Collisions

[Lusche]

Originally posted by Coronado
well.. i'm a T n B'er   collisions happen more often than your 20k cherry pickers.

If you only knew how often we 20k cherrypickers collide because we botch our "approach" (= mindless dive onto a low E target) ...

[Elfie]

Originally posted by Lusche
If you only knew how often we 20k cherrypickers collide because we botch our "approach" (= mindless dive onto a low E target) ...

I've never done that....no...not me!!

[BaDkaRmA158Th]

"Plane A:I hit something..sending data"
"plane B: i didnt hit anything..sending data"

"server: player A: your dead...player B: you are clear,have a nice day"

Such is life.

Like said before..everything collision wise is on YOUR side.
if you hit someone it was because you hit them,period.

the ONLY time i had a collision i couldnt understand is when the other player was warping and i ran into his plane as he warped back in front of me.

again,even tho it was due to lag and situation,the fact still is that I "me,myself" HIT..him.
period.


The situation may change,but the fact is..if you collide..its because you did it.

The REASON the other player doesnt go down in flames is how right would it be if someone hit YOU, and YOU had to suffer because your SIDE said you missed, but his side said you hit.

Then the server would have to get and send a "hey, he realy did hit you,sorry..death for you"
Now imagine makeing a merge and thinking you survived..only about 2-3 seconds later your plane flips out and starts brakeing up.

This is the best way EVER possible.

and ultamitly is like a coin toss for fairness, its ither one guy messes up and bolth die because of it, or bolth mess up and bolth die.
that is fair to me.
because every time i have fell down dead due to  a collision it was totaly avoidable.
have a p51 run up your tailpipe and watch the dude go down in flames,while MOST of the time you only suffer minor damage if any "and thats WHEN your side agrees with you geting hit"

heck the way i see it, i LOVE this system vs. flying on for a few more miliseconds before haveing some OTHER guys computer DESIDE my life is prime for the takeing because some one else goofed up and hit ME, da heck with that.

Thats as lame man term as i can get it.

Some things are server side,and some are client "you" side.
so its a toss up of whos data is sayin' what first.
back in the old days when net code first started coming out,you could shoot like 5 rounds into someone with a lower ping and because his* computer said he shot first,the death "packet" would automaticly be sent to you.

Imagine shooting a plane or hiting a plane only to have it fly off because HIS computer said he killed you first,or was not even close enough to you to collide.
talk about fealin' raped.



In all reality you should be thanking HTC,5 years ago such tech was unheard of and impossible.

HTC, you do your best and those who know what the best is,you are it.

[Coronado]

explain the percentage
 i am dead serios when i say 90%

[WMLute]

Originally posted by Coronado
explain the percentage
 i am dead serios when i say 90%

you are joking right?

If you hit them you will get damaged 100% of the time.  I guess you are saying that 10% of the time you only suffer some damage and can still keep flying.

You hit them, 100% of the time you get damage.

There is no "winning" to it.

What are you havin' problems "getting"?

I'll will try one last time.  (I love my sig's)

Once I was flying around and an enemy plane zipped by me a good hundred feet or so away.

From what I saw they were not even close to me.  It wasn't a near miss, or any such thing.  We were fairly far apart from each other on my Front End.

As they flew past I saw a SYSTEM:so and so has collided with you message.

Lookin' back I see said plane floppin' down to the earth with only one wing.

THAT was a collision I "won".

Why did I "win"?  Because I never hit them.

On THEIR computer they saw their plane smack into mine, suffered damage (lost wing) and died.

They "lost" the collision (that I never saw)

The only way to "win" is to not hit them like I did.  I was never even close to hitting them from my perspective.  BUT on the other guys computer we smacked into each other, they lost a wing and died.  So they saw us hit, and me fly off undamaged.  I saw us fly by each other.  THEY SHOULD get damaged.  They hit me.  I should not get damaged, we never hit.

So when you ram into somebody (100% damage always, quit flying into 'em) and they fly off apparently undamaged, it's because from what they saw, your planes never made contact.  They didn't "win" the collision and you "lost", they never collided with you in the 1st place.

[Karnak]

Originally posted by hubsonfire
Your comment that it's half a collision model proves that you do not. The limitation is the telecommunications infrastructure, and the hardware which composes it. Until computers can transfer and process information at the speed of light, 100% realistic collision modelling is not possible.

The speed of light is too slow.  We need it to be faster than the speed of light for it to work on both ends.

