Ramming - is there a solution?

[Darth Ender]

there are two things people are talking about but only one that the thread is referencing.

1. Accidental collision with an NPC or NPC collision with your ship. Nobody is saying this should change (except maybe npcs should fly better than they do currently).
2. Player on player collision. This is what the thread is about and is almost never ever accidental except possibly when already fighting eachother.

It's a non-issue for FD to treat player on player collisions the same as shooting them. All the calculations have already been done during the collision. To explain away why the behavior is different for npcs we can refer to the friendly fire mechanic (hit me once, meh....hit me twice and it's on)

Even with two players heading towards eachother, it's easy to tell who is responsible if they collide because the victim will be the one with less velocity in the direction of the collision at the collision point.

 

[Nonya]

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....

Then folks that can't fly in a RES shouldn't go into a RES. Problem-that-isn't-a-problem solved!

 

[dioogio]

Then folks that can't fly in a RES shouldn't go into a RES. Problem-that-isn't-a-problem solved!

You what? Is there a brain inside that muppet?

 

[DrakeAurum]

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).

In which case, taking out an expensive-but-fragile ship, lowering shields, and ramming another player becomes a superb griefing tactic. Your ship gets blown up, but you lose nothing except the few seconds it takes to respawn in a sation, and your innocent victim is fined the exorbitant re-buy cost of your ship. And you can do it again, and again, as often as you like.

 

[Arthur Z.]

I'm pretty sure you can programmatically tell who rammed who. They have some sort of physics engine in the game, so they already have the collision information (what parts of the ships collided). Since you need to face the ship in order to ram it, you can use this collision data to determen who was the rammer. Add an extra multiplier for boosting before the collision and you have your suspect.

All accidental collisions usually happen on the sides of both ships and don't do much damage, so it should be pretty easy to distinguish them.

 

[dioogio]

I'm pretty sure you can programmatically tell who rammed who. They have some sort of physics engine in the game, so they already have the collision information (what parts of the ships collided). Since you need to face the ship in order to ram it, you can use this collision data to determen who was the rammer. Add an extra multiplier for boosting before the collision and you have your suspect.

All accidental collisions usually happen on the sides of both ships and don't do much damage, so it should be pretty easy to distinguish them.

Fa off and full pitch just before impact, I am not sure anything can/should be done about it its just another low life tactic. Use the game and go get revenge!

 

[shadragon]

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

Or better still, Mutton Orbital.

Mutton but the best for me.

 

[Acaelus Thorn]

In which case, taking out an expensive-but-fragile ship, lowering shields, and ramming another player becomes a superb griefing tactic. Your ship gets blown up, but you lose nothing except the few seconds it takes to respawn in a sation, and your innocent victim is fined the exorbitant re-buy cost of your ship. And you can do it again, and again, as often as you like.

Nah it wouldn't have to be like that at all. Program a check at collision to see which ship had the highest velocity; they're the one at fault. Just like they measure speed by tire tread braking on the roads in real life.

So much complaining and so little solution searching going on here. It really is just that simple!

Fa off and full pitch just before impact, I am not sure anything can/should be done about it its just another low life tactic. Use the game and go get revenge!

Velocity would remain consistant in this situation so still would be easy to tell. I'm sure they have other checks they can do that I'm not covering. Not to mention if someone is doing this repeatedly it will be really easy to tell who the aggressor is.

The only people I imagine disagreeing with this proposal are the Rammers themselves. Put an end to it and hold them accountable for what they are doing Frontier.

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.

Please implement this.

 

[DrakeAurum]

I'm pretty sure you can programmatically tell who rammed who. They have some sort of physics engine in the game, so they already have the collision information (what parts of the ships collided). Since you need to face the ship in order to ram it, you can use this collision data to determen who was the rammer.

I spend most of my time in close combat moving sideways, or vertically, or occasionally backwards. NPC Anacondas commonly try to close distance while oriented perpendicular to their direction of flight while in close combat. Basically, with thruster control facing your target is entirely optional.

 

[Arthur Z.]

Fa off and full pitch just before impact, I am not sure anything can/should be done about it its just another low life tactic. Use the game and go get revenge!

Well you have to try very hard to ram someone from a distance that will allow you to turn your ship in time with FA off Even then, you still need to boost facing the targeted ship in order to do some significant damage.

In order to pull this off, the other ship must be standing still, so you can tell the speed difference and assume who was the rammer.

