Jump to content

Recommended Posts

You can call people snowflakes and SJW's all you want. That's not going to magically make them agree with you. I don't even think you know what a snowflake or SJW is, the way you recklessly throw them terms around (maybe you're just trying to be trendy because that's what the cool kids say?).

 

Anyways, you just sound like a little kid who''s feelings are hurt because he can't get his way.

 

You gave your opinions on the subject, that should be enough.

 

[Edited]

 

No...........

Edited by Bearcat

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Long story short, there are many reasons that make the case for a ram. You don't do it just because you want to end the fun of somebody, you do it because you need to, in your mission context or even for your own survival.

 

like it or not, it is like that as it was in the real war.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And you gave your opinions on the subject. I thought that was enough... but then you posted again. Oh, the irony. ;)

 

The point is not that I cannot get my way, I can. (Unless I am shot down before ramming the other plane, but then that's part of the game, isn't it?)  The point, especially in calling out some as SJWs, is that they don't want the other guy getting his way simply because they don't like his way. They call people trolls and want the thread locked. That's pure SJW snowflake talk from people who are frightened by words.

 

If you don't want to ram another plane, then don't. That's easy enough. But don't whine and moan if the other guy choses to do it.

Try to re-read the OP... This is about AI behavior. Not about your personal crusade to ram people and call them names if they don't like it. War Thunder awaits you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Try to re-read the OP... This is about AI behavior. Not about your personal crusade to ram people and call them names if they don't like it. War Thunder awaits you.

 

I read the OP carefully, both sentences, and I supported the idea of the AI being able to ram other planes. Difficult to implement properly, I would imagine - I'm not a programmer - but it would add spice to the game.

 

WT holds not interest for me. I'm staying here with you. :friends:

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I read the OP carefully, both sentences, and I supported the idea of the AI being able to ram other planes. Difficult to implement properly, I would imagine - I'm not a programmer - but it would add spice to the game.

 

WT holds not interest for me. I'm staying here with you. :friends:

Just trying to help you out bud. War Thunder seem more your caliber. :salute:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just trying to help you out bud. War Thunder seem more your caliber. :salute:

It doesn't, he plays offline ;)

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've done a lot of online flying and aside from the technical differences in the quality of the representation between this combat flightsim and that combat flightsim, it's all the same.

 

And one thing you will never hear from me, notwithstanding my distaste for vulching, is the kind of whining that's being heard in this thread. I'll leave to the snowflakes. 

 

So Vulching is something to be looked down upon as distasteful, but Ramming is all good...lol.  

 

You really should have kept that one to yourself, because it really undercuts your arguments against the need for "etiquette" in an online server that simulates war, death, and destruction.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just trying to help you out bud. War Thunder seem more your caliber. :salute:

 

And I appreciate you trying to help me out. But people fly from a third-person point of view in WT from what I've seen on youtube. That is so gross.

 

I like highly detailed cockpits and FMs. BOX is it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Boom!

 

 

Well, Staiger, is correct, I shouldn't feed the Troll (despite it being somewhat fun to watch a blowhard twist himself into knots).  I will part with one final thought however:  If you ever do decide to actually play this game online, instead of just putting forth controversial hypotheticals, I'm fairly confident that the most common thing you will see go "boom" is your own aircraft.  Some of those "snowflakes" can be pretty deadly.

Edited by Iceworm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, Staiger, is correct, I shouldn't feed the Troll.  I will part with one final thought however:  If you ever do decide to actually play this game online, instead of just putting forth controversial hypotethicals, I'm fairly confident that the most common thing you will see go "boom" is your own aircraft.  Those "snowflakes" can be pretty deadly.

 

It's not a hypothetical because, since all combat flightsims are essentially of the same nature, and I have flown a great deal online, my opinion, shared by others, is valid whether you approve of it or not.

