The quote you were replying to, that I then quoted, was very clearly talking about collision damage, not perpetrator identification.
Removing rammers
- Thread starter eldon113
- Start date
The quote you were replying to, that I then quoted, was very clearly talking about collision damage, not perpetrator identification.
Literally the first words of the thread "so there is a small player base that rams other with their ship to avoid being a criminal. Is their any updates coming to avoid this? "
Congratulations, you are officially the most stupid person I have come across on the internet in over 25 years.
Which is missing the point, just as you seem to be doing
![[VR] M4st0d0n](https://forums-cdn.zaonce.net/data/avatars/m/182/182772.jpg?1569064854){kind=avatar}
So you can quote whole posts in the end. Good, we're making progress.
Still isnt about detecting intent but more about detecting rams, you silly.
Perhaps the OP's point but, not of the post in question. Threads meander, and the topic of the quote chain I was replying to was very explicitly collision damage itself, not the detection of intent behind collisions, nor anything C&P related.
A ram is a deliberate collision, you can't distinguish a collision from a ram without intent.
Disable the colision box of any ship at 100mps and below, or Ghost any ship traveling at beyond 100mps and fine them 100 cr per mps, added to this a set station speed button at 100 mps, there's a ton of things that could be done but many would claim it infringes their playinq style.
Play in Solo, or PG... hey I'm just giving options!
Play in Solo, or PG... hey I'm just giving options!
Nope. A ram is a frontal collision where the literal ram of the ship deals damage to another ships hull, regardless of intent. It's a ship melee weapon.
In Elite snooker ball, you could ram another ship with your rear pulling some FAOff manoeuvre, and that is silly.
Exactly no one is referring to any ship equipped with a physical ram. Indeed, no ship in Elite has one.
Why you would would choose such an obtuse and obviously irrelevant definition of the word, to use in the context of this thread, is beyond me and pretty much everyone else here.
The OP's is clearly referring to the game's inability to discern intentional collisions.
Focusing on this for a moment - If you're attempting to take off from a station and someone starts ramming you to prevent departure within that 5 minute timer and you obviously don't have the option to deploy weapons and defend yourself, is it considered legal to simply exit to menu, wait 20 seconds, then log back in (putting you outside the station)?
The station won't shoot you if that's what you mean.
I am not aware of rammers blocking ppl leaving stations though
I love a good Combat Ram™!!!
But i haven't encountered a station rammer in literally years....
Where did this happen OP?
Personally - i'm kinda tempted to fly over there, grab a sidewinder, and ram the rammers (While spamming Local with "be warned everyone, keep the speed down!")
I can understand getting upset over shadow rams (grrrr!)
But just stay below 100 m/s (or play Solo) you'll be fine OP!
Don't get mad - get even
But i haven't encountered a station rammer in literally years....
Where did this happen OP?
Personally - i'm kinda tempted to fly over there, grab a sidewinder, and ram the rammers (While spamming Local with "be warned everyone, keep the speed down!")
I can understand getting upset over shadow rams (grrrr!)
But just stay below 100 m/s (or play Solo) you'll be fine OP!
Don't get mad - get even
Indeed. that first one is even listed as an example of the things you're not allowed to do in Mobius - do not deliberately fly into the path of someone else's guns with crimes on.
At the time, people were taking fast stealth ships and doing stuff like zipping in between miners and the asteroid they're mining. Mining lasers do next to no damage but they still count as "assault". Other people just did it more generally in res sites counting on the average PvEer's lack of trigger discipline, just getting between bounty hunters and their targets.
Most of all - any attempt to programmatically determine intent will be gamed by people the instant they figure out how it works. Either like you see now with the station rammers, where they try to get other people accused of ramming and shot by the station, or else by taking advantage of the rules to blatantly attack people but do so in a way that doesn't "count" as far as the game is concerned, like the guy that pulled me in Borann the other day and tried to ram me over and over without actually opening fire, so I would have been the "aggressor" if I'd fired back while under clear attack.
Computers can't read minds and neither can you.
Well, I was using "leaving a station" as an example (they may have requested docking so they have a 10 min timer, while you, departing have only 5 minutes to get out, advantage goes to the rammer). The station won't shoot you in either case, i.e., leaving or arriving) if you're being rammed by another player. The purpose might not be to get the station to shoot regarding ramming - it's just to prevent you from landing within that 10 minute time as well as preventing you from leaving the station so you DO get shot by the station. As I understand it, logging to menu and waiting 20 seconds, then logging back in should put you in the hanger (if you were landing) or put you just outside (if you were departing).
Since no one has weapons deployed, it shouldn't be considered combat-logging, right? It was more a curious question on my part and possibly a final (or logical) solution to the OP's issue.
I don't know the nuances of "combat logging" and TBH combat logging isn't "illegal" as such it just looks to be something the shooty boys have come up with as some form of code of honour or something.
The sort of ramming we are talking about here is players purposefully causing other players grief so there is no honour in that.
I love a good Combat Ram™!!!
But i haven't encountered a station rammer in literally years....
Where did this happen OP?
Personally - i'm kinda tempted to fly over there, grab a sidewinder, and ram the rammers (While spamming Local with "be warned everyone, keep the speed down!")
I can understand getting upset over shadow rams (grrrr!)
But just stay below 100 m/s (or play Solo) you'll be fine OP!
Don't get mad - get even
I'm fairly sure he's complaining about repeated low speed collisions, not people colliding with speeding ships, though the inability to detect intent is ultimately the reason for both tactics.
And yes, people still do this. I encounter it about once or twice a week at San Tu...I figure it's just Prizm and NATO checking to make sure I still know how to use my vertical and lateral thrust.
Hello obtuse and obviously irrelevant definition of the word :
Ramming - Wikipedia
Notice how "intentionnal" or "intent" is crucially missing, and how it's only your Elite Dangerous videogame logic talking. But yeah, we're totally agreeing about Elite missing ramming modules and a proper ramming mechanism, and how bumping your Vulture's canopy to deal absolute damage is silly.
It's not a combat log if you're not in combat. With the exception of people that log out immediately after an interdiction (which is frankly an oversight on FD's part - even if you're not being fired on, if your drive is still cooling down you should still count as "in danger" as far as I'm concerned) if you don't have the 15s timer then it's fair game.
Anyone who cries "this person I wasn't shooting at and the game didn't recognise as hostile combat logged on me" would just be laughed at.
All those "rules" are just made up though aren't they? There is no official crime either in game nor dictated by the developers for avoiding combat by logging out is there?
"Combat logging" in standard parlance means severing one's connection and bypass any timer. "Menu logging" is quitting via the menu, with the requisite timer.
The former is explicitly against the rules and officially a punishable offense, according to Frontier. The latter is legal, but still a context violating way to escape in-game consequences.
Yes, that's the obtuse and irrelevant definition I was talking about. You already said that.
Because you chose the least relevant definition of the word possible.
It's like me saying "Elite", where I know people will think I'm talking about this game, then linking to the dictionary definition of a typeface.
Oh my god you are so fresh.