Jump to content
You need to play a total of 50 battles to post in this section.
SkollUlfr

any chance of a ramming rework?

50 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

[MAD4T]
[MAD4T]
Players
175 posts
3,867 battles

i get it that 2 bb's t-boning each other would never be short of catastrophic for both in 90% of cases, but a lot of cases that wouldnt be much more than trading paint result in mutual annihilation all the same.

 

do we have any chance of getting collision mechanics that are a bit more authentic?

  • Cool 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[NWP]
Players
4,017 posts
6,041 battles

Ramming damage is already influenced by the speed the targets are hitting each other.

Just today i first rammed a CM to death with my PEF, then killed another PEF also by ramming. He was slowly reversing into me.

So even if you touch your sides only while fullspeed, you will still die most likely, unless flag or a weaker target.

 

Spoiler

shot-19_01.21_18_53.38-0698.thumb.jpg.b00ac7f6c092eb34ccfed8b03fc51af1.jpgshot-19_01.21_18_53.40-0964.thumb.jpg.6d5de016237160d406416e08c54f5970.jpgshot-19_01.21_18_53.47-0747.thumb.jpg.990b52e8ec21e688f77e79336fce363f.jpg

 

Killed both the PEF and CM with a Ram, and didnt die myself (NM killed me with guns)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[CATS]
Players
15,379 posts
11,039 battles
10 minutes ago, SkollUlfr said:

i get it that 2 bb's t-boning each other would never be short of catastrophic for both in 90% of cases, but a lot of cases that wouldnt be much more than trading paint result in mutual annihilation all the same.

 

do we have any chance of getting collision mechanics that are a bit more authentic?

Close to zero.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[PMI]
Players
2,487 posts
5,898 battles
15 minutes ago, SkollUlfr said:

i get it that 2 bb's t-boning each other would never be short of catastrophic for both in 90% of cases, but a lot of cases that wouldnt be much more than trading paint result in mutual annihilation all the same.

 

do we have any chance of getting collision mechanics that are a bit more authentic?

 

Paint trading? You have not seen many ships collide have you?

 

While some ship collisions are indeed meaningless, given the weights and speeds of the ships we are dealing with here, I dont think you want realism any more than you want realistic MBH accuracy...

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[JR-IT]
Alpha Tester
753 posts
7,160 battles
1 hour ago, Juanx said:

 

Paint trading? You have not seen many ships collide have you?

 

While some ship collisions are indeed meaningless, given the weights and speeds of the ships we are dealing with here, I dont think you want realism any more than you want realistic MBH accuracy...

this, i think a lot of people don't get what happen when crashing those masses toghether.

 

I give you an hint from something that happened to me: a T collision between 2 boats at the relative speed of 15 knots. The outcome?  I carved my hull 1 meter into the onther boat and almost sunk him, and we are talking about 500 kgs ships at 15 knots. Here in the game on a head on collision we are talking about 5-50k tons at a relative speed of 60 knots ( 120 km/h), it would be devastating.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[PMI]
Players
2,487 posts
5,898 battles
33 minutes ago, Flavio1997 said:

this, i think a lot of people don't get what happen when crashing those masses toghether.

 

I give you an hint from something that happened to me: a T collision between 2 boats at the relative speed of 15 knots. The outcome?  I carved my hull 1 meter into the onther boat and almost sunk him, and we are talking about 500 kgs ships at 15 knots. Here in the game on a head on collision we are talking about 5-50k tons at a relative speed of 60 knots ( 120 km/h), it would be devastating.

 

Well, our OP seems to believe otherwise.

 

As they say, ignorance is bliss...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[MAD4T]
[MAD4T]
Players
175 posts
3,867 battles
1 hour ago, Juanx said:

 

Paint trading? You have not seen many ships collide have you?

 

While some ship collisions are indeed meaningless, given the weights and speeds of the ships we are dealing with here, I dont think you want realism any more than you want realistic MBH accuracy...

im not asking for 'realism' just something more authentic.

just so that my cruiser doesnt explode because its stern clipped the torp bulges of a bb.

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
612 posts
37 minutes ago, Flavio1997 said:

this, i think a lot of people don't get what happen when crashing those masses toghether.

