Removing rammers

[Bigmaec]

We're living in an age of AIs already able to fake phone conversations and process big data from consumers bahaviours, and you're arguing about your game not being able to tell if a player is intentionally ramming something, while obviously ramming something.

Sweet irony.

How? How can the game decide if a ram was intentional?

I once had a duel with a friend and we decided to stop at 20% damage. We both pressed boost at the wrong time and the wrong vector and he exploded.
How can the game decide if that was intentional? It's just not as trivial as you presume it to be.

 

[Maggie_Oz]

We're living in an age of AIs already able to fake phone conversations and process big data from consumers bahaviours, and you're arguing about your game not being able to tell if a player is intentionally ramming something, while obviously ramming something.

Sweet irony.

And yet you are still unable to even hint at what sort of thing might be put into the game that might be able to detect what is "obvious"

 

[[VR] M4st0d0n]

How? How can the game decide if a ram was intentional?

I once had a duel with a friend and we decided to stop at 20% damage. We both pressed boost at the wrong time and the wrong vector and he exploded.
How can the game decide if that was intentional? It's just not as trivial as you presume it to be.

You choose to report agressions off when you duel, no?

So what's the issue here? You rammed each others by boosting noze against noze. It's perfectly normal for you both to explode. Heck in a lot of sims you'd both explode even with 100% hull.

 

[Maggie_Oz]

You choose to report agressions off when you duel, no?

So what's the issue here? You rammed each others by boosting noze against noze. It's perfectly normal for you both to explode. Heck in a lot of sims you'd both explode even with 100% hull.

What you are missing, although to be fair you are missing pretty much everything in this discussion, is that the situation he describes is beyond a bit of software to arbitrate as to who was the criminal and who was the victim, as it was there was neither.

 

[[VR] M4st0d0n]

And yet you are still unable to even hint at what sort of thing might be put into the game that might be able to detect what is "obvious"

I said there was no proper ram damage or ram hitbox, but obviously you cant read whole posts.

 

[Bigmaec]

You choose to report agressions off when you duel, no?

So what's the issue here? You rammed each others by boosting noze against noze. It's perfectly normal for you both to explode. Heck in a lot of sims you'd both explode even with 100% hull.

It was in anarchy, and only the other ship exploded.
That's not the point, how can the game detect if a ram was intentional?
In this case it wasn't, and still someone exploded.
Had I gotten a murder bounty if both had crimes on, perhaps even if only my friend had boosted?

That is what everyone is saying. It's not that easy to detect.

 

[Maggie_Oz]

I said there was no proper ram damage or ram hitbox, but obviously you cant read whole posts.

It's quite alarming that you don't have the mental faculties to understand that hitboxes and damage detection aren't the issue, despite being told that numerous times by numerous people.

 

[Red Anders]

Oh wait, I get it. I dont code the game, so I'm wrong. Pristine argument.

The issue is that despite being asked several times, you still haven't attempted to explain how the game could detect which of the two ships involved in a collision was the 'aggressor' and which was the passive recipient of the ram. I can only assume you're going to continue to deflect until the mods rescue you with a badgering warning.

I don't require your answer to be in the form of code by the way. A simple verbal sketch of your concept would do.

When your answer involves analysis of the respective vectors of both ships in three dimensions, analysis of any changes to said vectors, analysis of relative speeds and changes to those etc, please remember that you're describing something that a computer game will be doing in real time.

I think most of us could watch a video of an incident and determine the aggressor but coding a subroutine in a game to flawlessly replicate the processing capability of the human brain in such situations is generally considered to be a bit difficult. Well unless you're Derek 'neural networks' Smart obviously

It's trivial for the game to detect that two ships collided and one or both were damaged. It already does that. It's not trivial at all for the game to detect intent, which is what you want.

 

[bladebss]

Personaly I think that ramming should be a thing you want to avoid doing.. rather than it being one of the best meta moves in PVP.. it should be very lethal for both ships in the equasion so colide.

