Ramming - is there a solution?

[Kijarni]

The problem isn't that there is too much damage from ramming, the problem is that there is too little.
Even the best shields are designed to stop lasers and bullets which weigh maybe a few Kg at most.
Even an empty sidewinder weighs around 45 tons. No shield should be able to protect from that.
Sure the sidewidner should be destroyed, but the larger ship should take significant damage from a collision,
maybe 40% hull and kill multiple modules.

The point is that ramming should be a phyric victory for large ships.

Oh and to offset the one issue I can think of, You should only be able to get a free sidewinder if you have no money and
no other ships, and the base cost probably should be increased to deter people from just using sidewinders
as kamakaze missiles.

I do also like the speed limit suggestion around stations.

 

[cheekibreekisuka]

simple to end griefing: any collision that causes explosion for the rammed ship inside the no-fire zone, will trigger the station to fire upon the infractor; and for that to work as instant punishment further buff the station's weaponry to the point that a dropship explodes in 1 sec

 

[CdrTwisted]

A speed limit around stations would affect smugglers, and that's an important part of the game. And when leaving the station lots of people boost out of the letterbox. So that doesn't work.

 

[CdrTwisted]

Ideally, I'd agree, but there is no way for the game to distinguish between an attack or an accident.

The only "solution" I'd find acceptable would be speed limits (not hard limits, but fines for exceeding a certain speed) inside stations, and this is far from perfect.

.

All of these people are wrong. There is next to no situation where you cannot avoid a ramming at least as easily as a more traditional attack.

That quote you've responded to was me talking in general terms about griefing and pking complaints, not specifically about ramming. The point being that a criminality system is always open to abuse, and my personal preference is to get rid of it entirely. Instead, players should have the tools they need to respond to attacks. Obviously lots of players don't feel they have those tools if they play on their own or in a freighter, so they play in solo or group mode.

 

[RustiSwordz]

Get out of the way, or have a bigger ship than them.

And no bloody speed limits around stations, stupid idea besides will griefers abide by such limits when they are happy to ram you? Nope!

 

[dayrth]

simple to end griefing: any collision that causes explosion for the rammed ship inside the no-fire zone, will trigger the station to fire upon the infractor; and for that to work as instant punishment further buff the station's weaponry to the point that a dropship explodes in 1 sec

Don't like this idea much. You could get yourself a cheap sidy with no shields and ram a FDL near a station and get it destroyed, just because you didn't like the pilot of because you liked griefing.

Wouldn't discourage people ramming away from stations either.

A speed limit around stations would affect smugglers, and that's an important part of the game. And when leaving the station lots of people boost out of the letterbox. So that doesn't work.

Absolutely agree with this though.

 

[Kijarni]

A speed limit around stations would affect smugglers, and that's an important part of the game. And when leaving the station lots of people boost out of the letterbox. So that doesn't work.

The key point about the speed limit is that it is only enforced if you collide with something. No collision, no fine.
But it makes determining who is in the wrong easier.

 

[Blastbeats]

The magic 8-ball on the laws of physics says "No"

It also says no to aerodynamics in space, yet that is what Elite's flight model is based on.

 

[Zplintz]

What happens if someone is flying and another player (travelling much slower) deliberately moves into the path of the other ship and causes the collision?

How do you determine who is at fault?

IMO you cannot determine who is at fault in any collision, so you might as well not worry about it.

 

[Farmboy]

You don't. You fine the player for speeding not for causing the accident. You avoid all fines by going slow enough. If you are smuggling you make sure the slot is empty or you don't hit anyone. Or you suck up the fine

It won't stop ramming but even a relatively small disincentive ( the hassle of having to pay off a fine ) could have a noticeable effect. I don't see much downside to legal traders flying at normal speeds

 

[shadragon]

There is a solution to ramming, but it's up to ewe.


Sorry for that lads. I'm off to the pub with my head held low.

 

[CdrTwisted]

There is a solution to ramming, but it's up to ewe.


Sorry for that lads. I'm off to the pub with my head held low.

For a pun like that you deserve to be sent to Coventry.

Or better still, Mutton Orbital.

