[Tritian]

depends on the way. but yeah, i'm open to ideas...

[GrimGriz]

They had them turned on when I was in beta for a little bit, but they weren't very accurate. I mean, two tows smacking into eachother in Dark Gateway didn't make either one explode, they just bounced off each other and all their forward momentum was lost, regardless of their mass. It was an amusing day or 2, but the game was much better on the whole with collisions off.

[netburnr]

Originally Posted by GrimGriz

They had them turned on when I was in beta for a little bit, but they weren't very accurate. I mean, two tows smacking into eachother in Dark Gateway didn't make either one explode, they just bounced off each other and all their forward momentum was lost, regardless of their mass. It was an amusing day or 2, but the game was much better on the whole with collisions off.

Was there shield or armor damage depending on the speed of the impact, or was there no damage when colliding with other players?

[GrimGriz]

Originally Posted by netburnrol

Was there shield or armor damage depending on the speed of the impact, or was there no damage when colliding with other players?

There wasn't even a bouncing sound if I remember correctly. And bytheby, as of this post I'm putting you on ignore, so don't bother addressing me directly again.

[netburnr]

Originally Posted by Tritian

depends on the way. but yeah, i'm open to ideas...

How about using the lateral thrusters to make course adjustment as needed. Similar to how EVE does it, but it will be much more impressive since its an actual ship, and not just a pretty picture.

What I picture is the most avid PvPer that doesn't like the "help system" will have to avoid other people at all costs as their low mass ships would be tossed about.

Bigger Civ craft will have the help flight system already, so just add a few collision detection "systems" and let it help them avoid other people. I would see this as a bonus to the new people because at lower speeds their small ships could keep their deaths down so they don't get frustrated by crashing all the time.

Then as they progress to bigger ships the mass will be higher and they will need to learn to use it less...

Then as they "grow up" the ships they are likely to use will too high of a mass for anything more than basic coarse corrections to avoid another ship.

Feedback?

[Algore]

I think it would fundamentally change the way we pilot our ships in every way.
I think it's fair to say that the one thing that isn't currently broken about the game is the way in which we pilot our own ships. Introducing something that would have such far fetching repercussions to the game would be both unwise, and an unnescessary use of coding manpower.
Do you think it would be a good idea net? If so why? I'm not having a go, but you do seem to randomly come up with things for no apparent reason.

Regards
Al

[netburnr]

Well realism for one.

Also, it can add to the depth of piloting a ship, IE real repercussions for flying right at someone on purpose.

Lastly to support GG's idea of attack shielding which would require ship collision.

[Eraser55]

It will not only change how you pilot your ship, but will require massive amounts of unessesery shield/armor ship balancing. Because in the end there will be a ship superior to all other, maybe a miner or whatever, and this ship will be used by a squad or some persons to bumpkill just for fun of it..

like Al said, its not broken, its fun to fly as it is now and this doesnt bring anything to the Fun factor, most people would just want to avoid hitting eachother and will find this as an annoying element.

[Algore]

Originally Posted by netburnrol

Well realism for one.

Also, it can add to the depth of piloting a ship, IE real repercussions for flying right at someone on purpose.

Lastly to support GG's idea of attack shielding which would require ship collision.

Realism is all well and good but this is a computer game. There are many factors in Jumpgate that could be changed to create a feeling of realism, but I'm not so sure from my exp(like GG's in beta) that I would be willing to sacrifice fun for realism.
I generally look at an idea and if I feel there are more issues that would cause a detrimental effect on the game than their plus points I tend to dismiss it. There are so many negatives that I can see with collision damage with few positives I see no need to go into more detail.

Regards
Al

[-Vomir-]

Originally Posted by Ambrosius

To Vomir: apparently Jumpgates are now huge.I'd like to see collision turned on for Beta and see how it goes. Almost anything that adds realism is ++ for me.

Yes, gates seem to be huge... but freighters too seem to be huge, If everything get's "huge", or at least some ships do, how do you handle 10 freighters jumping more or less at the same time... you'd have to come up with a very clever system to avoid this. I just think it's not worth the limited coding resources to overcome even this "small" problem.

If you add an autopilot to avoid freighter collisions it will need a madman to make it work properly (and realistically), and it would be most abusable to get freighters off course.

You won't get a huge boost of realism if we have real collisions, and it might lead to other "unrealistic" fixes to make things as gates and flight between gates work.

What's the point of making things "realistic" if you have to add exeptions to make it bearable in terms of coding time and or playability?

[Wild_Bill]

I'm willing to give it a try in Beta and see how it works out, but I'm not sure it would add anything "postive" to the experience.

It bums me out now how a small ship can "bump" a Tow, Tug or HM and cause it to 'splash' the station, Jumpgate, roid, etc. I have NEVER understood how a pesky little C1 can move my loaded miner around just by shooting lasers at me. Makes no sense whatsoever.