In alot of cases the two ships are going 400ms head on. Now.. a projectile from a large cannon goes 850ms or so i think? So the combined kinetic effect of a head on collision of who ships traveling 400ms would be like hitting a stationery ship at 800ms! A cannon shell has very low mass in comparison to a ship.. even a sidewinder.. we are delaing with 100s to 1000s of tuns of ship colliding at 800ms and we just boop off each other.

Now raming does way more damage than any weapons we have because the weapons are all weak toilet water in comparison the insaine hit points we can acomplish, thanks to engeneer's ''complete and wonderfully balanced upgrades''... but it still makes no sence from a game play perspective or a imersion/realism way that ramming does so little damage that it is a go to tacktick in combat.

Back at launch.. if you accidentally hit the space station you tended to go pop. Even going quite slowly but now i can boost thrugh the mailslot and buffet around the interior like a pinball and not even loose shields most of the time.

Also if some one rams you to death, they get a bounty and notoriety. And yes that means you could take a weakened sidey to a combat zone or whatever and suicide into a large player ship and get them wanted with notoriety, which could be rather inconvenient but its not on the level of death by station as you arnt in a no fire zone. Im not sure there is a solution to such actions.. its the nature of that particular beast.

But most rams happen during combat as a way to deal massive damage to your oponant in a heavy ship, it can take a bit of skill to do, but that does depend on what your both flying. I think it should do massive damage to both ships to the point it would cause massive systems damage and hull damage leving both ships almost crippled in any significant collision.

I understand that this may make raming more meta in wing battles against lesser numbers but frankly that is alredy a GTFO situation.

 

[Maggie_Oz]

The easiest way to stop ramming would be to add in a possibility of the player's character being killed whilst doing it.
Send you back to 0 with a Sidey.
Ahhh I can see the indignant forum posts now

 

[Bigmaec]

Personaly I think that ramming should be a thing you want to avoid doing.. rather than it being one of the best meta moves in PVP.. it should be very lethal for both ships in the equasion so colide.

In alot of cases the two ships are going 400ms head on. Now.. a projectile from a large cannon goes 850ms or so i think? So the combined kinetic effect of a head on collision of who ships traveling 400ms would be like hitting a stationery ship at 800ms! A cannon shell has very low mass in comparison to a ship.. even a sidewinder.. we are delaing with 100s to 1000s of tuns of ship colliding at 800ms and we just boop off each other.

Now raming does way more damage than any weapons we have because the weapons are all weak toilet water in comparison the insaine hit points we can acomplish, thanks to engeneer's ''complete and wonderfully balanced upgrades''... but it still makes no sence from a game play perspective or a imersion/realism way that ramming does so little damage that it is a go to tacktick in combat.

Back at launch.. if you accidentally hit the space station you tended to go pop. Even going quite slowly but now i can boost thrugh the mailslot and buffet around the interior like a pinball and not even loose shields most of the time.

Also if some one rams you to death, they get a bounty and notoriety. And yes that means you could take a weakened sidey to a combat zone or whatever and suicide into a large player ship and get them wanted with notoriety, which could be rather inconvenient but its not on the level of death by station as you arnt in a no fire zone. Im not sure there is a solution to such actions.. its the nature of that particular beast.

But most rams happen during combat as a way to deal massive damage to your oponant in a heavy ship, it can take a bit of skill to do, but that does depend on what your both flying. I think it should do massive damage to both ships to the point it would cause massive systems damage and hull damage leving both ships almost crippled in any significant collision.

I understand that this may make raming more meta in wing battles against lesser numbers but frankly that is alredy a GTFO situation.

The game should simulate g-forces and send you to a rebuy screen if they are exceeding the limits a human can survive.

 

[Maggie_Oz]

The game should simulate g-forces and send you to a rebuy screen if they are exceeding the limits a human can survive.

Not a bad one but I was thinking along the lines of every time you run into something you gain a higher probability of being actually killed, i.e. you are dropped right back to the start and lose everything. That probability would drop over time if you don't run into things.

It would encourage good piloting while making ramming carry serious consequences

 

[bladebss]

The game should simulate g-forces and send you to a rebuy screen if they are exceeding the limits a human can survive.

