[suggestion] Simple fix for ship ramming (griefing)

[NW3]

Sandro recently said: "Ramming is an issue we want to look at. It may be we can tweak the ramming crime to mitigate against this behaviour, though it may be that a karma solution is still required."

My suggestion is simple: Don't kill either ship. Keep the collision code the same, but limit the damage to 1% hull.

That way, there's no need to determine who is at fault. If someone is ramming as a combat technique, it's easy enough for them to fire weapons at the critically wounded ship. Then handle any karma adjustment in the weapon damage code, which you have to do anyway.

 

[CMDR GTR2014]

Sandro recently said: "Ramming is an issue we want to look at. It may be we can tweak the ramming crime to mitigate against this behaviour, though it may be that a karma solution is still required."

My suggestion is simple: Don't kill either ship. Keep the collision code the same, but limit the damage to 1% hull.

That way, there's no need to determine who is at fault. If someone is ramming as a combat technique, it's easy enough for them to fire weapons at the critically wounded ship. Then handle any karma adjustment in the weapon damage code, which you have to do anyway.

That's utterly nonsense. there are people who rely on ramming to do damage. and for a game with so tight good controls removing one more part of the game challenge for the sake of incompetence (getting rammed in a station IS INCOMPETENCE).



There are far better solutions for this matter...

 

[xondk]

Sandro recently said: "Ramming is an issue we want to look at. It may be we can tweak the ramming crime to mitigate against this behaviour, though it may be that a karma solution is still required."

My suggestion is simple: Don't kill either ship. Keep the collision code the same, but limit the damage to 1% hull.

That way, there's no need to determine who is at fault. If someone is ramming as a combat technique, it's easy enough for them to fire weapons at the critically wounded ship. Then handle any karma adjustment in the weapon damage code, which you have to do anyway.

That really isn't the problem with ramming, the problem last I checked is people taking and pre damaging their ships to low health and then get on purpose hit by another player and die, causing the other ship to be attacked by station for murder even if it wasn't speeding?

 

[CMDR GTR2014]

That really isn't the problem with ramming, the problem last I checked is people taking and pre damaging their ships to low health and then get on purpose hit by another player and die, causing the other ship to be attacked by station for murder even if it wasn't speeding?

Not speeding, no problem. I've killed many of those like that

 

[Riverside]

I quite like this, it allows ramming to continue as a combat tactic to bring the hull down to a low level, but needs a shot to be fired for the final kill.

For normal combat there would be virtually no difference, and while players bent on frustrating others could still push you around, you would have more chances to escape than without this.

It would mean that if the inattentive player faceplanted into the ground or collided with something they wouldn't die just from that alone (making explorers essentially immortal, with a reboot/repair to get modules working) though, but potentially a price worth paying in terms of risk, and may well be considered a positive change by many.

Not perfect, and a little implausible but better than what we have now imo.

 

[DocLooshkin]

Hello, NW3.

+1. The more I think about it, the more I quite like this. As Riverside points out, immortal explorers aren't really a desirable thing, so I would have it that collisions not causing death only applies in the No-Fire Zone - it's a little more complex a task, certainly, but one that's equally certainly not beyond the skills of FD's talented coders to develop in timely and efficient fashion.

It would definitely have helped me today, albeit for an uncommon reason. On approach to landing for repairs in some station or other, my machine decided to have an unexpected choking fit and drop the game to 2FPS (I don't know why. nVidia audio driver bugging out, maybe?). I stupidly slowed the ship to a halt above the pad, forgetting that I have a DC installed for FUI reasons, which then kicked in automatically.

Like Bobbleheads and the station UI, the DC just does not work properly at low frame rates. The normal, tiny roll-adjustments amplified into impossibly huge, fast, spastic swings that smashed my ship repeatedly against the landing pad at insane speed, bouncing it from wingtip to wingtip like a hummingbird having a seizure. My shields and remaining hull were stripped in a few seconds, before I could pull the plug. Kaboom.

As with those who find themselves being proxy-griefed by rammers, the situation was my responsibility, but the flaw in the normally-working design that lead to my demise - and the loss of my cargo and bounties - was not. I'd certainly appreciate a measure of mercy from the game in these situations. 1% doesn't seem like too much.

 

[clinton]

A simple approach to reduce (although not eliminate) ramming grieving is to only apply the offense to the fastest ship in a collision. If you're doing 110m/s and a sidewinder boosts into you then won't get a bounty for the collision as it will get the blame not you. It could still slowly approach from the front but at least this makes the process more difficult.

 

[[Diplomacy] Carnegie]

I'm pretty sure this means an unshielded Sidey can repeatedly boost at a 'Conda until both were down to 1% hull - which seems a little silly.

 

[NW3]

That's utterly nonsense. there are people who rely on ramming to do damage. and for a game with so tight good controls removing one more part of the game challenge for the sake of incompetence (getting rammed in a station IS INCOMPETENCE).

There are far better solutions for this matter...

Respectfully, I disagree. You can still do significant damage to a ship via ramming: Shields dropped to 0, hull at 1%. Any weapon would finish that ship off, if your intent was to destroy it. What is prevented is accidental death. It's not always incompetence; oftentimes there is a small ship in hiding.

Those solutions are far more complicated. My suggestion is a simple solution with few drawbacks.

That really isn't the problem with ramming, the problem last I checked is people taking and pre damaging their ships to low health and then get on purpose hit by another player and die, causing the other ship to be attacked by station for murder even if it wasn't speeding?

Right. This prevents that. No matter how low the health, ramming would not kill the ship, only disable it.

I'm pretty sure this means an unshielded Sidey can repeatedly boost at a 'Conda until both were down to 1% hull - which seems a little silly.

