yes, another collision model one

[Lusche]

Originally posted by Karnak
Yes, because you filmed them.  If you had seen the film the other guy made or whould have made, then on his it would look like a miss.

That is what you are misunderstanding.  The simulated world we play in is different on each person's version of AH.  Not a lot different, but enough to mean one person collides and the other does not.

It can differ alot, even with otherwise fine and stable connections.

Bronk's pictures were taken when two players with comparatively small pings tested the collision model.

I have recently made the same, but both players had a ping of about 150ms. The result was a much bigger positional difference:







Both pictures show exact the moment of collision!

First picture is from MY film. I tried to ram the enemy P-47.

Second picture is from HIS film. I sincerely doubt that anybody asking for "both should go down" would not complain when he was the Jug driver.

[WMLute]

Originally posted by Lusche
It can differ alot, even with otherwise fine and stable connections.

Bronk's pictures were taken when two players with comparatively small pings tested the collision model.

I have recently made the same, but both players had a ping of about 150ms. The result was a much bigger positional difference:







Both pictures show exact the moment of collision!

First picture is from MY film. I tried to ram the enemy P-47.

Second picture is from HIS film. I sincerely doubt that anybody asking for "both should go down" would not complain when he was the Jug driver.

NOW let's see one with a player with a 30-60 ping vs. a 250-300 ping.

I really don't think any of the "they should both die" people understand just how FAR away you would be and die.

Just for one night HTC should do "both die".  Getting rammed when they are 1-2k away from their opponent would shut 'em up quick and end that line of thinking.

[SD67]

Just for a minute imagine how this would look for two players each with ~250ms pings  like we in Oz have. I know when we go up against the Prawns we see some unusual differences in front end views.
One comes to mind where We were over a base and one came in with a shot at d600 above me but was a HO on his FE. IIRC he missed and vended up killing me with a deflection shot on a scissors but still, the point is, imagine if during the initial merge he clipped my aircraft on his FE. I know I'd not have been happy to die to a collision with an aircraft that was 600yards away from me.

postscript for the HO whiners: Generally I have no problem with the HO
 attack, I usually try to avoid it but I see it as a valid ACM if one is placed in that position. I usually try to merge guns cold if head on, but if I'm upping from a capped base or I'm flying into a sea of red alone, all bets are off


Oh yeah! Flog that Zombie Horse!

[Bronk]

Originally posted by Lusche
It can differ alot, even with otherwise fine and stable connections.

Bronk's pictures were taken when two players with comparatively small pings tested the collision model.

I have recently made the same, but both players had a ping of about 150ms. The result was a much bigger positional difference:







Both pictures show exact the moment of collision!

First picture is from MY film. I tried to ram the enemy P-47.

Second picture is from HIS film. I sincerely doubt that anybody asking for "both should go down" would not complain when he was the Jug driver.

WTG lusche,  now i get to cut and paste your post the next time.

[Scca]

Originally posted by Lusche
It can differ alot, even with otherwise fine and stable connections.

Bronk's pictures were taken when two players with comparatively small pings tested the collision model.

I have recently made the same, but both players had a ping of about 150ms. The result was a much bigger positional difference:







Both pictures show exact the moment of collision!

First picture is from MY film. I tried to ram the enemy P-47.

Second picture is from HIS film. I sincerely doubt that anybody asking for "both should go down" would not complain when he was the Jug driver.

This is another good illustration of the collision model.  I agree, it works as best as anything can given the lag times involved.

If you look at these pictures and still think the collision model is flawed, cancel your subscription, create your own game with the collision model you desire and have a nice day.  

This is just SOOOOOOOOO simple..  I know lab rats that get it...

Sorry, I just get tired of the collision model whiners...

[Yknurd]

Lusche,

Are you using the hi-res packs?

Your planes look really, really good!

[Lusche]

Originally posted by Yknurd
Lusche,

Are you using the hi-res packs?

Yes.

[Ghastly]

Originally posted by Scca

This is just SOOOOOOOOO simple..  I know lab rats that get it...

 

I'll bet if we could use electrical shock training on the players, they'd eventually be as smart as the lab rats.


Or maybe not.

[dedalos]

Originally posted by Scca
This is another good illustration of the collision model.  I agree, it works as best as anything can given the lag times involved.

If you look at these pictures and still think the collision model is flawed, cancel your subscription, create your own game with the collision model you desire and have a nice day.  

This is just SOOOOOOOOO simple..  I know lab rats that get it...

Sorry, I just get tired of the collision model whiners...

That is a good description of the collision model.  Now try the same thing but instead of trying to ram the guy on his tail, dive under him and pull up in front of him at D100 or 200 depending on the lag.  You can take down a formation of buffs by just BnZ ing their flying path, lol.  How fair would that result be since it can be deliberate and deliver no damage to you.

We have to look at both cases, no?  Not just the once that fit our point of view.

