Another Collision Whine

[Steve]

The level of pissed-offed-ness ....

Quoted for my own amusement.   

I am not fond of the collision model but understand it may very well be the best solution to the factors involved in the game, particularly internet latencey.

Sometimes it frustrates me, then I come to the boards and start a thread about how I hate it. Hey, it makes me feel better to cry now and then..   

[96Delta]

Need the other guys film.
C'mon I know you are smarter than this. You plan theses elaborate missions but can't grasp the fact that we have our own unique picture of what happens in an air to air encounter?

Bronk,

I'm just trying to get your post count up.
Its a little low...needs boosting to at least 10K!  

Anyway, my only point is that in ANY collision,
both planes should be out of action.  Period.
That would be far more fair than having one plane
completely destroyed and the other fly off
with, say, a gun damaged.  That kind of
event is highly unrealistic.

Mutual destruction would reduce reckless HO's because both
pilots would KNOW that if they collided, both
would be dead.  Period.

This one is not different than my other suggestions.
My intent is to make the game more realistic and
less of an arcade game.  This idea is consistent
with that goal.

And with that said, I am done adding my comments
to this thread.  I've already given my two-cents.
Any more and it will cost ya! 

[96Delta]

dp

[Lusche]

Anyway, my only point is that in ANY collision,
both planes should be out of action.  Period.
(...)
My intent is to make the game more realistic and
less of an arcade game. 

The ususual question. Here's an actual collision from both players viewpoints:




Both showing exact the moment of collision

So if you were the P-47 pilot (and what you see on 2nd picture is what happens on your screen) ... would you think it's more realistic and less arcade if you'd go down now? Getting a collision message even though on your screen the Pony never got closer than 30 yards?

[BaldEagl]

I understand how the collision model works and why it is how it is but that doesn't mean it can't be improved and I don't think it would take an inordinate amount of coding to do so.

Here's an idea:

If two planes collide and one takes frontal damage (from the wing forward) and one takes rear damage (from the wing rearward) the forward damaged aircraft incurs appropriate damage while the rear "damaged" aircraft incurs no damage.

If two planes collide and both take forward damage then both incur appropriate damage.

If two planes collide and both incur rear damage (highly unlikely) then neither incur damage.

As to the coding it should be relatively easy.  We all know what parts get damaged forward of the wings (engine, radiator, guns, wings or wingtips, etc.) and well all know which parts get damaged aft of the wings (vert. stab, elevators, etc.) so the extra code can be based off which parts take damage.

This at least gets rid of ramming someone into a death.

[Chalenge]

They cant ram you to death unless you see a ram on your side and usually you got shot anyway and its the bullets/cannon that does the damage. Why is this so obvious to me and not so much to other people? 

[Bronk]

I think some have been hit by the dumbtruck.  

[Lusche]

Just for the record...

Today I messed it up and rammed my Spit XIV into an enemy Boston III drone. This collision did kill only... *drumroll*.. me!
I found it perfectly acceptable, and I guess RTHolmes even more so 

[BaldEagl]

They cant ram you to death unless you see a ram on your side and usually you got shot anyway and its the bullets/cannon that does the damage. Why is this so obvious to me and not so much to other people? 

I never got shot in the instance in my OP.  There was never a ping and I have to believe I'd have heard a 30mm hitting.


Why is everyone so adamamnt against an improvement to the damage model?  All it would take is disabling rear damage in the case of collisions.  Please explain how this would make things worse.

[CAP1]

The film clearly showed that Shane missed the other plane, thus no ram occurred.

That Shane got lucky and caused the other guy to collide is beside the point.  For it to be a "ram", he would have had to smack the plane he saw with his.  But, they never touched, hence it is not a ram.

Admittedly I am claiming a technicality, but it is an important one.  The film was of a very unique situation, and for people to claim that it happens deliberately and regularly, is simply false.

In AH, if you actually ram a plane, you only guarantee harm to yourself.  The other guy may or may not be damaged depending on whether the planes on his screen intersect or not.

on his screen there was no ram. he knew full well what he was doing though. he was exploiting what could be considered a bug. he was taking into account(i think) the amount of delay or lag that he hoped was present, to see if he could take the guy out. if he could do it, then others will figure out how to do it on a regular basis.

and ya, i agree it is a technicality.

[Lusche]

Why is everyone so adamamnt against an improvement to the damage model?  All it would take is disabling rear damage in the case of collisions.  Please explain how this would make things worse.

In that case I will try not only to make pursuing enemy fighters to overshoot me... I would try to incite a collision. After all I couldn't get damaged at all but they could. No risk for me, but high risk for them.

[Bronk]

I never got shot in the instance in my OP.  There was never a ping and I have to believe I'd have heard a 30mm hitting.


Why is everyone so adamamnt against an improvement to the damage model?  All it would take is disabling rear damage in the case of collisions.  Please explain how this would make things worse.

So when your vert stab catches on a merge..it just doest count?

[Chalenge]

I never got shot in the instance in my OP.  There was never a ping and I have to believe I'd have heard a 30mm hitting.


Why is everyone so adamamnt against an improvement to the damage model?  All it would take is disabling rear damage in the case of collisions.  Please explain how this would make things worse.

I dont know about your game but on my game a 30mm hit sounds just like a ram and in fact any major part leaving my plane sounds like a 30mm hit.

[Sincraft]

I'm sorry but the collision model is truely messed up.

Last night I was flying along in a Ta-152 when I saw tracers going over my wings.  I looked back to see a 262 starting to try a break turn but before he was able he rammed me from behind taking he tail off my plane.  He flew on with one engine smoking slightly.

The system reported that I collided!  It also reported that he collided.

That's just not right.  Period.  End of story.  How in the h*ll can I collide with someone I'm flying AWAY from.

Screw it.  I'm just going to start ramming everyone in the arena.  Evidently it works.

If that's the case, then fly a spit 16 - they usually win ho's more than any other plane in the game.  They can also seemingly explode a p38-j from 1k out as this happened to me 3!!!!!!!!!! times in one week.  
The spit 16 is incorrectly modeled, I won't fly it.  The hurri2 is the only plane I respect.

But yes to lend to your post, there IS an issue with collision that is ruining the game.  Any real attempt to find real battle is gone.  Possibly only the DA is your friend.  I like the randomness of the MA personally but get very frustrated when I fly 20 minutes to be taken out by yet another spit dweeb that didn't even make an attempt to fire his weapons.

[Sincraft]

I have flown 400 mph right underneath a spit before, and he got a collision message and his wing was ripped off.  No damage to me.  This is the one circumstance imo where the collision model isn't great.  As is now, the model does attempt to address fault and not penalize a player who didn't collide on his end. 

I think it would be cool though if HiTech could somehow eliminate the rammed from behind collisions.  Like if a collision starts from the back, the collision becomes void for that encounter for the player being rammed from behind.  (no pun intended)

Makes you wonder greatly about what bullets are actually hitting.  I think the window is WILDLY different than actually aiming.  Enter again the spit tard who just flops his wings and has zero scaling - impossible to hit if done correctly.