 

As for this business of calling people trolls who you don't agree with and wanting to shut down conversation, that is simply fear of words and discomfort with open conversation on the part of the person taking to that tactic. It's intellectual cowardice, nothing more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Exactly! And in F1 there are cases of ramming to win a championship or help the team. So you just felt on your own argument.

It seems you are still not getting my point about people generally not willing to die just for destroying something? I don't fully get what you mean that "I felt for my own argument"? You mean, if F1 drivers feel that their tires are getting worn out, they often just choose to ram another driver instead of going to pit stop to change tires? That is level of argument here for reasons of aerial ramming. I know that intentional ramming has happened in F1 and that intentional aerial ramming happened in WWII, but the argumentation or reasoning for that tactics, which often also meant actual death, is comparable to claiming that it is a common habit in F1 to ram drivers out of the way, if not being able to overtake them by passing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems you are still not getting my point about people generally not willing to die just for destroying something? I don't fully get what you mean that "I felt for my own argument"? You mean, if F1 drivers feel that their tires are getting worn out, they often just choose to ram another driver instead of going to pit stop to change tires? That is level of argument here for reasons of aerial ramming. I know that intentional ramming has happened in F1 and that intentional aerial ramming happened in WWII, but the argumentation or reasoning for that tactics, which often also meant actual death, is comparable to claiming that it is a common habit in F1 to ram drivers out of the way, if not being able to overtake them by passing.

 

So let's try to be clearer.

 

1. It is STUPID to ram just for the sake of it. I agree and everyone that preceded me on this topic agree.

2. One won't just ram in F1 because of the tyres or anything minor, as well as one wouldn't in this sim. One would ram mainly because you need to achieve a bigger goal, whether it is to win a championship in F1 (yes, this happened), or to save the life of a fellow soldier in an air combat. There are more probable reasons, like trying to stay alive if you can't outrun your enemy, so you attack with the last weapon you have, in your own terms, and this way with less risk to your life.

 

There were many cases of ramming that didn't end up in death for the ramming pilot. It's a risk, but sometimes is the lesser risk, and when this time comes, you need to make a decision. This decision might be sometimes to ram.

 

Is that clear?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Long story short, there are many reasons that make the case for a ram. You don't do it just because you want to end the fun of somebody, you do it because you need to, in your mission context or even for your own survival.

 

like it or not, it is like that as it was in the real war.

So, for what reasons would you be willing to just die, in real life? About, "as it was in real war", according to Wikipedia there were 636 reposted taran cases during WWII. Many of which were also quite probably false claims. That is about the same amount that is claimed by only two German pilots during the war. And the probability of ramming in this game is already now way higher than it was in real life, without any extra effort from devs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

And the probability of ramming in this game is already now way higher than it was in real life, without any extra effort from devs.

 

So is the number of pilots killed magically coming back to life to fly again and again and again. That didn't happen often in real life as far as I know.

 

Now if someone hosts a server where if you die in the game you are out of the game, period, at least for the night, that could be interesting. Would you want to be part of that game, or do you want the wheel of samsara to keep turning for you so you can keep flying? My guess is the vast majority of people who say they do not want anyone to ram them, still want to pop back to life a minute later after they have ended the last one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Taran was never a formalized doctrine AFAIK, ]

It was - even if unwritten.

In fact I watched an interview with a modern Russian jet pilot back in the 80's who was talking about it (during WWII) and he said - right from his mouth that it was still a valid tactic with their modern AC and doctrine.

That's flying the MiG 21 at the time.

 

I would be surprised if current Russian pilots are of the same mind, but I don't know.

...now maybe that pilot was incorrect - but I clearly remember that interview.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So is the number of pilots killed magically coming back to life to fly again and again and again. That didn't happen often in real life as far as I know.

Exactly. That is why real pilots did not ram just because they were out of ammo, as you are advocating. Dying for real did not seem as fun for them as e-dying seems to be for you.