[Lusche]

Originally posted by dedalos
That is a good description of the collision model.  Now try the same thing but instead of trying to ram the guy on his tail, dive under him and pull up in front of him at D100 or 200 depending on the lag.  You can take down a formation of buffs by just BnZ ing their flying path, lol.  How fair would that result be since it can be deliberate and deliver no damage to you.

We have to look at both cases, no?  Not just the once that fit our point of view.

The problem is, it's hard to do. You don't now how much lag there is, so you don't now were you(and he is) on his respective front ends. It can happen, but it's rare. Most of the times what appears to be a "ram" is purely unintentional.

I died 2 times today to similar collisions, but it was only a matter of bad luck, it wasn't intentional done by my enemies.

When it happens, it sucks, but it should now be clear for everyone that "both should go down" is absolutely no solution. Only if both go down, ramming does really work, with greatly reduced chances to dodge - it's simply the "Your FE / My FE" problem reversed.

The current solution can't be perfect, because it has to deal with the phenomenom of lag. But it is the best possible one.

[Ghastly]

Originally posted by dedalos
That is a good description of the collision model.  Now try the same thing but instead of trying to ram the guy on his tail, dive under him and pull up in front of him at D100 or 200 depending on the lag.  You can take down a formation of buffs by just BnZ ing their flying path, lol.  How fair would that result be since it can be deliberate and deliver no damage to you.

We have to look at both cases, no?  Not just the once that fit our point of view.

Yes, technically it's possible - but it's AWFULLY hard to time it correctly - you have to account for both lag (an unknown) and relative speeds (another unknown).  I once saw a player who was attempting something very like that in an IL2, and he took out at least myself and one other enemy plane successfully.  (And when it works, it only works once, then pilot who "lost" is onto it and your dead meat).

The less than 1% of the the instances where it can be exploited are hardly worth the turmoil that changing it would cause the other 99% of the time.

[dedalos]

Originally posted by Lusche

When it happens, it sucks, but it should now be clear for everyone that "both should go down" is absolutely no solution. Only if both go down, ramming does really work, with greatly reduced chances to dodge - it's simply the "Your FE / My FE" problem reversed.

 

Not arguing that at all.  What is the drawback of turning it off?  The guys that will hold the trigger and fly through you, do so already.  The only diff (assuming you did not try to get out of the way) would be that if they missed, you would not have to deal with the collision.

There is a little more to just getting out of the way.  Sometimes, even though it is clear on your FE, a micro warp or smoothing coad, or what ever name we want to call it, force an update at the last second that puts his plane in a position to collide.  Its not because you did not try to avoid.  Its because you received an update that changed the location of his plane.  Have you noticed how sometimes the planes seem to move as soon as you pull the trigger?  Something similar to that.

So, the question is, why stop a fight or the fun because that reason.  Tuening it off is one solution.  Maybe another would be to make sure it was a hard collision.  Meaning, it was not his aileron hitting your wing but maybe the centers of the planes?

[Lusche]

Turning collsions off is the end of ACM as we know it. No need to be careful, just fly guns blazing through your enemies - there is no risk involved. Especially the buff drivers would thank you for sure...

Originally posted by dedalos
Maybe another would be to make sure it was a hard collision.  Meaning, it was not his aileron hitting your wing but maybe the centers of the planes?

No big difference. He rams you, you go down without any collision on your screen. Would be very easy to do when attacking buffs.

[Ghastly]

What is the drawback of turning it off?

The biggest drawback is that to point your nose at an enemy aircraft and maneuver into him such that you fly right through him while holding down your trigger requires no skill at all-  it completely eliminates the second hardest part of getting a gunnery solution, which is to not kill yourself while you are at it.  

Right now, the guys who TRY to hold down the trigger and fly right through you usually die in the process - they might kill you some of the time but they usually die in the immanent collision almost all of the time.  Like lab rats, they then start to learn that they probably need to do something different in order to survive the engagement.

But what you are proposing is to take away the only downside in order to "resolve" a relatively minor issue where we currently accept a less than perfect game experience in exchange for the ability to play with other people at disparate worldly locations - an issue that only mostly the uninformed argue is a problem to begin with.  

It would destroy any semblance of realism - real life defensive maneuvers would work poorly at best, and realistic attack methods would be far less effective than the totally artificial "collision gunnery pass".

In short, it totally suck...

That's why!

EDIT -> Lusche keeps beatin' me to it!

[dedalos]

Originally posted by Ghastly
The biggest drawback is that to point your nose at an enemy aircraft and maneuver into him such that you fly right through him while holding down your trigger requires no skill at all-  it completely eliminates the second hardest part of getting a gunnery solution, which is to not kill yourself while you are at it.  
 

Yes, I agree with that. My point is that they are doing that now anyway.  Not to mention that you should be trying to get out of the way collisions or not.  It would take 2 to do the fly straight on thingie.