Author Topic: Collision Model (Read 1490 times)

Viper9th · « **Reply #30 on:** May 12, 2006, 01:45:14 PM »

Ive collided loads, but mainly because they miss, or run out of ammo and ram me, such as SHawk's ram with me yesterday in my 262, we went HO, got his wing we rammed and we killed eachother, I pulled away but the ram still counted. It also matters what the player on the other end sees, like he could have lag and see something else and you ram him but he doesn't die, happens alot to me

Lye-El · « **Reply #31 on:** May 12, 2006, 04:28:10 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by E25280

In the AvA during the Pacific set, I landed a zeke on the deck of a carrier, and a squaddie landed shortly thereafter. While I waited for the reload, I look to my right, and squaddie is sitting there, a few hundred feet off to my right, hovering in mid air.

I have seen planes do the hover over water thing from carriers in the MA several times myself.

helbent · « **Reply #32 on:** May 12, 2006, 05:19:14 PM »

Yesterday, I rolled from the cv to 19. I engaged a con when I spotted a nik divin on me hot. I was at such disadvantage I chose to take the head-on pass with the nik in my seafire. (not smart, but besides the point) I get a couple hits on him and he pulls up in to me and collides. I get a message saying whoever has collided with you. As a result my spit lost elevators. So as I start kickin in rudder, I look behind me and see him on the way into the drink, yet he pulls out and flys away. I said, aint that some mess. Oh well lets see if we can it get home. OMWB to the cv i see the guy lands 2 kills after colliding with me. Lovely. Inb the cv it starts to turn, so i decide to try for the ditch, didnt work yayy.

It was no innocent pass on my part, mind you. But, I was a little annoyed that he had collided, scored a victory or 2 and was able to land. There was no messg saying that I had collided with him, yet Im down an elevator and end up crashing.

-helbound

hubsonfire · « **Reply #33 on:** May 12, 2006, 06:55:20 PM »

Helbound, you took damage from guns. Since we don't know what his FE saw, we can't tell if he took serious damage (flight surfaces, engine oil, PW, etc), or if he just made enough contact to knock off the tailwheel or something minor.

If you received the "Soandso collided with you message", but did not receive a "You have collided" message, and took damage, you took that damage from weapons, not from the collision. He, in this instance, would have taken damage from the collision, but not necessarily serious damage.

Sometimes you'll lose a wing when you ram, sometimes something useless like flaps or landing gear, but only the guy whose system registers the collision takes damage from it. Mind you, there are situations in which both PCs register a collision (normally one right after the other), and in these instances both planes will receive damage, since both FEs decide that the player occupied the space currently filled with the other guy's plane, but this doesn't sound like what happened in your case.

Clear as mud?

Docc · « **Reply #34 on:** May 12, 2006, 09:56:24 PM »

Hubks, why don't you and I do a test ?

You seem to be the most vociferous of the few defenders of the collision model, and I (along with many others) believe there are inherent inequities in it and would like to make it better.

We can meet in the DA any day and any time between 8am and 1pm your time (US central time?). We will fly and film 6 flights in C47s (no guns).

Each of us will:

1. attempt a nose to tail collision or near miss until one of us sees a collision

2. nose to nose near miss (until one of us sees a collision)

3. 90 degree hit

Lets see who gets the collision messages and the damage.

We will both film all flights and send each other the films. If/when a problem exhibits itself we can send the films to HTC.

I live 13 hours ahead of you and fly with lag all the time.

Pick a day and a time and let me know.

hubsonfire · « **Reply #35 on:** May 12, 2006, 10:31:39 PM »

Actually Docc, how about we don't? I personally find attempting to explain anything or communicate with you to be unpleasant at best, and absolutely frustrating at worst. Despite repeated explanations by the game designer, and seeing the actual code, you still maintain that it's broken, that what I see on a daily basis is impossible, that what you see didn't happen, and that the guy who wrote the code is an idiot.

I already know how the code works, and I know it's implications in the game. I have no reason to believe you will accept the results in good faith, nor do I think you will be any more reasonable, nor any less of an outspoken critic of the system.

For these reasons, I'm going to refuse to participate in your test, and I honestly hope your frustration and inability to understand (or at least accept) how things work in the game eventually drive you to either quit criticizing the normal function of a system within the game that you refuse to accept as such (best for all involved), or quit altogether (good enough for me). It makes no difference to me, so long as I don't have to listen to the same BS every time I log in. When someone provides a strong case for the collision model malfunctioning (ie posts film, or details a scenario which we can all replicate), I might be more willing to discuss the matter, but until such time, I'll let you and "the many others" who think it's broken work yourselves into a frenzy.

Good day.

Docc · « **Reply #36 on:** May 12, 2006, 11:05:28 PM »

Ok, so a test in a controlled environment that might prove either of us right or wrong is not to your liking. You want to see other people's test results so you can dispute the results if/when necessary.

