Jump To Lightspeed Archive
Thread: collision detection, the mechanic of awesomeness
Page 1 of 2
zounds_klaxons
Wed Nov 10, 2004 9:30 am
#1
i think collision detection should be turned on.
1) it would make asteroid fields dangerous and difficult to traverse. the way it works now is, we just blow through them and ignore the huge asteroids that bounce off our hull.
2) it would add a layer of complexity and coolness to dog fighting. you'd be forced to dodge debris, and play chicken with fast moving a-wings or tie interceptors.
3) on escort or attack missions, buzzing capital ships could be a way to lose opponents who are dog-tailing you.
Barbonokla
Wed Nov 10, 2004 9:38 am
#2
I support the addition of collision damage (we already have detection), but only to an extent.
Lag means PvP collision detection would be...unwise, not to mention griefers.
I agree that collision with the environment should be enabled - ie. asteroids, space stations, capitol ships etc.
Lag means PvP collision detection would be...unwise, not to mention griefers.
I agree that collision with the environment should be enabled - ie. asteroids, space stations, capitol ships etc.
zounds_klaxons
Wed Nov 10, 2004 9:40 am
#3
Barbonokla wrote:
I support the addition of collision damage (we already have detection), but only to an extent.
Lag means PvP collision detection would be...unwise, not to mention griefers.
I agree that collision with the environment should be enabled - ie. asteroids, space stations, capitol ships etc.
it's griefing to ram someone with your ship, but not griefing to shoot them?
the word "grief" getsthrown around so much on the forums its insane.
Barbonokla
Wed Nov 10, 2004 9:42 am
#4
Um...I didn't actually mention shooting, but my definition of griefing with regards to PvP would be those who 'don't play fair' - ramming would be one, as well as the encouraged forced PvP dynamic - a griefer's dream, that appears to be on it's way out ...
zounds_klaxons
Wed Nov 10, 2004 9:45 am
#5
Barbonokla wrote:
Um...I didn't actually mention shooting, but my definition of griefing with regards to PvP would be those who 'don't play fair' - ramming would be one, as well as the encouraged forced PvP dynamic - a griefer's dream, that appears to be on it's way out ...
ummmm ok. soif at some point in the future, if collisions cause damage, your opinion is that, in a PvP situation,a player who rams another player is a griefer?
am i missing something?
DotSWarlock
Wed Nov 10, 2004 9:49 am
#6
I think he meant ramming someone in a non pvp area or against someone that they are not usually able to damage. Like let's say a tie aggressor bumping into a starter shieldless tie to blow them up for the fun of it. In the event though that bumping does not cause more damage then lasers then I'm all for it in pvp zones or in duels.
Barbonokla
Wed Nov 10, 2004 9:50 am
#7
The only viable way (IMO) to implement PvP ramming is if the rammer (not sure how to determine that) receives more damage than the ramee (hmm)..
As I said - lag also poses a problem - during a period of worryingly high latency, people could be bouncing into each other, which I can imagine pissing people off.
Just seems safer to not have it for PvP at all.
As I said - lag also poses a problem - during a period of worryingly high latency, people could be bouncing into each other, which I can imagine pissing people off.
Just seems safer to not have it for PvP at all.
Uther27
Wed Nov 10, 2004 9:52 am
#8
That's interesting, but to be fair if ramming was viable in PVP it would also cause dmg to yourself... so it really couldn't be considered griefing. By the way, what kind of rule is fighting fair? If someone can do it back to you then it is fair game.
Barbonokla
Wed Nov 10, 2004 9:56 am
#9
Well, I was just thinking back to racing games.
When you play racers online (with the exception of games like Burnout) ramming into other racers is often frowned upon - sure you could do it back but its not quite...fair.
When you play racers online (with the exception of games like Burnout) ramming into other racers is often frowned upon - sure you could do it back but its not quite...fair.