Think of it this way, it is at 40-60% of the speed of light right now.  If we take it to 100% that still leaves significant lag between, say, somebody in Isreal and somebody in Texas.

[WMLute]

Originally posted by Karnak
The speed of light is too slow.  We need it to be faster than the speed of light for it to work on both ends.

Think of it this way, it is at 40-60% of the speed of light right now.  If we take it to 100% that still leaves significant lag between, say, somebody in Isreal and somebody in Texas.

They did indeed break the speed of light

They were able to get a pulse of light to travel 2-300 times faster than the speed of light.  (the pulse of light has no mass they said, so this doesn't disprove Einstein, just proves that you can make something w/o mass travel faster than light)

My 1st thought was about them figurin' out how this might apply to the Aces High Collision Model.  




(ok not really, but I found this quite cool)

[Oleg]

These frikkin scientists has nothing sacred. They ever created light pulse with negative speed
http://www.rochester.edu/news/show.php?id=2544

[FBplmmr]

Originally posted by Coronado
explain the percentage
 i am dead serios when i say 90%

you tell me

if you collide with a plane you collide with a plane ..if you dont you wont "loose"

[Warchief]

I think everyone can agree on this I hope. Very few like the collision model but is better then what we had or it could be worse.

The only thing I have noticed as far as collisions go. If you get rammed by a vet you know most of the time it is not on purpose and it just happens due to numerous reasons. Most of the collisions I have noticed come from noobs. I say some they are just trying there up most to get the kill. While others seem to thinking about gaming the game to get to the top spot.

Noobs getting High Rank is great and for some it is well heard. But mostly ranking and scoring are overrated.

[straffo]

Originally posted by Coronado
explain the percentage
 i am dead serios when i say 90%

I can explain :

boolean collisionDetector:: asColided(void){
// Before entering the complex collision computation do a little optimisation trick
if (getUserName() == "Coronado"){
return TRUE;
}
// hush hush code deleted
}

[Bronk]

Originally posted by FiLtH
In those pics I see the two planes show different ranges from eachother. At impact one is 64 one is 66. Could that affect the outcome?

No.

Only thing that effects collisions is what your front end detects.

Bronk

[SlapShot]

Originally posted by DREDIOCK
Not true. I both understand how they work and accept the explanations.

I only see how having them as they are now creating more problems and arguements then having them is worth

Don't know how you can say that ... we have never had it the "other" way, so there is no way that you can quantify what the response would be if the "other" way was turned on.

Personally, I think if it was the "other" way ... those whines would drown out the current volume of "collision" whines.

[Bronk]

Originally posted by Coronado
LOL .what what i'm hearing is "yes, it's whacked and yes it makes sense" all in one breath *scratches head* [ all i need to see.. still not perfectly clear why i "lose" 90% of collisions.
The collision model makes perfect sense. If you run into an ac you lose 100% period.

 Seems to me if HT sees a collision by my plane..it would see it on the other.. as for the examples shown... wouldnt both planes likely go down??    lost tail... busted prop.
just thinkin ..let the horse lie..it'll never expain the percentage.
Collisions are detected on your pc. HTC server is nothing more than an information hub. Your pc detects a collision ,you go pooof. That information is sent to the server. The sever then sends the info to your opponent. All that takes time thats why there is lag and we all see a slightly different view.


    all,thx for the imput!

Originally posted by Coronado
well.. i'm a T n B'er   collisions happen more often than your 20k cherry pickers..much more often...and even some head on collisions,,i guess my complaint is the percentage i dont survive,,again.,, can't be fixed ,so let it lie.

Don't hit them you wont collide. You just need to adjust you habits a bit.
There is nothing that needs fixing .

Originally posted by Coronado
explain the percentage
 i am dead serios when i say 90%

Because 90% of the time when you fly into the other ac you do fatal damage.
The other 10% you do minor damage and fly away.

There is no winning or losing. When your pc detects a collision it assigns damage according to what part of your ac touched.

Once again look at the pictures posted. Due to lag the other guy can be quite a ways away from you. It's your job to fly to what you see.

Bronk

[Bronk]

Originally posted by Warchief
I think everyone can agree on this I hope. Very few like the collision model but is better then what we had or it could be worse.
 

I like the collision model. But I took the time to figure out how it works.
It's a very simple solution for the lag issue.
The only 2 conditions could be taken as "unfair".

Orange text on spawning AC.
Again I still understand how it looks from the other guys .

GV collisions.
Same circumstance as above.

Maybe ht could throw out all collision detections that occur on the ground?

Bronk