There are lots of things in this game that do not work as intended at all times for various reasons: look at the Bug report forum, gvs that can't be killed at times, AI acks that don't fire at enemies, rubber bullets, positional discrepancies.......the collision model is another.

I don't think HT is an idiot nor have I called anyone an idiot.....you did. We are just trying resolve an game issue that many people have a problem with in a reasonable way.

The offer remains open.

Brenjen · « **Reply #37 on:** May 12, 2006, 11:14:31 PM »

I'll do it Docc. If only to give you a good picture of how it works. Is the collision model the same in the DA as it is in the MA? I would hate to waste my time trying to film an accurate representation of how it works only to find out it's different in the DA.

Edit: You can PM me to set up the details if you like. I will be free all day tomorrow.

helbent · « **Reply #38 on:** May 13, 2006, 05:03:07 PM »

well, hubs, thats a possible explanation i geuss thx. I didnt hear or see a shot from the rammer in question, but I really dont worry about the small stuff so much. Im just working on my post numbers i geuss.

Docc did mention rubber bullets, thats a funny thing. It happens to everyone (I think) so its all good. Seems to occur in cycles of 1 week on 3 weeks off =). Now you may come at me with connex stuff this and that, but I do believe rubber bullets is a pox that affects everyone sooner or later.

Bender

BTW, thats no ordinary rabbit

DoKGonZo · « **Reply #39 on:** May 13, 2006, 11:02:13 PM »

FWIW I've seen some very suspicious collisions (Spits running into IL2's and suffering no damage, etc.) lately. Making them more suspicious is the people who seem to land multiple kills despite sometimes having multiple collisions in a sortie. And a lot of these guys don't fire guns during the attempt, which is a give away - no tracers, no sparks on the barrel, no firing sound.

As good as the collision code is, with lag and all it's not impossible that some players have found a way to trick the system.

WldThing · « **Reply #40 on:** May 13, 2006, 11:41:21 PM »

Ovr so many longg years ive comet o realize that this game is awsome, and that the collision model should d be klept the way it alwaus has been.

ok yeah i love aces high.

MIShill · « **Reply #41 on:** May 14, 2006, 01:40:26 AM »

This has actually been a pretty good thread. Could someone now say something really stupid or offensive and get it onto a more useless track. BTW, thank tou all for an explanation that helps me at least accept, if not enjoy, the model.

.-MI-{Shillelagh}

SHawk · « **Reply #42 on:** May 14, 2006, 12:48:42 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Viper9th
Ive collided loads, but mainly because they miss, or run out of ammo and ram me, such as SHawk's ram with me yesterday in my 262, we went HO, got his wing we rammed and we killed eachother, I pulled away but the ram still counted. It also matters what the player on the other end sees, like he could have lag and see something else and you ram him but he doesn't die, happens alot to me

Sorry Viper9th, but that was a HO shot, we did NOT collide with anything but bullets. No collision message on my FE and I'm quite sure there was none on yours.

Simaril · « **Reply #43 on:** May 15, 2006, 07:36:49 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Docc

There are lots of things in this game that do not work as intended at all times for various reasons: look at the Bug report forum, gvs that can't be killed at times, AI acks that don't fire at enemies, rubber bullets, positional discrepancies.......the collision model is another.

I don't think HT is an idiot nor have I called anyone an idiot.....you did. We are just trying resolve an game issue that many people have a problem with in a reasonable way.

The offer remains open.

Have you set things up with brenjen yet? I would love to see BOTH films posted. I think you'll find the results revealing, Docc.

DOnt pick on hub -- he's not the most vociferous defender of the collision model, he's the most patient. I thought this thread was dead after you said,

Quote

"Until I have some films, I have said all I am going to say on the subject."

Where are the films?

I guess you changed your mind, becasue you're still strutting....and insisting that you are right and more experienced players (with literally THOUSANDS of hours more AH time, and more opportunity to see this "problem" you claim is so pervasive) tell you your perceptions are wrong.

And thats why Hub declined your offer. If you're rigidly ranting about the collision model after all this, you are a fanatic -- "someone who wont change his mind and cant change the subject" in the words of Churchill.

Please hush up unitl you have some proof.

BTW, "bugs" usually happen when 2 areas of code interact in unexpected ways. What HT has told you precludes the chance of such a bug: the damage code occurs in onlyone place, and it is only ABLE to assign damage to the plane that hits on its own front end. Your bug theory would require the program to write its own code secretly, assigning damage to the other plane...and thats not logical, thats magical voodoo thinking. Dont expect others to take that seriously.

Simaril · « **Reply #44 on:** May 15, 2006, 07:39:08 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by MIShill
This has actually been a pretty good thread. Could someone now say something really stupid or offensive and get it onto a more useless track. BTW, thank tou all for an explanation that helps me at least accept, if not enjoy, the model.

.-MI-{Shillelagh}

Green is the color of bile, snot, and pond scum.

(How'd I do, MI?)