Theoretically, yes, but I don't think a ramming Sidewinder would ever have the ability to drop the shields of a large ship, so the 'Conda's hull would never be damaged.

As a refinement, if a ship was unshielded, perhaps it would need time to reboot its systems, which would drop the repeat rate substantially.

A simple approach to reduce (although not eliminate) ramming grieving is to only apply the offense to the fastest ship in a collision. If you're doing 110m/s and a sidewinder boosts into you then won't get a bounty for the collision as it will get the blame not you. It could still slowly approach from the front but at least this makes the process more difficult.

More difficult, yes, but ideally, the non-aggressor should never be penalized. My suggestion completely prevents the victim to be further victimized.

 

[[Diplomacy] Carnegie]

Theoretically, yes, but I don't think a ramming Sidewinder would ever have the ability to drop the shields of a large ship, so the 'Conda's hull would never be damaged.

Sidewinder is very much the edge-case here, but I'm pretty sure a T6 would do the job.
Thing is, if ramming has no risk then people will find ways to abuse that lack of risk.

 

[Riverside]

Sidewinder is very much the edge-case here, but I'm pretty sure a T6 would do the job.
Thing is, if ramming has no risk then people will find ways to abuse that lack of risk.

I can imagine playing hockey with the sidewinder as the puck could be popular, certainly big ships would be able to intimidate smaller ones, but then smaller ones would stand a better chance of moving out of the way.

If the '1%' rule were applied only to ship-to-ship damage it removes the immortal explorer issue, but then a smaller ship could be punted into a station (or other immovable object) to destroy it. On balance I think I'd rather have immortal explorers.

 

[Chrystoph]

Not speeding, no problem. I've killed many of those like that

Having waived his, in the United States Fifth Amendment, right to self incrimination by bragging about being one of those creating the problem, one solution is to punish this player since he ADMITS he is of those guilty.

 

[mostly newish]

or just play solo ? the npcs are just as good as the try hards in open .

 

[Riverside]

or just play solo ? the npcs are just as good as the try hards in open .

That option is already available to us, this is a new suggestion aimed at reducing the impact of a specific action. It would have an effect on solo (and group) players too of course, do you have an opinion on that?

 

[Ian Doncaster]

The momentum transfer from a high-speed ram is quite significant: I saw a Corvette get knocked flying when a SLF boost-rammed it. Of course, the SLF didn't survive, and the Corvette's shields held just fine, but it took it a good few seconds to stabilise.

If that collision doesn't destroy the lighter ship, you can probably repeatedly ram a heavier ship to keep it inside a station until the departure timer expires - or bouncing off the scenery until its hull gives in. Or pin it to the wrong landing pad until it gets shot to death. Or keep ramming it so it can't get into the station in the first place. Lots of ways to inconvenience players with an invincible battering ram...

(Adding reboot/repair if you get rammed down to 1% hull just reverses the problem - now heavy ships with plenty of shields can bat lighter ships around the station, trapping them in an endless reboot/repair cycle until the timer runs out - letting the station kill the offender, rather than them taking the blame for it. And it still allows a pair of Sidewinders to pin a much bigger ship)

Having waived his, in the United States Fifth Amendment, right to self incrimination by bragging about being one of those creating the problem, one solution is to punish this player since he ADMITS he is of those guilty.

Read more carefully: what he's admitting to is killing station-rammers by travelling under the speed limit and letting them harmlessly explode on his hull.

 

[CMDR Cosmic Spacehead]

A sort of solution, is being up a "speed restriction in XXXX metres" warning when approaching a speeding zone.
This allows you to slow down in time for the speeding zone.

When leaving the zone, have a "speed restrictions lifted in XXXX metres"

The distance is calculated based on your ships vector.

 

[Frenotx]

A simple approach to reduce (although not eliminate) ramming grieving is to only apply the offense to the fastest ship in a collision. If you're doing 110m/s and a sidewinder boosts into you then won't get a bounty for the collision as it will get the blame not you. It could still slowly approach from the front but at least this makes the process more difficult.

I like the approach a lot, actually. Or, at the very least, make it so no crime occurs of both parties are speeding. Suicidewinder ramming would be all-but-eliminated, and if a big ship manages to ram-kill a speeding small ship then, well, that's just impressive. Speeding? Then you're not protected by the law.

 

[mostly newish]

That option is already available to us, this is a new suggestion aimed at reducing the impact of a specific action. It would have an effect on solo (and group) players too of course, do you have an opinion on that?

well in solo the ships leaving and entering space docks could do with being optimised , they ram me all the time . but then having accidents while driving cars on the roads happens too - i think it should be left as is .

 

[MBaldelli]

Sandro recently said: "Ramming is an issue we want to look at. It may be we can tweak the ramming crime to mitigate against this behaviour, though it may be that a karma solution is still required."

Good in theory... Really bad in practice... ESPECIALLY if they're moving the Crime from the Commander to the Ship.. This sounds like a whole lot of band aids that are being put in place to fix an ongoing issues that they mitigated with their attitude of a "Cutthroat Galaxy".

Further, this doesn't fix a problem with griefers that have bottomless wallets and reminds me too well of this scene:

[video=youtube;kXZs3mjGlQU]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kXZs3mjGlQU[/video]

Now don't get me wrong I'm a strong proponent for Crime and Punishment when it makes sense. When it's being slapped together in a nonsensical, lackadaisical, band aid come "let's put the genie back into the bottle" sort of way; I will fight it tooth and nail...

I believe there's bigger issues that should be addressed instead of trying this patched-together approach.

After all, you -- the Developers -- created this monster. Deal with it instead of patching it every time complaints come up.