 

I give you an hint from something that happened to me: a T collision between 2 boats at the relative speed of 15 knots. The outcome?  I carved my hull 1 meter into the onther boat and almost sunk him, and we are talking about 500 kgs ships at 15 knots. Here in the game on a head on collision we are talking about 5-50k tons at a relative speed of 60 knots ( 120 km/h), it would be devastating.

Were your boats made from welded steel, designed to shrug off canon or artillery fire?

 

Or were the hulls made from wood or fibreglass.

 

There doesn't seem to be that many collisions of battleships in history that could be used to realistically model this event in the game.

 

A Yamato going full speed nose in to a broadside Gearing would have a reasonable chance of slicing the Gearing in half.

 

A Yamato and Musashi hitting a glancing blow on each other at 1/4 speed? Who knows. Could just be a rather dented upper hull on each of them? Could be worse.

 

What is very Tom and Jerry cartoonish is that friendly rams at full speed broadside on, shave off the tiniest bit of health, whilst enemy rams from the faintest touch are like 2 Ford Pintos reversing into each other at full speed. :Smile_unsure:

  • Cool 1
  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[JR-IT]
Alpha Tester
753 posts
7,160 battles
7 minutes ago, Lin3 said:

Were your boats made from welded steel, designed to shrug off canon or artillery fire?

 

Or were the hulls made from wood or fibreglass.

 

There doesn't seem to be that many collisions of battleships in history that could be used to realistically model this event in the game.

 

A Yamato going full speed nose in to a broadside Gearing would have a reasonable chance of slicing the Gearing in half.

 

A Yamato and Musashi hitting a glancing blow on each other at 1/4 speed? Who knows. Could just be a rather dented upper hull on each of them? Could be worse.

 

 

4

when those masses are applied, steel is no better than cardboard, trust me.

and i can give you another example:

7 may 2013: pilots tower control tragedy's in Genoa ( Italy) a  tanker reverse at 4 knots ( 7kms/h) and hit the port's watch tower ( no smaller than an airport one, as Genoa is the biggest port in the Mediterranean sea) and crush it ( 6 casualtyes). And we are talking about an armored concrete structure.

 

In ww2 there were a lot of collision between ships 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[-YOLO]
Alpha Tester
540 posts
2,490 battles

I think there has been at least one colision during the Battle of Jutland. The ships past each other with 1 meter too less distance :cap_fainting:, ripping off a few meters of belt armor of a BB.

Btw: None of the ships exploded ;)

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[MAD4T]
[MAD4T]
Players
175 posts
3,867 battles
13 minutes ago, Lin3 said:

There doesn't seem to be that many collisions of battleships in history that could be used to realistically model this event in the game.

afaik many of the low tier cruisers have ramming prows.

but, again, not asking for realism, just something more authentic that removes some of the silly stuff that happens. 

like 2 dd blowing up going past each other when they are literally barely touching.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
612 posts
28 minutes ago, Flavio1997 said:

when those masses are applied, steel is no better than cardboard, trust me.

and i can give you another example:

7 may 2013: pilots tower control tragedy's in Genoa ( Italy) a  tanker reverse at 4 knots ( 7kms/h) and hit the port's watch tower ( no smaller than an airport one, as Genoa is the biggest port in the Mediterranean sea) and crush it ( 6 casualtyes). And we are talking about an armored concrete structure.

 

In ww2 there were a lot of collision between ships 

 

The control tower was anchored to the ground, Whilst ships float in low viscosity fluid. Which makes a difference.

 

But sure, with most ship collisions, catastrophic damage would ensue.

 

Edit: and then there was the Marchioness disaster. The Marchioness sank. The Bowbelle didn't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
2,424 posts
14,595 battles

"...However, this dash placed Cruiser Division 7 within torpedo range of the submarine USS Tambor, which was spotted by Kumano, which signaled a 45° simultaneous turn to starboard to avoid possible torpedoes. The emergency turn was correctly executed by the flagship and Suzuya, but the third ship in the line, Mikuma, erroneously made a 90° turn. Behind her, Mogami turned 45° as commanded. This resulted in a collision in which Mogami rammed Mikuma's portside, below the bridge. Mogami's bow caved in and she was badly damaged..."

