Collision Damage against larger ships

[Kyoretsu]

So, I've read a few threads about people's ideas for collisions but I haven't seen many staff responses addressing my concern. Are there plans to make collision ineffective while shields are up? While similarly sized vessels, this wouldn't matter much, but small ships (fighters) ramming into much larger ships (titans, I believe the colloquialism is), obviously it would make a huge difference. X-wing versus Deathstar type thing.

Will mass come into play? Small arms fire against armored tanks and transports for this example. The most powerful pistol is laughably underpowered when fired at an Abrams, for example, is completely ineffective. I was flying a little ship around a WIP and crashed across it's hull, making a large scar I had to repair. I now know I can turn it off, but I am just curious what the overall plan is for that feature.

If anyone can point me in the right direction, I would deeply appreciate it.

 

[DukeofRealms]

As far as I'm aware, we have no plans for collision damage; it's not officially supported. Later down the line (beta), we may fix issues with enabling it, but I suspect that will be the full extent of our support.

 

[Zekester81]

If it's not officially supported, then why the hell put options for it in the config? That's just dumb if you ask me.

 

[KaRe]

If it's not officially supported, then why the hell put options for it in the config? That's just dumb if you ask me.

Would you rather not have the option to test something experimental? Maybe you'd like it, or if not you someone else. You'd prefer taking someone else's happiness just because it's not going to be working quite right until later?

 

[Kyoretsu]

As far as I'm aware, we have no plans for collision damage; it's not officially supported. Later down the line (beta), we may fix issues with enabling it, but I suspect that will be the full extent of our support.

It's in the options settings for the game, but it absolutely feel incomplete. I wasn't sure if there were plans to fix it or not, not collision is fine with me.

 

[Madman198237]

Welcome to an Alpha Testing game, where the game is in first development. You get to see the ugly side of a videogame. This game is still working on having a halfway decent UI, it's full of so many bugs it makes an anthill look tame, there's not even a single properly functioning sound in the game, and the servers are more likely to crash and burn than to let you play. (I exaggerate. [A little]) That's what this is---a game that has a plan, but doesn't yet know how it's getting there. It's going to be refined and changed and generally hammered into shape as it goes along, but it's not there yet. So have a little patience. Accept it when a broken feature stays a broken feature because it's an Alpha game, and it's not meant to be anything but a broken heap of somewhat related spaghetti code. Schoomadyne knows what he's doing, mostly, we think, we hope, we suspect but can't yet prove.

So, accept the glitches.

 

[Lecic]

If it's not officially supported, then why the hell put options for it in the config? That's just dumb if you ask me.

For the same reason tons of options are in the config that are there for testing and not the official game? You need to have the options to test with in the first place to even know if you want to support them in the future.

 

[Kyoretsu]

Welcome to an Alpha Testing game, where the game is in first development. You get to see the ugly side of a videogame. This game is still working on having a halfway decent UI, it's full of so many bugs it makes an anthill look tame, there's not even a single properly functioning sound in the game, and the servers are more likely to crash and burn than to let you play. (I exaggerate. [A little]) That's what this is---a game that has a plan, but doesn't yet know how it's getting there. It's going to be refined and changed and generally hammered into shape as it goes along, but it's not there yet. So have a little patience. Accept it when a broken feature stays a broken feature because it's an Alpha game, and it's not meant to be anything but a broken heap of somewhat related spaghetti code. Schoomadyne knows what he's doing, mostly, we think, we hope, we suspect but can't yet prove.

So, accept the glitches.

I don't have a problem "being patient" but if the information was out there, or in this case if it wasn't, there is nothing wrong in asking. I merely wanted to know.

 

[Brokengauge]

Man I hope collision damage does get to stay.

When I'm testing one of my ships out, I usually pull a Jean luc Picard....especially if the fight's not going my way lol.
Some say it's not very sporting. Maybe....Maybe. But then why else should I have an armored prow, hmmmm?

 

[AtraUnam]

Damn the federation sure does build their cruisers really damn sturdily, though as I recall they're basically solid titanium and tungsten so thats to be expected.

 

[DrTarDIS]

Eh, I think collision is fine if the threshold is set properly.

Besides, Star wars did ships crashing a little better than star trek. 3-ship pileup, anyone?

 

[Brokengauge]

Eh, I think collision is fine if the threshold is set properly.

Besides, Star wars did ships crashing a little better than star trek. 3-ship pileup, anyone?

Where was the third ship? Lol.

 

[Kyoretsu]

Man I hope collision damage does get to stay.

When I'm testing one of my ships out, I usually pull a Jean luc Picard....especially if the fight's not going my way lol.
Some say it's not very sporting. Maybe....Maybe. But then why else should I have an armored prow, hmmmm?

Keep in mind, I have nothing against collision damage as a rule, but in a game setting, there is no real sense of loss meaning as soon as the fight goes against you, you can collide. Also, tiny ships versus large ships. I don't mean slightly larger, I mean MUCH larger. But they were only questions. Schine is the final word. I just didn't know if the information was around the forums.
[doublepost=1492894356,1492894011][/doublepost]

Eh, I think collision is fine if the threshold is set properly.

Besides, Star wars did ships crashing a little better than star trek. 3-ship pileup, anyone?

Of course, but keep in mind, their bridge shields were down. They explicitly mention that.

 

[DrTarDIS]

Where was the third ship? Lol.

It's what the super-star destroyer crashed into at the end: the death star 2. it's a ship, just a REAAAALY big one.

 

[Madman198237]

Yeah, but why were the shields down? Because two A-Wings strafed the generator dome with their half-sized laser cannons? I think some better explanations were in order, even though I really do enjoy Star Wars.

 

[Brokengauge]

It's what the super-star destroyer crashed into at the end: the death star 2. it's a ship, just a REAAAALY big one.

Ah, I thought that might've been what you meant. I just wasn't sure because, you know, each death star was a "battlestation" despite the fact that they could move on their own power lol

 

[Ghent96]

...because collisions on literally breaks the server, crashes the game, and sends every single electron involved in the sordid affair crying home to mommy. Collisions were on briefly in the past and nearly caused reality as we know it to fracture in a way CERN can't even begin to postulate.

...leave it off...

...forever.