I spend most of my time in close combat moving sideways, or vertically, or occasionally backwards. NPC Anacondas commonly try to close distance while oriented perpendicular to their direction of flight while in close combat. Basically, with thruster control facing your target is entirely optional.

The damage is not so significant when colliding sideways. And since the main goal is to end griefing, griefers will have a hard time doing their job...

 

[DrakeAurum]

Nah it wouldn't have to be like that at all. Program a check at collision to see which ship had the highest velocity; they're the one at fault. Just like they measure speed by tire tread braking on the roads in real life.

Popping up in front of someone so that they ram into you is not a difficult move, especially in a busy combat or in a situation with limited visibility such as the station mailslot. It took me five seconds to think of that after reading your reply - most griefers will manage to come up with similar tactics within a few minutes.

 

[Arthur Z.]

Popping up in front of someone so that they ram into you is not a difficult move, especially in a busy combat or in a situation with limited visibility such as the station mailslot. It took me five seconds to think of that after reading your reply - most griefers will manage to come up with similar tactics within a few minutes.

Not a difficult move? Really? Well if it's a combat situation, i think ramming should be allowed (like in the ED trailer at 0:45):

[video=youtube;dwvjElmFCfE]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dwvjElmFCfE[/video]

 

[dioogio]

Not a difficult move? Really? Well if it's a combat situation, i think ramming should be allowed (like in the ED trailer at 0:45):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dwvjElmFCfE

I think thats the point. Ramming is a valid combat strategy. The thing that upsets people I guess is that its an aggressive tactic that can be used without getting you tagged as wanted.

Maybe Shield hitting Shield should only result in minor shield loss.... nerfs the combat usefulness of ramming (which I doubt is used that frequently - is it?) but would take a weapon away from those who like to act aggressively without facing the consequences.

 

[Acaelus Thorn]

Popping up in front of someone so that they ram into you is not a difficult move, especially in a busy combat or in a situation with limited visibility such as the station mailslot. It took me five seconds to think of that after reading your reply - most griefers will manage to come up with similar tactics within a few minutes.

I realize you probably didn't read the whole thread or all of my comments, but I specifically stated I wanted it to be for out-of-combat situations only. If you're getting "griefed" by someone pulling out in front of you while you're leaving the mail slot because you were going to fast, that's your own fault. Go slower.

Seriously - it's not that difficult people. Stop complicating it.

 

[Arthur Z.]

I think thats the point. Ramming is a valid combat strategy. The thing that upsets people I guess is that its an aggressive tactic that can be used without getting you tagged as wanted.

Maybe Shield hitting Shield should only result in minor shield loss.... nerfs the combat usefulness of ramming (which I doubt is used that frequently - is it?) but would take a weapon away from those who like to act aggressively without facing the consequences.

Considering what i said above, if they implement rammer detection, it will be VERY hard to ram someone and get away undetected.

 

[dioogio]

Considering what i said above, if they implement rammer detection, it will be VERY hard to ram someone and get away undetected.

Sorry, I just don't think they will, so i will not hold my breath and will seek revenge on Rammers!!!!

 

[Acaelus Thorn]

Ok - I made a poll - please vote your feelings after reading the first thread carefully. This is to assist the FDEVs with assessing the desires of the ED Community. Posting because I received several +reps for my suggestions so would like to see how everyone feels.

https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php?t=136421

 

[Armour]

There probably isn't a foolproof liability determination method, or insurance companies would all use it. There are however distinct types of collision, some ably described by posters in this thread, for which liability could be estimated to a reasonably high degree of accuracy. I would suggest that a good start could be made by dealing with those classes only at first. Changes in momentum and movement vectors can be used to deal with lots of cases, probably most of them. Once all the easy targets are picked off, then more ambiguous cases can be data mined for telltale characteristics that allow liability to be estimated. Or maybe those unsolved edge cases will be so ambiguous that random chance is as good as any method for determining who gets the blame?

So a simple one-size-fits-all function probably won't do the job, but the job can still be done, and it probably should be attempted.

 

[Helvellyn]

Evidence over time is needed. The odd collision now and then, that'll happen to most of us. Lots of frequent damaging ones - starts looking suspicious.

 

[iofhua]

Ramming doesn't need a solution. Stop crying about PvP in a PvP game. There are so many ways to avoid it:

1. Stop standing still so the other guy can hit you
2. FSD to another location
3. Stop choosing to be a victim and ram them instead
4. Shoot them in the face

Never have I seen a PvP community so sensitive about pointless violence. Soon we will all be british pansies speaking with snobbish accents, drinking from tiny teacups with our pinkies raised up in the air.