 

I wouldn't but a lot of faith in the bow of most WW2 warships.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester, Players
12 posts
6,439 battles

if you are going to apply mass or inertia/please apply to BB ramming Islands at the same time plus apply the island Idea to the edge of map for instance, take damage and you have run aground, disembark, shoot a few rounds off (make yourself lighter or wait for the tide!)

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
2,424 posts
14,595 battles

h68355.jpg

Marshall Islands Campaign, Jan.-Feb. 1944 --
USS Washington and USS Indiana Collide, 1 February 1944

In the pre-dawn darkness of 1 February 1944 the battleship Indiana turned to leave the cruising formation of Task Group 58.1. Consisting of three aircraft carriers, three battleships, a light cruiser and nine destroyers (**: ships are listed below), TG 58.1 was steaming at ninteen knots through the Marshall Islands, supporting the invasion of Kwajalein Atoll. Indiana was under orders to refuel four destroyers, to be done at night to ensure a full anti-submarine screen during the following day's combat operations.

Indiana announced by radio at 0420 that she was turning towards the left and slowing to fifteen knots. However, her Commanding Officer, based on a "seaman's eye" evaluation of the situation, apparently thought better of that course and a short time later changed direction toward the formation's right. This was not reported to the rest of the ships and, about seven minutes after she began her turn, Indiana was seen close ahead of the battleship Washington's port bow. The latter ordered her engines to "back, emergency full" and put her rudder hard left. Indiana also maneuvered in an effort to avoid a collision. However, in about a minute the two big ships ran together, with Washington's bow scraping down the after portion of Indiana's starboard side.

Both ships were damaged enough to require shipyard repairs, taking both out of combat at an inopportune time. Indiana's starboard hull side was dished in and ripped open. Above deck, her after sixteen-inch gun turret rangefinder was damaged, several machine guns were destroyed, and her starboard aircraft catapult and a seaplane were torn off. Some sixty feet of Washington's forward hull was ground away, causing its deck to flap down into the water. Ten lives were lost in this accident, six killed or missing on Washington and four on Indiana.

 

h92882.jpg

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[PMI]
Players
2,487 posts
5,898 battles
42 minutes ago, SkollUlfr said:

 

but, again, not asking for realism, just something more authentic that removes some of the silly stuff that happens. 

 

What silly stuff? You mean like:

 

42 minutes ago, SkollUlfr said:

like 2 dd blowing up going past each other when they are literally barely touching.

 

As in, being completely rendered useless? Might having holes punched in the hull count?

 

But please keep at it, its funny to see someone argue about something that youtube can teach you about...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[MAD4T]
[MAD4T]
Players
175 posts
3,867 battles
4 minutes ago, Juanx said:

As in, being completely rendered useless? Might having holes punched in the hull count?

 

But please keep at it, its funny to see someone argue about something that youtube can teach you about...

youtube could also teach you that putting several 16 inch holes in a dd would sink the thing by flooding, even without any explosions going off.

deliberate and intentional ramming could still work even if it was changed so that clipping a passing ship doesnt cause both the explode.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
612 posts
3 minutes ago, SkollUlfr said:

youtube could also teach you that putting several 16 inch holes in a dd would sink the thing by flooding, even without any explosions going off.

deliberate and intentional ramming could still work even if it was changed so that clipping a passing ship doesnt cause both the explode.

Yeah, but the DD's in this game are made from pixels, not steel. Pixels are lighter than air, so that DD's float like a cork even after being peppered with more holes than a sieve.

 

It's all in the interests of Game Balance TM. :Smile_trollface:

  • Funny 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[PMI]
Players
2,487 posts
5,898 battles
14 minutes ago, SkollUlfr said:

youtube could also teach you that putting several 16 inch holes in a dd would sink the thing by flooding, even without any explosions going off.

deliberate and intentional ramming could still work even if it was changed so that clipping a passing ship doesnt cause both the explode.

 

Wait, do they not have a bunch of guys running around with rolls of cork and boards to cover those eventual holes?

 

You are telling me its all been a lie?!?!?!