 

Now if someone hosts a server where if you die in the game you are out of the game, period, at least for the night, that could be interesting. Would you want to be part of that game, or do you want the wheel of samsara to keep turning for you so you can keep flying? My guess is the vast majority of people who say they do not want anyone to ram them, still want to pop back to life a minute later after they have ended the last one.

I can tell you that flying in SEOW campaigns, where dying meant your game was over for that night, definitely gave deeper simulation experience than being able to just respawn over and over again. Obviously a computer game can never simulate the real fear of death and things like that, but that is not a good enough reason for me to flush all the other simulatable things down the toilet, too. I can also understand that other people might like more arcade approach (I have heard that Super Mario Kart was very popular), but it gets silly when these people try to argument that this arcadish approach is "like real war" or "simulating" reality somehow.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, for what reasons would you be willing to just die, in real life? About, "as it was in real war", according to Wikipedia there were 636 reposted taran cases during WWII. Many of which were also quite probably false claims. That is about the same amount that is claimed by only two German pilots during the war. And the probability of ramming in this game is already now way higher than it was in real life, without any extra effort from devs.

I don't know the reasons I would be willing to die and surely hope that nor me or you would ever need to find it out.

 

My answer to the rest is the same as of CanadaOne's. This is a simulator and things are ALWAYS augmented. You didn't have the offensiveness that you see in the game during the war. 

Exactly. That is why real pilots did not ram just because they were out of ammo, as you are advocating. Dying for real did not seem as fun for them as e-dying seems to be for you.

 

 

I can tell you that flying in SEOW campaigns, where dying meant your game was over for that night, definitely gave deeper simulation experience than being able to just respawn over and over again. Obviously a computer game can never simulate the real fear of death and things like that, but that is not a good enough reason for me to flush all the other simulatable things down the toilet, too. I can also understand that other people might like more arcade approach (I have heard that Super Mario Kart was very popular), but it gets silly when these people try to argument that this arcadish approach is "like real war" or "simulating" reality somehow.

Nobody said it's like real war. We are just saying that it has happened and that there are reasons for it to happen from time to time. And that's a fact!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Exactly. That is why real pilots did not ram just because they were out of ammo, as you are advocating. Dying for real did not seem as fun for them as e-dying seems to be for you.

 

 

 

I'm of the opinion that e-dying matters little to anyone here. Unless, of course, they enjoyed the graphical feast of the flames and smoke as they lawn darted. I admit to having found it a captivating light show, albeit an e-fatal one. 

 

 

 

I can tell you that flying in SEOW campaigns, where dying meant your game was over for that night, definitely gave deeper simulation experience than being able to just respawn over and over again. Obviously a computer game can never simulate the real fear of death and things like that, but that is not a good enough reason for me to flush all the other simulatable things down the toilet, too. I can also understand that other people might like more arcade approach (I have heard that Super Mario Kart was very popular), but it gets silly when these people try to argument that this arcadish approach is "like real war" or "simulating" reality somehow.

 

 

Given that all of us are warm and safe in our homes, at our desks, playing make believe war with make believe airplanes - decades after the fact, as it were -  there is a reasonable expectation of latitude in the interpretation of how real one thinks the simulation should be. If you are going to allow for your virtual bullets and bombs to sow virtual destruction upon all around you, it might be a bit... stifled, to insinuate a lower motivation upon he who would fly his virtual airplane into your virtual your virtual airplane with the same gusto as you would have filled his with smoking hot virtual cannon fire.

 

Breathe, gentlemen. ;)

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm of the opinion that e-dying matters little to anyone here. Unless, of course, they enjoyed the graphical feast of the flames and smoke as they lawn darted. I admit to having found it a captivating light show, albeit an e-fatal one.

 

 

I said above that I wasn't going to come back to this thread, but this deserves a comment.  Lots of people who play BoX as a simulation, do indeed value virtual lives.  There are many of us, quite a lot actually, who are of the opinion that one of the best tests of skill, and one of the most rewarding aspects of the game, is seeing how successful you can be without "dying".   Sure, it's a video game, played for entertainment and enjoyment, but as Kemp says, that doesn't mean we need to treat it like Mario Brothers.  The easiest thing to do in an online air combat sim is to 'die'.

