Jump to content
Aesir

Raming ship

Recommended Posts

10 minutes ago, NanoDot said:

NQ are the ones who said they will not be allowing ship ramming as a game feature.

 

Whether it's possible or not is irrelevant, they mainly don't want it in the game because of the disruptive "cheese" tactics it will allow.

 

I agree with NQ in this regard...

No reason it can't be done in the future. Ramming would also damage your own ship and cause you unnecessary repairs. Sure, a troll or two might do it, but you will have trolls no matter what features are/aren't in the game. They may not be focusing on it now, but they will have to in the future.

I imagine having "breaching pods" for bigger ships, where the pod is shot at a ship, pierces the hull, and then opens its doors inside causing it to get "stuck" onto the hull. then a boarding party could raid the ship on the inside instead of just blowing it up, do some kind of hacking to make the ship theirs (all part of the programming and maybe requires a mini game of XXX difficulty to execute, or whatever way of going about doing it.) and bam, pirates are born.

There is no reason in my mind to rule out any feature just because "trolls will overuse ramming ships". That's just ridiculous. I can right now think of 5 ways to troll people right now and the game isn't even out yet and I am not a paid supporter yet so i haven't played the pre alpha. Should we stop other things just because of trolls? I think not. Its human nature. Ignoring human nature in a game about human nature is just wrong to me....

maybe they said "no" because they are focusing on more important things right now. There is honestly no good reason to ignore it in the future.....

EDIT: someone ramming their ship, killing themselves and destroying their ship, just to disable yours or kill you, is no different than sending in a small team of ships to fight one larger ship, then after its damaged a bit, sending in more to finish the job.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just a note of personal preference: I really don't like ram tactics for sanbox games where players design their own ships.

 

True, I am a strong supporter of the #edprotestgoat (Goat will ram you anyways, David!), but in ED the ship designs are fixed. In a game where the ram tactics option would make "ram capability" a single valid construction goal, it would directly oppose the micro management of the weapon and defensive equipment options NQ will give us.

 

It's a bit difficult for me to put this in English... but it's about balancing combat. You'll have weapons and counter measures. The more complex these are, the more tactical depth we will experience as players. Introducing the option to ignore all of this implied gameplay, by building voxel torpedoes and such, is not only about trolling, but about what players will/can chose to do.

 

As I said - it's a personal preference and you may disagree. I can even see your point there - freedom of choice and all. But, on this very personal level and for this very topic, I really disliked the "Throw a construct at em!" tactic that is possible in other games with player built constructs. In my opinion it leads to low-end warfare (mediocre at best, because I really want to use the term "mediocre") and a dull snowball fight experience overall.

 

Design of a battleship should be more complex than just slamming dem hammer plates in the front and get dem biggest drives in da back, yo ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 25/10/2017 at 12:46 AM, namco said:

I imagine having "breaching pods" for bigger ships, where the pod is shot at a ship, pierces the hull, and then opens its doors inside causing it to get "stuck" onto the hull. then a boarding party could raid the ship on the inside instead of just blowing it up, do some kind of hacking to make the ship theirs (all part of the programming and maybe requires a mini game of XXX difficulty to execute, or whatever way of going about doing it.) and bam, pirates are born.

 

Oh, post scriptum: aye, this is a cool aspect! But I don't think you need the ram option for this. The boarding capsule could be realized without it doing high damage to the construct from impact. Sure, you could say it's Kyrium on the outside - but whoa that's expensive! If you don't have Kyrium, the impact would be bad for the boarding crew too - so just carefully attach your boarding capsule to the ship, pressurize it and weld your way through the hull. Will work just as well for entering constructs. No need for goating =)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the max speed in space is rumored to be 20,000 km/s, thats one mighty fast target to accurately ram........  lets just see how the game unfolds as we might be talking about a tactic that can only work near where ships slow down to dock/enter atmosphere etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎10‎/‎5‎/‎2017 at 6:30 AM, Aesir said:

As we know there will be collision damages, I would love to see a Ram element, could be a weapon or some kind of special plate you put in front of your ship to protect it from the impact. What do you think ?

I have ben thinking about this and mention it to a friend of mine how is planning on building ships we both talked about it and have ideas that we would like to try and see if they work but we will need to play the game to test them but for now we have a few theories on how we might be able to make it work ! 

My main goal is commerce and weapons system development but I could see the value in a ship that has a ramming feature or even a boarding party feature built around its design !   =)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The thing is most space combat engagements will be happening over dozens of kilometers, if not hundreds(assuming the game has somewhat realistic physics), so if you manage to get into ramming distance without getting shot down then why would you even ram it you have a freakin tank!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't want to hurt anyone's feelings but taking ramming out just for the sake of performance is plain nonsense.

The physics will take much more server resources than voxel states and the game will still need to calculate movement vectors after the collision. or are you trying to suggest that ships should go through each other without any interaction?

