever watched news footage of real warfare? Do you see planes ramming each other and drones crashing in to enemy troops like pin balls? Soldiers bumping chests and head butting each other before drawing weapons to shoot each at point blank with sniper rifles and bazookas other?

Well - considering ED is somewhat comparable to WW2 planes in space - yes - it was used. Someone already mentioned Kamikaze. Using the tactic in a non-suicidal manner was employed by the Luftwaffe (Sonderkommando Elbe) - well - at least they were expected to try surviving.

The soldier and warship comparisons are a bit lacking imho. I could play devils advocate and say "have you ever seen triremes not trying to ram each other?"

Anyway - I'm not necessarily disagreeing with the point you're trying to make - I don't have strong feelings about it and don't see ramming as a major problem - however that could be due to me not engaging in PvP a lot.
It was quite annoying when we had had the Kamikaze AI back in beta, though.

[edit]: Ninja'd by atak2.

 

[Ben Ryder]

They seem to attempt it quite a lot in Star Trek :

https://youtu.be/AdNbVxMNFvk

Yup every time they have no they choice and they are up ship creek with a paddle. Not as regular combat.

Give up. Your not coming up with a good example or come up with one.

 

[Chip Patton]

Umm, not enough time to read through all the posts... but... "Ramming Speed! Today, is a good day to die!"

 

[Ben Ryder]

Any one read any of the elite novels where they use ramming? Purely out of desperation and drama. Every other combat is at range.

 

[ROSS-128]

I agree it is kind of silly how ramming is so much more effective than our guns, and how it's such a preferred method of attack due to the current shield mechanics.

The way I see it, if you're going to ram, you better have a boarding party ready.

[video=youtube_share;hLi7ULuqDkQ]https://youtu.be/hLi7ULuqDkQ[/video]

 

[Banana's_Are_Good_For_You]

They seem to attempt it quite a lot in Star Trek :

https://youtu.be/AdNbVxMNFvk

I just wanted an excuse to post Star Trek clips.

Again, no shields. There seems to be a pattern emerging.

 

[Windscreen Smudge]

Well said and in 1943 ramming was officially called dashed stupid by the royal navy. Something people who were not desperate, suicidal or stupid had known since the invention of the bow and arrow and spears.

The Greeks are calling your bluff. Ramming used to be a favored tactic in their once world-dominating Navy.