Edited by Iceworm
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you are going to allow for your virtual bullets and bombs to sow virtual destruction upon all around you, it might be a bit... stifled, to insinuate a lower motivation upon he who would fly his virtual airplane into your virtual your virtual airplane with the same gusto as you would have filled his with smoking hot virtual cannon fire.

So, you have trouble understanding the difference from "simulation" point of view? When simulating WWII, where real cannons shot down real planes, real bombs destroyed real trains etc, by having virtual cannons shooting down virtual planes and virtual bombs blowing up virtual trains, compared to situation where most of the real pilots actually cared about their lives vs virtual pilots being willing to die virtually for minimal reasons?

To make it more simple for you, one case is doing virtually something that was reality. That is simulation. The other case is doing something virtually that was not reality. That is not simulation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I said above that I wasn't going to come back to this thread, but this deserves a comment.  Lots of people who play BoX as a simulation, do indeed value virtual lives.  There are many of us, quite a lot actually, who are of the opinion that one of the best tests of skill, and one of the most rewarding aspects of the game, is seeing how successful you can be without "dying".   Sure, it's a video game, played for entertainment and enjoyment, but as Kemp says, that doesn't mean we need to treat it like Mario Brothers.  The easiest thing to do in an online air combat sim is to 'die'.

 

Agreed.

 

But that does not negate the idea of flying your plane into another guy's plane in order to, at least, take him with you.

 

I believe it was Churchill who made a remark along similar lines as to what a good Englishman could do if the Nazis made it past the beaches in Operation Sea Lion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agreed.

 

But that does not negate the idea of flying your plane into another guy's plane in order to, at least, take him with you.

 

I believe it was Churchill who made a remark along similar lines as to what a good Englishman could do if the Nazis made it past the beaches in Operation Sea Lion.

 

So you gleefully piss someone off by ramming them, and then simply respawn for the 10th time that night..and I guess you'll just keep repeating it.   What an E-Hero. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, you have trouble understanding the difference from "simulation" point of view? When simulating WWII, where real cannons shot down real planes, real bombs destroyed real trains etc, by having virtual cannons shooting down virtual planes and virtual bombs blowing up virtual trains, compared to situation where most of the real pilots actually cared about their lives vs virtual pilots being willing to die virtually for minimal reasons?

To make it more simple for you, one case is doing virtually something that was reality. That is simulation. The other case is doing something virtually that was not reality. That is not simulation.

 

If you are saying that no pilots rammed their planes into other planes in WWII, you are wrong. I believe we are all in agreement that it did happen. It was real, and if done in game, even for reasons you disapprove of or do not fully comprehend, it is simulating reality.

 

Again, I am not talking about just flying around ramming your plane into other planes as a form of entertainment. Everyone agrees that is pretty useless. I'm talking about ramming your plane into someone who is trying very hard to end you.

 

If that is out of bounds as far as virtual ethical behavior goes, how do people on your side of the fence feel about it when someone sneaks up on your six, or comes diving in from a thousand meters overhead, and just shreds you to bits with zero notice? Was he supposed to call up the Marquis of Queensbury, prior to his attack, and ask if his actions are acceptable? 

So you gleefully piss someone off by ramming them, and then simply respawn for the 10th time that night..and I guess you'll just keep repeating it.   What an E-Hero. 

 

We're all e-heros my e-friend, and all e-heros respawn.

 

And if you don't want the guy you are engaged in A2A with you to ram you... wait for it... wait for it...

 

Shoot him down!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And if you don't want the guy you are engaged in A2A with you to ram you... wait for it... wait for it...

 

Shoot him down!