 

I think there should be collision damage but only minimal(like a man sized hole) Because this way c damage would only help against cheese tactics. While missiles would be ineffective it would kill fighters who ram into ships for any reason.


And on the other hand it would make boarding ships easier while not being a valid ship destroying tactic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, gyurka66 said:

I don't want to hurt anyone's feelings but taking ramming out just for the sake of performance is plain nonsense.

The physics will take much more server resources than voxel states and the game will still need to calculate movement vectors after the collision. or are you trying to suggest that ships should go through each other without any interaction?

 

I think there should be collision damage but only minimal(like a man sized hole) Because this way c damage would only help against cheese tactics. While missiles would be ineffective it would kill fighters who ram into ships for any reason.


And on the other hand it would make boarding ships easier while not being a valid ship destroying tactic.

I don't wanna hurt your feelings but that's not what nq wants. Ramming to kill other ships and because it needs too much performance. 

You bump the other ship, going through would be ridiculous

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Lethys said:

I don't wanna hurt your feelings but that's not what nq wants. Ramming to kill other ships and because it needs too much performance. 

You bump the other ship, going through would be ridiculous

Physics is a gpu load, not a cpu. Running psychics on cpu is literally the wrong way to run physics. Most companies who run physics calculations have a similar setup to bit coin mining rigs with multiple gpu's to actually pound out said physics code, because gpu's are better at it.

I guarantee they don't have a set server farm setup yet. They probably have a few test servers and that's it. Add 1-8 gpu's per server rig and the physics issue load is solved in one fell swoop. If they can code a new algorithm for handling server load itself to where 1000's of players can hang out in the same spot and even fight each tother, than coding their game to use gpu's for physics calculations would significantly improve performance, which would mean we could even see actual wheels and such instead of "hover/flying" tech only, and we would also see water. "but water would be too much calculations" well, from other thing they said is that scripting only works when someone is present, I thought they meant your scripts only run when YOU are present, they haven't clarified, but if they can basically "turn off" unused sectors and then "turn them on" when a player is actually there to interact with them, then everything people are claiming can't be done, can be done. Server technology isn't how it was years ago. Not to mention, if you pay attention to how games are run server side, its all code, no game. Its not like running the game on your pc. However, look at the servers today. 80% are single core servers. That means you could have an 8 core server and its only using 1 core to run said game. 15% are dual core games that run on 2 cores, 4% run on 4 cores, and 1% run on 6 cores or more. We have 32 core/64 thread cpus, and none of that is properly getting utilized. If the devs here making DU decided to use all the horsepower that they can, anything is possible....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

NQ is already doing the physics collisions for constructs. They have a video of a spaceship landing on a space station from 2016.

 

Adding in a flat damage calculation wouldn't require any more physics calculations to be done, because it's already happening. So the load of adding collision damage would be pretty negligible.

 

Personally I don't care one way or the other if they decide to add damage to collisions or not, but it wouldn't create a performance issue for the server.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, namco said:

Physics is a gpu load, not a cpu. Running psychics on cpu is literally the wrong way to run physics. Most companies who run physics calculations have a similar setup to bit coin mining rigs with multiple gpu's to actually pound out said physics code, because gpu's are better at it.

I guarantee they don't have a set server farm setup yet. They probably have a few test servers and that's it. Add 1-8 gpu's per server rig and the physics issue load is solved in one fell swoop. If they can code a new algorithm for handling server load itself to where 1000's of players can hang out in the same spot and even fight each tother, than coding their game to use gpu's for physics calculations would significantly improve performance, which would mean we could even see actual wheels and such instead of "hover/flying" tech only, and we would also see water. "but water would be too much calculations" well, from other thing they said is that scripting only works when someone is present, I thought they meant your scripts only run when YOU are present, they haven't clarified, but if they can basically "turn off" unused sectors and then "turn them on" when a player is actually there to interact with them, then everything people are claiming can't be done, can be done. Server technology isn't how it was years ago. Not to mention, if you pay attention to how games are run server side, its all code, no game. Its not like running the game on your pc. However, look at the servers today. 80% are single core servers. That means you could have an 8 core server and its only using 1 core to run said game. 15% are dual core games that run on 2 cores, 4% run on 4 cores, and 1% run on 6 cores or more. We have 32 core/64 thread cpus, and none of that is properly getting utilized. If the devs here making DU decided to use all the horsepower that they can, anything is possible....

Thanks for clarifying.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 26/10/2017 at 1:02 AM, vertex said:

Just a note of personal preference: I really don't like ram tactics for sanbox games where players design their own ships.

 

True, I am a strong supporter of the #edprotestgoat (Goat will ram you anyways, David!), but in ED the ship designs are fixed. In a game where the ram tactics option would make "ram capability" a single valid construction goal, it would directly oppose the micro management of the weapon and defensive equipment options NQ will give us.

