Destroyed Trampler Change Suggestion

[coral spindle]

I don't understand why do people keep asking for changes that prevent people from staying in their destroyed trampler. Just kill them??? They cannot respawn! If they are staying on their cannons they are trivial to kill, while they cannot even see where they are shooting due to the smoke.

Meanwhile, allowing the crew 1 last life after their trampler is destroyed makes for some really fun clutch comebacks if the enemy is dumb

[formal helm]

Because its nonsensical that you kill a trampler just to immediately lose urs bcs they already had their cannons aimed at u thru the smoke

whats the point of killing tramplers if urr gonna lose ur own one

[coral spindle]

If you immediately lose that's because your reactor was already 1hp. You shouldn't let it get to that, that's part of the skill

[formal helm]

according to that logic u should just be able to go into raid with no trampler and set up a cannon on the ground...

[coral spindle]

Wait until you see that there actually ARE cannons on the ground that you can shoot in this game lol

[formal helm]

Straw man fallacy

[craggy fiber]

Just naming buzzwords atp

[coral spindle]

lol do you know what that means, you're just saying things now

[craggy fiber]

how is ensuring no-one extracts a clutch?

[formal helm]

its just low honor game play, u lost ur trampler so ur worst, therefore u should lose or at least delay the ability to immediatly relaiate

also board is still a thing u dont need cannons

[coral spindle]

You can kill their trampler and then win a on-foot fight without them having respawns, for example. You get to live, they don't. You don't need a trampler to extract

[formal helm]

u need it to exctract with any significant loot

[coral spindle]

Again, that's not really my point, my point is that this is such a rare silly edge case of "our reactor was at 1 hp and when their trampler exploded (which randomly destroys cannons) it just so happened that the cannon that didn't get destroyed was already pre-pointed at our one hp reactor so they shot it blindly through the smoke and it got destroyed", it's not worth sacrificing potentially interesting (or funny) plays being possible just to avoid it.

[formal helm]

i aint reading allat

[next stump]

repair your reactor

You haven't won until you've killed all the crew.

What's next? Destroying the trampler should instantly kill all enemy players because what if they board your trampler and kill you and capture it

[craggy fiber]

Slipperly Slope fallacy

[next stump]

It's the same end result. There's nothing wrong with both tramplers being destroyed tbh, and I quite like that fights continue despite the reactor going down.

[craggy fiber]

Why spawn with them then?

[formal helm]

clearly havent experienced it

[next stump]

... how exactly do you intend to travel or loot anything without a trampler?

[ivory ledge]

that is exactly our point

[next stump]

"You shouldn't spawn with a trampler because it can die" is a stupid point

[formal helm]

ad hominem fallacy

[craggy fiber]

but having both tramplers destroyed is not bad so why need them in the first place

just run around with a shelf

[ivory ledge]

false dilemma fallacy

[formal helm]

have u ever played eft, once u kill someone they cant kill u from beyond the grave

[next stump]

actually they can

what if they chucked a grenade at you. Also, you haven't killed them

[craggy fiber]

What if fallacy

[next stump]

False equivalence fallacy because you're comparing killing a player to not killing the player :)

[formal helm]

the trampler is the equivalent of the player

[ivory ledge]

false equivilence fallacy

[next stump]

It is not. The player is the equivalent of the player

The trampler is a vehicle the players use. Destroying parts of the vehicle doesn't mean the players are dead

[formal helm]

im not saying u cant shoot the cannons, just u need to fix them first or wait a bit

[next stump]

If you destroyed a players body armor in EFT that doesn't mean their guns should break nor does it mean they are dead

anyway, I fundamentally disagree. I think the continuation of combat is fun. I would rather that destroying the Reactor didn't kill the trampler and you had to destroy all the functional parts of the trampler to fully kill the enemy crew.

I've done plenty of pvp where the fights have gone on for quite a while after killing the trampler and I think it adds another interesting layer to the fight instead of just instantly ending because you sniped their reactor.

[formal helm]

yeah and i dont disagree with that, im just saying after the trampler is destryed the cannons shouldnt still magically be working

[next stump]

I don't see why not. The cannons don't depend on the reactor at all, it doesn't need to be on for them to shoot

[formal helm]

u should need to at least repair them or smth

[formal helm]

have u seen how big the explosion is

[next stump]

Maybe if there were energized turrets of some kind i could see them not being functional anymore, the railgun probably should need the reactor to fire, maybe.

and tbqh you're just going to be a free kill if you have to stand still to repair a cannon

someones going to whip out an m82 or a petros and click on your head

I mean, we do that anyway just to people still on the guns but, you know, they're still going to die they're just not going to be able to shoot before they die.