Or vulch him before he’s a threat. You should see a lot of that if you start ramming people once you get online.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Or vulch him before he’s a threat. You should see a lot of that if you start ramming people once you get online.

 

Vulching is pointless. It's little more than a digital cheat, taking advantage of the way the game is coded for the planes to respawn.

 

And it's not a question of "ramming people". No one here, on either side of the issue, thinks it's a good idea to just go out and ram planes, and respawn, then go ram more planes. That's also kind of pointless. We are speaking to a limited set of circumstances, where, when engaged in A2A, and at some kind of disadvantage - out of ammo, smoking and burning, mostly defenceless - the player at a disadvantage choses to take the other guy down with him instead of going down alone.

 

I will repeat, and I think this is the golden phrase for this issue: If you don't want the guy to ram you - shoot him down!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Exactly. That is why real pilots did not ram just because they were out of ammo,

 

Except when they did.

This is a profoundly stupid debate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Except when they did.

This is a profoundly stupid debate.

 

Welcome to the Interweb. :cool:

 

A question for those on the other side of the aisle. I glossed over it perhaps because it seems so obvious:

 

Player G is in a 109. Player R is in an La5. They are going at it A2A. Player G has ammo left and his plane is sound. Player R has no ammo and he is smoking.

 

Is it not true that if the out-of-ammo La5 manages to get into a position where he is able to ram the still-has-ammo 109, that means Player R in the La5 is a better pilot because Player G in the 109 with ammo could not gain the advantage? Player G in the 109 should be able to kill the La5 at a distance with bullets, whereas the La5 has to get up close and personal to do any damage at all?

 

What excuse does Player G in the 109 have not to have been able to shoot down the out-of-ammo Player R in the La5?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it not true that if the out-of-ammo La5 manages to get into a position where he is able to ram the still-has-ammo 109, that means Player R in the La5 is a better pilot because Player G in the 109 with ammo could not gain the advantage?

Unfortunately after all this discussion you still did not get the point from the other side of the aisle. It has nothing to do with who is the better pilot. But player R in this example definitely demonstrates great E-courage by putting his valuable E-life at risk. Just like in real life, where people prefer to die to show to their opponents that they are better pilots. Right.

But I guess we have gone through those circles a few times already and the point is not getting through, so there is no point of doing another round of the same.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

What excuse does Player G in the 109 have not to have been able to shoot down the out-of-ammo Player R in the La5?

 

I have one...Maybe he lost sight of the La-5 and couldn't shoot him down because he was too busy face-palming himself:

 

picard-facepalm.jpg

Edited by Iceworm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sounds like the guy who got rammed in the scenario I mentioned was simply not the better pilot and it's sour grapes on his part. He's just a whiner.

 

Oh well.

 

 

st%2Csmall%2C215x235-pad%2C210x230%2Cf8f

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Winner for inane thread of the month.

What's lost on a few of you is how difficult it is to ram another player intentionally, especially with limited sensory input compared to real life.

 

Some of you act like it's an "out of ammo, therefore ram = auto kill" equation.

Ironically ramming someone is a LOT harder than putting rounds on them...thus I fail to see why a few of you got your underwear in such a tangle

over what is really a non-issue. Even if you're trailing smoke you have enough time to eject, and if you don't need to eject then you

have enough control authority to avoid being crashed into by another aircraft for crying out loud.

If you're inept enough to get hit by basically a several thousand pound, slow, sluggish projectile then you deserve to die.

 

Reminds me of the time some guy in the old sim moaned because I shot him down with rockets in mid-air...nevermind how hard that is to pull off.

In his mind I "cheated", at no time did it occur to him that maybe he was in error allowing me to set there for long enough to set that shot up and pull it off.

  • Upvote 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Winner for inane thread of the month.

What's lost on a few of you is how difficult it is to ram another player intentionally, especially with limited sensory input compared to real life.

 

Some of you act like it's an "out of ammo, therefore ram = auto kill" equation.

