Yeah, you could try to find some complicated algorithm comparing flight vectors and collision points but I guess this would take some time to implement.
Is Ramming Speed griefing?
- Thread starter scorpyon
- Start date
Yeah, you could try to find some complicated algorithm comparing flight vectors and collision points but I guess this would take some time to implement.
As for the ethical side:
Ramming without firing first should get you spanked (unless you like it in which case not).
Ramming without firing first should get you spanked (unless you like it in which case not).
I always thought that two "shielded" ships should simply bounce off each other without shield damage.
Save the ramming damage for ships with no shields - since it's the hull that takes ram damage.
If the ships are shielded, then ramming should do nothing.
It would surely solve many / all of the current problems.
That said, I'm sure some bright chap / chapess will find something I've missed in my idea!
according to this forum: playing in open is griefing.
Doesn't matter how you change the game rules, there will be punks who find their way around it.
Otherwise it's all part of the gameplay. Ramming inside a CZ or NAV while they are combating NPCs. That's low but as said before, there's situation awareness you have to have. In any case I'd happily turn around and get the fine for first fire and bring their hull down to 3%, disable their thrusters or sensors, then leave them there to ferment. (However, my guess is that they would combat log because that appears to be the MO of such minded players.)
In station, their card would be marked and I'd keep an eye out. Same treatment if I ever meet them in open space.
- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -
Nah, but being a total Richard is though.
Otherwise it's all part of the gameplay. Ramming inside a CZ or NAV while they are combating NPCs. That's low but as said before, there's situation awareness you have to have. In any case I'd happily turn around and get the fine for first fire and bring their hull down to 3%, disable their thrusters or sensors, then leave them there to ferment. (However, my guess is that they would combat log because that appears to be the MO of such minded players.)
In station, their card would be marked and I'd keep an eye out. Same treatment if I ever meet them in open space.
- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -
Nah, but being a total Richard is though.
Last edited:
Last edited:
Adding fines for ramming would be ludicrous in my view.
It's a perfectly reasonable combat tactic, and if you're worried about another playing hitting you, keep out of their way.
If you don't like busy star-ports, there are thousands of quiet ones.
I just don't see it as being a problem the Devs need to worry about
It's a perfectly reasonable combat tactic, and if you're worried about another playing hitting you, keep out of their way.
If you don't like busy star-ports, there are thousands of quiet ones.
I just don't see it as being a problem the Devs need to worry about
I think it's fine in combat - just lame in the no fire zone.
How many times have you been in a CZ, you and a NPC are taking out a ship together and you end up scraping hulls because you are both closing on him. I've had that too many times, even though I'm quite nifty on thrusters, because I've got too many things to keep track of (usually heat and cap levels.) That would be nuts in my opinion.
Not sure what you mean. I don't think I was saying dish out fines in combat/combat zones (I said "out of combat/combat zones") - really meant just in dock/the no fire zone.
Not to mention RES, where you have asteroids to worry about too.
I personally think ramming in any situation should be considered a criminal offense, even those by accident going through the letterbox. You wouldn't let someone bump your car and drive away scot free would you?
The difficulty lies in finding out who is the one ramming, and who is the one being rammed. Because from a pure simulation and physics standpoint, both are equal, but from a gameplay standpoint, they may not. There are cases where that may be easy (for example one ship being stationary relatively to the instance' local coordinate system, or one ship moving very slowly and the other very fast), but for every easy case there are 10 or more cases where it's all a big grey area.
And if you have significant fines for ramming, that would just change the method of potential griefing. Instead of ramming someone to death (or hull damage), you can still force a fine upon them.
And bounties for ramming are straight out of the question, because if you have ramming considered as an attack, you can kill any ship in a starport just by ramming them, then both of you would get a bounty and swiftly destroyed by the station.
Edit: I remember a situation which I have experienced myself with NPCs several times already, mostly at starports but also once in an RES: A system authority ship, usually an Eagle or a Viper, comes straight at me, starting their usual crime/cargo scan. I am in a Python, 2 pips engines, 2 pips shields, approaching the station. I was moving in a straight line, minding my own business, but the NPC forgets to decelerate and smashes into the front of my shields, bumps off, tumbles, and explodes. It was definitely their error, I did not even alter my course, but they got destroyed. Should I be fined for their stupidity? What's then to stop a potential griefer to pick a free Sidewinder and boost headfirst at full throttle into someone's T9?
Last edited:
+1 for this.
Like collisions between vehicles in reality (TM) working out who is at "fault" isn't necessarily straightforward for anyone to independently verify, especially when both parties blame the other. It'd be a nightmare to try and code for absolute liability for such events.
Free mindreading headband with every copy of ED.
(In fine print: Open play only accessible when wearing it).
(In fine print: Open play only accessible when wearing it).
Ramming players to death, without reason IS griefieng .
Ramming in combat fight is an element of figting strategy and this is oK.
To determine the rammer it could be quite simple; it would rely on a few criteria to find who is at fault:
-The ship that has thrusted within 5 seconds of the crash (possibly longer?)
-The ship who's front makes contact
.
If both ships have thrusted and hit head on; both get the fine as they are both being irresponsible/aggressive.
.
Of course if you are already fighting someone, then this would be ignored in the same way as you don't get a fine for every shot made on a clean ship, just the first shot/ram and the death.
-The ship that has thrusted within 5 seconds of the crash (possibly longer?)
-The ship who's front makes contact
.
If both ships have thrusted and hit head on; both get the fine as they are both being irresponsible/aggressive.
.
Of course if you are already fighting someone, then this would be ignored in the same way as you don't get a fine for every shot made on a clean ship, just the first shot/ram and the death.
Last edited:
Sorry - speedreading accident. Like ramming someone when boosting out of a dock. As Mephan points out - it only gives the toads another way to grief others by throwing out the anchor when you are behind them.
Ramming is a perfectly legitimate combat tactic. I remember one battle where I was down to a 40% hull with no shields and no energy in weapon capacitor. They were on 50% hull, no shields. We're both vying for position, trading the odd shot, and ended on 10% each when I decided to ram them when my weapons were once out of power. It was either me or both of us. In the words of Worf: "Ramming speed now!"
Deliberate ramming while docking is another kettle of fish, however.
Deliberate ramming while docking is another kettle of fish, however.
Last edited:
Or rather "Today is a good day to die!"