 

As said, you are correct that some rubbing events would be harmless, but the thing is, the game has no way of portrating a ship that has had a hull panel, or bow-tail section ripped off, without it blowing up itself.

And again, for game purposes, the ship is effectively combat ineffective at that point, so you might as well blow it up and be done with it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[MAD4T]
[MAD4T]
Players
175 posts
3,867 battles
10 minutes ago, Lin3 said:

Pixels are lighter than air, so that DD's float like a cork even after being peppered with more holes than a sieve.

i prefer if when they fly spinning out of the water when they clip a sunk ship just right. though they havnt dont that for a while.

 

3 minutes ago, Juanx said:

the ship is effectively combat ineffective at that point, so you might as well blow it up and be done with it.

which is the same thing to be said about blowing the steering or engine.

you are trying to say i want too much realism, using way more realism than i would ask for in a game where ship speeds are just shy of double what the numbers on screen say they are. 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[BONUS]
Beta Tester
1,049 posts

Remember that decreasing a ship's HP to 0 does not nessecarily mean the ship is sunk. Depleting a ship's HP does simply mean the ship is considered unable to continue combat. HP is just an arbitrary value representing a ships resistance to damage taken. Get it to 0 and the ship has suffered so much damage it is rendered unable to fight in any way.

 

And that does kinda translate well to ramming. I mean, look at those pictures posted above. I think we can assume that those ships are considered unable to continue combat. Yes, the ship might not have sunk, but it is still a sitting duck and a total loss. And that's exactly what's represented ingame by having 0 HP on your ship. But because that looks silly, WG made a nice explosion and sinking animation when that happens.

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[ALA]
Players
18 posts
1,957 battles

How often do you scrape an inch of your belt on an enemy player, OP?

In nearly 2k games, I've seen a ram be somewhat close to a situation that wouldn't be worthy of a sinking, and that was still a couple of meters of belt overlap.

I doubt a 0,005% chance of something happening is worth reworking the ramming system for. Ramming alone is quite a rare occurance.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[MAD4T]
[MAD4T]
Players
175 posts
3,867 battles

fewer than i would like due to knowing its going to end up in blowing up from scratched paint a lot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[PMI]
Players
2,487 posts
5,898 battles
2 hours ago, SkollUlfr said:

i prefer if when they fly spinning out of the water when they clip a sunk ship just right. though they havnt dont that for a while.

 

which is the same thing to be said about blowing the steering or engine.

you are trying to say i want too much realism, using way more realism than i would ask for in a game where ship speeds are just shy of double what the numbers on screen say they are. 

 

You can argue as much as you like, facts are: the system is fine as is, you dont have to like it, and, WG does not look interested in reworking that, because of the aforementioned fact.

 

You want to speak realism? Lets go for MBH % and the outrageous game we are playing, what do you say?

 

1 hour ago, SkollUlfr said:

fewer than i would like due to knowing its going to end up in blowing up from scratched paint a lot.

 

But its not "scratched paint", we already explained.

 

OK what part of "a ship is made combat ineffective far before it sinks" is too hard for you to grasp. Bellegar even pointed you to it...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[IRQ]
Players
2,753 posts
6,638 battles
5 hours ago, SkollUlfr said:

like 2 dd blowing up going past each other when they are literally barely touching.

DDs are not small ships. They're some 100 m long and 2000-3000 tons.

 

5 hours ago, Lin3 said:

The control tower was anchored to the ground, Whilst ships float in low viscosity fluid. Which makes a difference.

No, it doesn't. Not really. In particular since we're still talking about one floating ship.

 

4 hours ago, SkollUlfr said:

youtube could also teach you that putting several 16 inch holes in a dd would sink the thing by flooding, even without any explosions going off.

What WG counts as flooding is a hole several metres in diameter. A 16 inch hole is a tiny fraction of that, and would do neglible damage.

 

4 hours ago, Ubrael said:

How often do you scrape an inch of your belt on an enemy player, OP?

Interestingly, if you actually do that at very low speeds, you do damage over time, rather than one big explosion that sinks at least one of the ships. This means the ship with the highest current health will survive, and maybe both if they disengage fast enough.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×