Ironically ramming someone is a LOT harder than putting rounds on them...thus I fail to see why a few of you got your underwear in such a tangle

over what is really a non-issue. Even if you're trailing smoke you have enough time to eject, and if you don't need to eject then you

have enough control authority to avoid being crashed into by another aircraft for crying out loud.

If you're inept enough to get hit by basically a several thousand pound, slow, sluggish projectile then you deserve to die.

 

Reminds me of the time some guy in the old sim moaned because I shot him down with rockets in mid-air...nevermind how hard that is to pull off.

In his mind I "cheated", at no time did it occur to him that maybe he was in error allowing me to set there for long enough to set that shot up and pull it off.

 

Amen brother!

 

If someone in a smoky leaky plane with no ammo can take the other guy out while the other guy still has ammo... double points and a beer for just flat out flying skill. :drinks:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Vulching is pointless. It's little more than a digital cheat, taking advantage of the way the game is coded for the planes to respawn.

 

And ramming is just a digital cheat that takes advantage of the fact that you’re not actually increasing your odds of dying by crashing into an enemy aircraft. So get ready for lots of vulching if you start ramming.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Winner for inane thread of the month.

 

And what's really inane is all these apparently offline-only (such as you Gambit, where are your stats at?) players telling online players what should be considered acceptable etiquette in an online server.   I'll bet the AI is terrified of you guys.

 

 

 

And ramming is just a digital cheat that takes advantage of the fact that you’re not actually increasing your odds of dying by crashing into an enemy aircraft. So get ready for lots of vulching if you start ramming.

 

yeah, but I think it's doubtful that we're ever going to see these guys online in a multiplayer environment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And what's really inane is all these apparently offline-only (such as you Gambit, where are your stats at?) players telling online players what should be considered acceptable etiquette in an online server.   I'll bet the AI is terrified of you guys.

 

 

 

Dude I flew for years in the old IL2, built and hosted CoOps for a long time...I'm spending my time right now building missions and will be back online when Bodenplatte hits, or at the latest PTO.

What does that have to do with the price of tea in China?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, that seems to be a common theme....well, I *used* to fly online in something that was similar

 

I don't care how cool you thought you were being a ramming spoilsport back in IL-2 1946, years ago...you shouldn't be lecturing active online players on what is "hard" in this game, or what is "easy" or what is "acceptable" against human opponents in the current online server scene. 

Edited by Iceworm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, that seems to be a common theme....well, I *used* to fly online.

 

I don't care how cool you thought you were being a rammer back in IL-2 1946, years ago...you shouldn't be lecturing active online players on what is "hard" in this game, or what is "easy" or what is "acceptable" against human opponents in the current online server scene.

 

Iceworm, I seriously didn't intent to traumatize you, stress you, or cause your fear of this ramming prospect to increase beyond your ability to manage it.

I looks I did just this and I apologize.

 

Clearly this whole thing touches a nerve with you and you feel particularly vulnerable or at risk from these theoretical rammers.

I was not sensitive to this - and I'm so, so sorry. I hope you can forgive me.

I said my piece...better things to do now.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, the nerve it touches is that I absolutely *hate* to see simulations like this, which i absolutelly love, get overrun by people who really want it to be just another shoot-em-up, ram 'em, arcade fest.  There is already more than enough jerkish behavior, unwelcomed by what I believe are the majority of players in the MP environment as it is, and the last thing we need to do is promote more of it.

Edited by Iceworm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In all seriousness though Iceworm, I don't think there's a danger of that.

I don't ever remember seeing it once in years past...I'm not saying it never happened....but I spent a lot of time flying online and I personally never saw it.

So maybe it's not worth arguing about at this juncture.

 

Edit: Also again, I think it's much too difficult to every be considered a "cheat" as it were.

I personally would never do it, but if I fell victim to it then I probably made a big mistake.

Edited by Gambit21

Share this post


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

×
×
  • Create New...