collied

[hubsonfire]

Some of the benefits of the system are outweighed by the clueless dolts- HO collisions still occur, with both planes being destroyed, even if only one goes down due to the collie of death, and one to guns. But, at the same time, the guys who fly with no regard for anything are more likely kill themselves than their intended target- I've gotten lucky many times this way. You probably all have- ever gone AFK and come back to two kills while you were on autoclimb? That's the collision model doing something useful.

Bombers... I don't think I need to repeat my feelings on formations as they are modeled. I would wager that bombers cause more collisions than they fall victim to. I don't care about any disadvantages that may result where formations are concerned.

I like the current setup- although it can be extremely frustrating. I've attempted to force collisions on a number of occasions, and while I won't claim that it's easy to replicate, it is not impossible. It does require a great deal of luck, and is fruitless more often than not. I don't think it can be abused, unless you have a stable connection, and are fighting the same people, with stable connections, and the ping times of all involved would have to remain the same. That just doesn't strike me as something that happens regularly in the MA. In the DA, maybe, but chances are if you're in there fighting the same guy repeatedly, you're not looking to call in the collie of death to get a kill.

Some of you are just being argumentative- I've known dedalos for a while, and he's not an unintelligent guy. Yeah, his typing sucks (hey, he writes coad. You know how those guys are... ), but he's not stupid. Just incredibly stubborn.

[Lusche]

On the second, he did not shoot me.  He intentionally caused a collision.  Benefit to game play?  Problem?  Yeah, what is a formation of bombers supposed to do about it?  I can demonstrate if you like.

But, I can see it is pointless to continue arguing.

Intentionally causing a collision is one of the hardest thing in AH. It's much, much more difficult than actually shooting down the bomber. Because you have to guess where both your and his plane are located on HIS front end. You don't now the total lag, so you don't know the positions. To shoot down your opponent you need to simply hit your enemy on your screen.

The drawback of removing collisions from AH (intentional fly-troughs with guns blazing) are far worse than the rare, unintentional collisions that can happen now.

[waystin2]

Intentionally causing a collision is one of the hardest thing in AH. It's much, much more difficult than actually shooting down the bomber. Because you have to guess where both your and his plane are located on HIS front end. You don't now the total lag, so you don't know the positions.

I have argued this point time and again.  You may know your front end, but your opponent's front end position is a crapshoot.  There is no way for anyone to accurately guesstimate or know the 2 front end positions in the time available to setup an intentional ram.  It is impossible to intentionally ram an opponent.  IMPOSSIBLE.

[hubsonfire]

It is difficult, but it is by no means impossible.

[waystin2]

It is difficult, but it is by no means impossible.

I say extremely difficult at best.  As you said, 99 times out of 100 it will be a fruitless endeavour.  Just too many variables involved, and with no guarantees that the variables are not going to change as you are trying to set up your "intentional ram". 

[hubsonfire]

You said IMPOSSIBLE. Repeatedly. It's not impossible AT ALL. I did not say 99 out of 100 times, either. You don't have any way of knowing the exact odds, and I don't pretend to either. I would guess 90%, tops, but it's merely a guess. If we all had similar ping times, and stable connections, I think it would become a significant issue.

[dedalos]

Just incredibly stubborn.

Only going to get worse now that I moved to Texas lol.  

[Shuffler]

Your all wrong.... collisions are all controlled by the future. In the future a collisionater is developed that controls all future craft from collisions and actually is so powerful as to control past collisions to an extent. All collisions or non-collisions are therefor completely controlled by this future machine.

 

[Vinkman]

You said IMPOSSIBLE. Repeatedly. It's not impossible AT ALL. I did not say 99 out of 100 times, either. You don't have any way of knowing the exact odds, and I don't pretend to either. I would guess 90%, tops, but it's merely a guess. If we all had similar ping times, and stable connections, I think it would become a significant issue.

I bet Lusche could calculate it. I think I could. I'm wondering if I want to take the time 

[Vinkman]

Your all wrong.... collisions are all controlled by the future. In the future a collisionater is developed that controls all future craft from collisions and actually is so powerful as to control past collisions to an extent. All collisions or non-collisions are therefor completely controlled by this future machine.

 

 

[Karnak]

I bet Lusche could calculate it. I think I could. I'm wondering if I want to take the time 

You can't because there is no way to tell what the total ping time is.  You can't see your opponent's ping and have no idea where he is in reality.

[dedalos]

You can't because there is no way to tell what the total ping time is.  You can't see your opponent's ping and have no idea where he is in reality.

Lets see, plane going at 300mph that means,

300 x 5,280 = 1,584,000 feet/hour = 26,400 feet/minute = 440 feet/second = 0.44 feet/millisecond

Server, last I checked, was sending updates every 250ms (not sure about FE though and cant check since I am at work).  Assuming that it only sends out the latest and greatest positions, pick a number bellow 250ms.  Would you agree that is a fair statement?  So,with a ping of 250ms the other guy will be between 0 and 110 feet off of where you see him.  Given the size of planes or even better bombers, all it will take is a couple of attempts at 40 and 80 feet maybe.  I'd say average difficulty but no where near impossible.  If the same 250 applies to the FEs then you may be looking at double those distances but that would be the max.

The point is, you don't need to know the calculations above (and they may be off) or the exact ping times.  You just have to make a couple of passes at close range.

[twitchy]

I've bingoed ammo and rammed bombers on purpose to keep them from dropping on a CV and actually pulled it off, yeah it killed me but it got the bomber as well so it's definately something you can do. Do these 'who sees the ram first' rules apply to rear end collisions or just head ons?

[dedalos]

I've bingoed ammo and rammed bombers on purpose to keep them from dropping on a CV and actually pulled it off, yeah it killed me but it got the bomber as well so it's definately something you can do. Do these 'who sees the ram first' rules apply to rear end collisions or just head ons?

Yes, but you may end up being the only one seeing the collision.

[FiLtH]

Fly with a bud and go spinner to spinner headon no firing. When I tried this some of the time we both died, some of the time 1 died, but the other got some light damage. We even tried having one at the last second yank his stick to avoid. Most times when this was done, the yanker didnt die, even though to both people it looked like a collision should have occured. Try it and see what you get.