 

[Weps]

A speed limit around stations would affect smugglers, and that's an important part of the game. And when leaving the station lots of people boost out of the letterbox. So that doesn't work.

For a smuggler doing 300+ through the box and nicking the catcher the fine is the least of his worries. In other words, there is no fine unless you actually hit something.

The speed limit I mentioned before is not a speed limit per se, it's more of an additional factor when determining fault. Whoever goes above the limit and is involved in a crash (voluntarily or involuntarily) should be held responsible. Everyone else flies just like before.

You can go full speed and land your ship upside down while juggling bananas? Bravo. Keep doing it. Maybe post it on YouTube for some attention.

Not confident with your ship controls? Go slower.

 

[Arindor]

Ramming has to be taken into context. Deliberate ramming out of combat should be met with a fine. Persistent ramming by the same commander on the same player should be met with a ban, or severe infraction. Ramming, while in combat, is a valid tactic, one I would use if I thought the game was up. However, determining which is which using game mechanics could be nigh impossible for FD.

 

[The Wallet Inspector]

I've said it before and I'll say it again. If someone dies from ramming while NOT in combat. The person that rammed them gets the bill for their ship replacement (whether in the form of a bounty, fine, whatever).

This would work. Even if griefers try to use eagles/sideys to get big ships in trouble, the bill would be negligible. The reverse applies though, and it would not deter the bug offenders. Given that some of them are bounty farming via station fines though, I suspect this would only make it easier for them, unless the fine was automatically deducted when the other player respawns.

- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -

Dear Frontier,

Please leave ramming exactly the way it is. No matter what you do, we will always find a way to break your game. That's what gamers do. Give us more content instead of wasting time changing stuff that works great. Thanks.

Your biggest fan,
Tidings

So basically, please leave station griefing in and keep the criminal system broken please, just give us more bells and whistles..

- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -

They should just disable station weapons and allow people to fight there. If they want the game to be a real open free for all..

 

[XHawk87]

I don't know about it as a ramming deterrent, but I think a "speed limit" around stations as described would be a great addition to the immersion of the game. It feels unrealistic that I never get in trouble for boosting in and out of stations like I do, scraping towers, denting landing pads, and ramming any hapless NPC out of the way if I feel like it. It would feel like a greater challenge if there were consequences to my reckless actions, and more exciting when I break the rules and get away with it.

Following on from that idea, I think that if you happen to be speeding when local security scans you, that should also incur a fine, and it should increase your chances of being scanned if you appear to be going too fast.

 

[Acaelus Thorn]

Because it's nigh impossible for the game to tell who rammed who.

No it isn't. The game makes numerous calculations to determine damage when two objects collide. It knows exactly what collided with what and determining who is responsible would only be one more variable (assuming it doesn't already exist anyway.

I don't like this suggestion either.

How do you distinguish combat from any other scenario?

The same way the game determines who gets the credit for bounty. Target is flagged as belonging to one pilot or another for a certain amount of time. When target dies, bounty gets rewarded accordingly. IF this flag (or a flag like it written specifically to deal with the ramming issue) exists on the player when they die, then they were in combat.

I'm serious. Just like in real life, if you hit someone with a vehicle you're insurance has to compensate them for damages, and can get sued medical and property expenses related to the incident whether due to negligence or an intentional act. (Primary difference being prison time)

The griefer should have to pay the re-buy cost, galactic average of any cargo and an inconvenience fee equivalent to 5% (percentage up for debate) their total credits.

I really believe this would fix the issue.

 

[AlexRyder]

Fed up with taking collision damage? Learn to fly.

 

[dioogio]

Your RES ?
What a Greedy kid you are.
Cost me 10k to teach you stop ramming me.

Agree. Its not to difficult to make you a wanted target, then its game on. Let it go once, never again!

 

[dioogio]

Fed up with taking collision damage? Learn to fly.

Avoiding deliberate Cmdr ramming is not about learning to fly. In a crowded RES its often difficult to even see other Cmdrs on the radar let alone keep track of their position when you are in the thick of conflict. Especially if they weren't in the instance when you engaged the Conda/Python/clipper/wing etc. Its a cheap tactic and what goes around....