One tiny problem with that i think, is that when we boost we also exeed that and would die.. i can get round this a bit with the idea that our suits are super good at keeping us alive during REALY high G manuvers.

 

[Bigmaec]

One tiny problem with that i think, is that when we boost we also exeed that and would die.. i can get round this a bit with the idea that out suits are super good at keeping is alive during REALY high G manuvers.

Toning down dd5 boosts also isn't a bad idea

 

[bladebss]

Toning down dd5 boosts also isn't a bad idea

Lol if we are going there, i want acceleration to be much more disparate between ships and a more realistic G force reaction to boot.

I pass out in my viper alot during combat cus i need to pull the Gs to out manuver other ships cus they are only a bit slower off the mark and can turn on a dime thanx to permaboost. It could be quite interesting to be able to take drugs that help deal with the Gs or upgrade my cabin/suit/lifesupport to better handle hi Gs.

Befor engeneers came out and we knew exactly what we were dealing with i was expecting it to be more tinkering and we could cut top speed for more acceleration or viser verser and that it would be way more interesting than what we go lol.

 

[[VR] M4st0d0n]

The issue is that despite being asked several times, you still haven't attempted to explain how the game could detect which of the two ships involved in a collision was the 'aggressor' and which was the passive recipient of the ram. I can only assume you're going to continue to deflect until the mods rescue you with a badgering warning.

I don't require your answer to be in the form of code by the way. A simple verbal sketch of your concept would do.

When your answer involves analysis of the respective vectors of both ships in three dimensions, analysis of any changes to said vectors, analysis of relative speeds and changes to those etc, please remember that you're describing something that a computer game will be doing in real time.

I think most of us could watch a video of an incident and determine the aggressor but coding a subroutine in a game to flawlessly replicate the processing capability of the human brain in such situations is generally considered to be a bit difficult. Well unless you're Derek 'neural networks' Smart obviously

It's trivial for the game to detect that two ships collided and one or both were damaged. It already does that. It's not trivial at all for the game to detect intent, which is what you want.

Elite treats ships as snooker balls with health bars (hulls and regenerative shields). That's what Ian is implying here :

The problem is how does the game know that it's them ramming you rather than you ramming them?

What I'm saying is : rams are actual weapons in real life. They could have been modeled in game with proper hitboxes on the ships. But no, the game dont detect the pointy bit of the ship hitting the softy bit of the other.

Who cares about the intent? You deal ram damage, consider it the same as weapon damage... No one argues about friendly fire? Why argue about friendly ram?

 

[Maggie_Oz]

Who cares about the intent?

That is what the thread is about.

No one argues about friendly fire? Why argue about friendly ram?

Because you can ONLY shoot from a weapon a "ram" is simply a collision with something, you can get that by going a bit low on approach to a station

 

[Morbad]

Shooting as well, and yet it does. What a stupid argument.

The game doesn't track intent with either. It's perfectly possible to shoot something one did not intend to shoot and perfectly possible to collide with something one did not intend to collide with. Recklessness is not intent.

Mmm, well the rammer may be the guy using his ship's ram to ram another guy's ship.

All I have to do is put my ship in their flight path. The game has exactly zero way to tell that my intent was for the other pilot to destroy my ship and become wanted for murder for doing so, losing their more expensive ship/cargo/data/whatever. The game sees a larger, faster moving ship, collide with a slower, letter of the law abiding ship. The malicious intent was mine, but the the penalties go to the one who was speeding.

Perhaps you should send your code to FD?

They deliberately reduced collision damage to 40% of it's original value not long after release. One of the worst balance changes ever, IMO.

Anyway, they clearly already have the code.

No one argues about friendly fire?

Uhh...

Search results for query: friendly fire

 

[[VR] M4st0d0n]

That is what the thread is about.

Nope. But maybe you should start your own silly thread named "How could ED detect players intent?" or something...

 

[Maggie_Oz]

Anyway, they clearly already have the code.

Clearly they don't, given you are talking about collision damage, not perpetrator identification