 

It's a bit difficult for me to put this in English... but it's about balancing combat. You'll have weapons and counter measures. The more complex these are, the more tactical depth we will experience as players. Introducing the option to ignore all of this implied gameplay, by building voxel torpedoes and such, is not only about trolling, but about what players will/can chose to do.

 

As I said - it's a personal preference and you may disagree. I can even see your point there - freedom of choice and all. But, on this very personal level and for this very topic, I really disliked the "Throw a construct at em!" tactic that is possible in other games with player built constructs. In my opinion it leads to low-end warfare (mediocre at best, because I really want to use the term "mediocre") and a dull snowball fight experience overall.

 

Design of a battleship should be more complex than just slamming dem hammer plates in the front and get dem biggest drives in da back, yo ;)

The problem imho is that allowing ram damage will potentially introduce "one-shot-kill" weapons.

 

The arms race will be to design the cheapest possible ram ship that produces the highest possible collision damage.

 

Nobody is going to be happy if a 20 ton fighter traveling at 20000 km/h just scratches a battleship's paintwork... how can the damage be kept "plausible" in situations like that ?

 

In "RL", suicide attacks are not viable as long-term tactics if the person carrying out the attack has to be highly trained, because it takes a lot of time and money to train pilots (even if you have an endless supply of willing kamikaze's).

In an MMO, it's a simple matter, because the highly trained pilot just respawns, which leads to totally implausable "cheese tactics".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

On 10/24/2017 at 6:25 PM, namco said:

I will post a little FAQ for you guys

Thank you, Namco, for that wonderfully condescending explanation. It's good to know that you're a better developer than the people over at NovaQuark. Maybe you should apply for one of their open positions so you'll be able to teach them how real game design is done. /s

 

Ok, seriously, "the server load is too great" isn't our personal opinion, it's the official position of NovaQuark, as told to us by JC himself. He's the Founder and CEO by the way, in case you didn't know. Next time, how about you keep your self-righteous opinions to yourself until you've actually had time to read a thing or two about the game, like just about everyone else in this thread.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Though how will collision mechanics work?  To minimize physics load, we can just make the ship coliders nonexistent, but this would just feel broken. The next step up would be accessing the size of both ships and calculating thloss of both ships and stopping the smaller ship Or, we could do bounce/bump physics collisions. The most heavy work will be realistic collisions.

 

How about turning off colliders and having voxels that overlap destroy each other?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Vorengard said:

Collision with the environment works, but not with other constructs. 

Like I said earlier, you can clearly see in a video from E3 2016 that they have construct to construct collision.

 

It's already done.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, 0something0 said:

Though how will collision mechanics work? 

Ship colliding against ship results in ship bouncing of ship with no damage at this stage of the game. So ramming tactics are pointless against ships at this stage of development.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Vellnn said:

Like I said earlier, you can clearly see in a video from E3 2016 that they have construct to construct collision.

 

It's already done.

Oh really? Well then I guess I'll have to go over to this post where Nyzaltar says it's "not happening soon" to tell him that he's totally wrong. Or would you rather be the one to tell him that you know more about the game than he does? :P 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Vorengard said:

Oh really? Well then I guess I'll have to go over to this post where Nyzaltar says it's "not happening soon" to tell him that he's totally wrong. Or would you rather be the one to tell him that you know more about the game than he does? :P 

That was in regards to collision damaging specific parts of a ship. Also that was more than a year ago.

 

Please read more carefully and consider the context.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Vellnn said:

That was in regards to collision damaging specific parts of a ship.

Yes, that's what this entire conversation is about. Perhaps I'm not the one who needs to read more carefully. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ramming mechanics would make the Kessler Syndrome real...

 

There could be specialized jobs to harvest space junk to minimize the effects of Kessler Syndrome. Or, some warring nation could deliberately induce it to blockade a planet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Vorengard said:

Yes, that's what this entire conversation is about. Perhaps I'm not the one who needs to read more carefully. 

Well “collision” as in checking “are these two things touching? If they are, make them bounce off of eachother based on mass” is already done, as you can see in some of their videos with ships.

 

What Nyz was talking about was “where exactly are these two things touching down to the voxel, and having every voxel have it’s own health, and dynamically breaking the voxels off when their health hits 0, modifying the physical shape of the construct”, which would take up a lot more reaources, and probably wouldn’t be realistic to implement by the time the game releases.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Vellnn said:

Well “collision” as in checking “are these two things touching? If they are, make them bounce off of eachother based on mass” is already done, as you can see in some of their videos with ships.

 

What Nyz was talking about was “where exactly are these two things touching down to the voxel, and having every voxel have it’s own health, and dynamically breaking the voxels off when their health hits 0, modifying the physical shape of the construct”, which would take up a lot more reaources, and probably wouldn’t be realistic to implement by the time the game releases.

Which we're arguing the whole time, thus it's NOT implemented as you suggested cause that what you mean hasby NOTHING to do with colliding ships that take damage (which is the while point of this thread)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...