collied

[AWwrgwy]

Mine does.  He is clear in his FE but you get rewarded with a collision.  Its ok, its a safe way to take out bombers.  Just tell them it was their SA being bad.

I say BS.

I have yet to get a "You have collided" message where I didn't see a collision where I "physically" ran into the other plane.

So, either you are

A:  flying within their envelope in "the internet ether" but not yours, and they physically "see" a collision with their plane...

Or

B:  You're shooting them as you blow through, doing catastrophic damage anyway, and incidentally collide anyway.


I'm still convinced 98% of "collision deaths" are actually due to gunfire anyhow.


wrongway

[dedalos]

I say BS.

I have yet to get a "You have collided" message where I didn't see a collision where I "physically" ran into the other plane.

So, either you are

A:  flying within their envelope in "the internet ether" but not yours, and they physically "see" a collision with their plane...

Or

B:  You're shooting them as you blow through, doing catastrophic damage anyway, and incidentally collide anyway. 

I'm still convinced 98% of "collision deaths" are actually due to gunfire anyhow.


wrongway

lol, just try it.  Find a nice formation of buffs, dive in from behind get under them and pull up trying to pass as close to their nose as possible.  Then come back and call bs

In either case, BS or not, do you think it is really preventing people from flying through you?  That is my only argument anyway.  I don't think the fear of colliding stops the guys who are not afraid to take a 30mm in the face.

[hitech]

Mine does.  He is clear in his FE but you get rewarded with a collision.  Its ok, its a safe way to take out bombers.  Just tell them it was their SA being bad.

This is udder and complete BS. Can it happen yes, can it be repeated nope. Along with if you could fly your plane that accurately , it is easier to just shoot them.

But I know you would much prefer coming up from the bottom and then shooting as you fly threw the bomber, that is a MUUUUCH HARDER waay to kill a bomber  


HiTech

[dedalos]

This is udder and complete BS. Can it happen yes, can it be repeated nope. Along with if you could fly your plane that accurately , it is easier to just shoot them.

But I know you would much prefer coming up from the bottom and then shooting as you fly threw the bomber, that is a MUUUUCH HARDER waay to kill a bomber  


HiTech

Lol, comon now, we both know I don't do that.  I can do it to prove a point (and repeat it easily) but I don't play like that.  If you think having collisions on stops players from flying into you guns blazing then fine, you are right to have them on.  That is not what I see though.  Again, if some one is not afraid of two 30mm and 4 20mm of a 110 and is willing to go for it, do you realy think he is woried about colliding?

[Karnak]

Lol, comon now, we both know I don't do that.  I can do it to prove a point (and repeat it easily) but I don't play like that.  If you think having collisions on stops players from flying into you guns blazing then fine, you are right to have them on.  That is not what I see though.  Again, if some one is not afraid of two 30mm and 4 20mm of a 110 and is willing to go for it, do you realy think he is woried about colliding?

You need to stop and think rather than just repeat exaggerated crap about behavior in the MA.  Sure, it is trendy to claim everybody just HOs and flies through the enemy, but it is also not true.

Most people don't HO as a first option, and even people who do almost all try to avoid an actual collision.

Nobody, literally, nobody does what hitech described.

[hubsonfire]

Actually, Dedalos does fly like that.

[minke]

just a real noobish question to ask,but shoot, I'll do it anyway -

does internet connection speed have any impact on the odds of surviving a collision?

[Sonicblu]

maybe i dont understand what im seeing how is it that a guy that dives on me guns blazing he rams me in the process I get a "you have collided message" and he fly's away. In a real world he would did also If the puter know that I collided It has to know what I collided with I think both should get a collided message and die. That wouldbe realistic. as for the other senerios I don't know.


I know I may have died due to guns blazing. I dont care about me dieing. What conserns me is the other plane flying away with no damage. He cause the collision whether or not i die. In this case he sould die also. and should get the message. YOU are a ace pilot.....  J/K

[Karnak]

just a real noobish question to ask,but shoot, I'll do it anyway -

does internet connection speed have any impact on the odds of surviving a collision?

No, it does not.

maybe i dont understand what im seeing how is it that a guy that dives on me guns blazing he rams me in the process I get a "you have collided message" and he fly's away. In a real world he would did also If the puter know that I collided It has to know what I collided with I think both should get a collided message and die. That wouldbe realistic. as for the other senerios I don't know.


I know I may have died due to guns blazing. I dont care about me dieing. What conserns me is the other plane flying away with no damage. He cause the collision whether or not i die. In this case he sould die also. and should get the message. YOU are a ace pilot.....   J/K

You're right, you don't understand.  You are trying to assign an "at fault" state like in an auto accident.  It doesn't work this way, all that matters who who's FE detects a collision.  On his FE he may have clearly dived past you, raking you with his fire, and passed 50 yards behind you.

[grizz441]

This is udder and complete BS. Can it happen yes, can it be repeated nope. Along with if you could fly your plane that accurately , it is easier to just shoot them.

But I know you would much prefer coming up from the bottom and then shooting as you fly threw the bomber, that is a MUUUUCH HARDER waay to kill a bomber  


HiTech

I've actually got a 'You have Collided' message when I attacked an A20 in my 109K4.  I dove on his upper 8 o clock and shot him up left engine to right wing tip, and collided my right wing off.  I was not in shrapnel range and my right wing coming off was impossible from my attack angle.  I saved the film and when I went to watch it, it was a 1 second film, no idea what happened.  So I guess my story isn't worth much.  

This is the only time I've ever been completely befuddled by a collision though.

[Lusche]

maybe i dont understand what im seeing how is it that a guy that dives on me guns blazing he rams me in the process I get a "you have collided message" and he fly's away. In a real world he would did also If the puter know that I collided It has to know what I collided with I think both should get a collided message and die. That wouldbe realistic.

Because in real life there is only 1 reality. Same thing happens for both planes.

In game there are two realities. What happens on two player'S screens can and will be differing fom each other:


Pony pilot's point of view

and this

is what the P-47 player saw on his screen.

The reasons for that difference are explained in aforementioned article on the Trainer Corps website.

[DREDIOCK]

I've always felt that if both sides see a collision then it should be registered as such.
And of only 1 side sees it then it shouldnt be registered as a collision for either.It would solve alot of the complaints
You would still see people avoiding a collision because of the risk of one.

Thats just my opinion

[Lusche]

I've always felt that if both sides see a collision then it should be registered as such.
And of only 1 side sees it then it shouldnt be registered as a collision for either.It would solve alot of the complaints
You would still see people avoiding a collision because of the risk of one.

In that case I would have an advantage above US players, because I know I would rarely get a collision at all when flying guns blazing through an enemy bomber.
US players would have a considerable higher risk of getting one.

So the current "what you see is what you get" is the most fair solution.

[Karnak]

I've always felt that if both sides see a collision then it should be registered as such.
And of only 1 side sees it then it shouldnt be registered as a collision for either.It would solve alot of the complaints
You would still see people avoiding a collision because of the risk of one.

Thats just my opinion

May as well just take collisions out in that case.  It amounts to essentially the same thing.

[DREDIOCK]

May as well just take collisions out in that case.  It amounts to essentially the same thing.

I've had plenty of collisions where we both collided. Not nearlyas many as only one side or the other have. But certainly enough to say it happens.

But if for some technical reason what Lusche says is true. Then I would have to concur. Not being my area of expertise. All I can do is offer an opinion based on what I experience.