ErikModi
Wed Nov 10, 2004 9:58 am
#10
I'd actually had a thought about this. My thought is: Make collision damage an option for environmentals and NPCs.
What this essentially means is that, if I'm a lousy pilot and can't navigate an asteroid feild, yet have to go there to blow things u-p for XP, I can turn the collision off, and still succeed. The game would play exactly as it does now.
If, however, I'm a great pilot who loves dogfighting and dodging asteroids, I can turn it on. With this option enable, kills give a bit more XP (scalable, with more XP given for a kill in a "high-impact" area, such as an asteroid feild) because my difficulty has gone up. However, all NPC ships are capable of ramming and being rammed, so having this option on would ALWAYS result in at least a minimal XP bous.
What this essentially means is that, if I'm a lousy pilot and can't navigate an asteroid feild, yet have to go there to blow things u-p for XP, I can turn the collision off, and still succeed. The game would play exactly as it does now.
If, however, I'm a great pilot who loves dogfighting and dodging asteroids, I can turn it on. With this option enable, kills give a bit more XP (scalable, with more XP given for a kill in a "high-impact" area, such as an asteroid feild) because my difficulty has gone up. However, all NPC ships are capable of ramming and being rammed, so having this option on would ALWAYS result in at least a minimal XP bous.
Barbonokla
Wed Nov 10, 2004 10:01 am
#11
Giving the user the option certainly sounds feasible - but only if it is attached to some sort of XP bonus etc, as you have suggested.
Mael_BH
Wed Nov 10, 2004 10:02 am
#12
Actually ramming a ship would be an acceptable last-ditch move, it has historically been done. there have even been ships that were designed to use this as an attack, the Greek trireme is an example of a ship specifically designed with ramming other boats in mind.
in our case if you are severely damaged and the only weapon you have left is your ship itself your options are try to run or take some of your enemies with you when you die.
I can see where this would seem to be unfair but fighting somebody isn't really supposed to be about what’s fair its supposed to be about coming out the victor.
Before anybody flames me on this, i think ship to ship collisions could be done like they have been in other space sims, the damage done is based on relative mass. When you fly into another fighter damage is done to your ship but you are not destroyed, if you fly into a capitol ship or a large asteroid you are toast.
Also, the weapons and armor/shields need to be reworked, we can kill each other way to easily and npcs take far more damage then us. if the weapons were made weaker and our armor made better it would help to get rid of the one shot kill that we have now. Then if the npcs were made better pilots and their armor/shields made weaker it would even things back out.
in our case if you are severely damaged and the only weapon you have left is your ship itself your options are try to run or take some of your enemies with you when you die.
I can see where this would seem to be unfair but fighting somebody isn't really supposed to be about what’s fair its supposed to be about coming out the victor.
Before anybody flames me on this, i think ship to ship collisions could be done like they have been in other space sims, the damage done is based on relative mass. When you fly into another fighter damage is done to your ship but you are not destroyed, if you fly into a capitol ship or a large asteroid you are toast.
Also, the weapons and armor/shields need to be reworked, we can kill each other way to easily and npcs take far more damage then us. if the weapons were made weaker and our armor made better it would help to get rid of the one shot kill that we have now. Then if the npcs were made better pilots and their armor/shields made weaker it would even things back out.
zounds_klaxons
Wed Nov 10, 2004 11:11 am
#13
i guessi just think things now are good, but flying through an asteroid field is completely unscarey and boring.
i would be happy if they changed it so asteroids do damage, if for some reason they couldn't work out the "grief potential"*** of making ships cause ramming damage.
***- not that i think its griefing at all. infact, i would consider it to be not a big deal at all-- considering when you shoot someone you damage them without any damage being done to you at all, and its certainly harder to ram someone. i mean, if they label ramming as a grief tactic, whats next? maneuverable ships like a-wings and tie interceptors are "grief ships" because they move too fast for someone to shoot?
Page 1 of 2