Ramming and Consequences?

[Shuffler]

I personally think that when two planes collide with eachother that both pilot have to leave the game as their toon peelot is dead.

I think this is only fair..... we can't have this sort of thing.


I vote we put AKAK in charge of going to Dallas and get this run through.

[mtnman]

So, some of you actually believe that you can ram someone and give them damage, yet not get damaged yourself???

Do you realize it's actually the other way around?  I'd have to miss you on my FE, but hit you on yours, for that to happen.  

If I hit you on my FE, I take damage.  If I miss you on my FE, I don't.  Same thing goes for you.  Seems plenty fair, and a deterrent is built right in...

Run film?  What do you plan to see?  The only way that film would be "proof" is if you can show yourself ramming someone and not taking any damage yourself.  Are you going to film yourself flying around ramming people?

Showing film of someone else hitting you and not taking damage himself doesn't prove your point, due to lag.

So, for ramming to work to my advantage, I'd have to fly very close to you, but not hit you.  (Essentially, if I see myself hit you, I'll have actually missed you (unless you're nearly stationary) since your plane is not where I see it (your plane is actually somewhere out in front of where it appears to be on my screen).  In that case we'd both take damage).  In addition to not hitting you, I'd have to figure out a way for you to see a collision on your end.

So, I suppose if I could barely miss you by flying in front of you, I could occasionally luck out and you might see a collision on you end.  Of course, since I succeeded in missing you, and no collision occurred on my end, why should I take damage?

[CAP1]

So, some of you actually believe that you can ram someone and give them damage, yet not get damaged yourself???

Do you realize it's actually the other way around?  I'd have to miss you on my FE, but hit you on yours, for that to happen.  

If I hit you on my FE, I take damage.  If I miss you on my FE, I don't.  Same thing goes for you.  Seems plenty fair, and a deterrent is built right in...

Run film?  What do you plan to see?  The only way that film would be "proof" is if you can show yourself ramming someone and not taking any damage yourself.  Are you going to film yourself flying around ramming people?

Showing film of someone else hitting you and not taking damage himself doesn't prove your point, due to lag.

So, for ramming to work to my advantage, I'd have to fly very close to you, but not hit you.  (Essentially, if I see myself hit you, I'll have actually missed you (unless you're nearly stationary) since your plane is not where I see it (your plane is actually somewhere out in front of where it appears to be on my screen).  In that case we'd both take damage).  In addition to not hitting you, I'd have to figure out a way for you to see a collision on your end.

So, I suppose if I could barely miss you by flying in front of you, I could occasionally luck out and you might see a collision on you end.  Of course, since I succeeded in missing you, and no collision occurred on my end, why should I take damage?

i think if you were to do a search, someone posted a film of themselves causing a collision,,,,,,and if i recall, they took no damage from it.

[Hungry]

Have to look for it but wasnt there a Shane film posted on these boards where he caused a ram on purpose, came from underneath got in front and slowed down or something to that effect.  I'll have to find the film and see if thats the case.

[lyric1]

Just crash to the earth & get another plane.

[mtnman]

i think if you were to do a search, someone posted a film of themselves causing a collision,,,,,,and if i recall, they took no damage from it.

It might have been me, even, lol.  I'm not sure if I ever posted those films or not...

The thing was, if I actually hit the other guy, I took damage, not him.  If he saw me hit him on his end, he took damage, but in every case it was a miss on my end, so I took no damage...

In every case, neither of us ever saw the same thing, so we never both took damage...

The simple result we were left with is this- if your FE senses a collision, you'll take damage, and it doesn't matter who's "at fault".  If your FE doesn't sense a collision, you'll take no damage.

So, quite simply, if you don't want to take collision damage, you should make every effort to not bump into the other guy, or allow him to bump into you...  The collision model already gives us incentive to avoid collisions; what were we hoping to change?

[bagrat]

sometimes wen i run outta bullets i like to  run my plane into the back..... to the base to re-arm my plane, and challenge the good sir to a most respectable equal playing field dogfight  

[mtnman]

sometimes wen i run outta bullets i like to  run my plane into the back..... to the base to re-arm my plane, and challenge the good sir to a most respectable equal playing field dogfight  

From my experimenting and filming, we found the six o'clock position to be the absolute worst if you wanted to have any hope of an intentional ram occurring, hehe.  If I tried to ram the other guy from the back, I always died, every single time, before I even came close to hitting him.  I saw the hit, and died.  He saw me just fall apart behind him.  We also found speed mattered.  The slower the better, and the less closure the better.

But again, we had to try to miss each other to cause the ram.  We had to try to predict where the other guy was on his FE, as well as where we were on his FE.

Not easy considering the variance in lag...

And see, our films all showed that it was very difficult (as in, we never succeeded) in causing damage to the other guy through intentional ramming.  That didn't lead us to assume it was impossible, just unlikely to be purposely achievable on a regular basis.  It also opened us up to being shot, since we would need to put ourselves in his flight path.

I guess that's a possibility; fly right in front of someone hoping that they don't shoot you, but take damage from a collision instead?

[E25280]

Yes, there is a film of shane doing it.  It was also a very odd circumstance where the other player was inexplicably flying straight and level and completely ignoring Shane's faster aircraft.  Then Shane got lucky that his manouever caused the other guy to register a collision on his computer while Shane missed the other player by feet on his computer.

To think this happens regularly is laughable.

It would also be absolutely impossible for the game to recognize when such a collision occurred intentionally or in the normal course of gameplay, making the suggestion there should be some kind of penalty on the plane that DID NOT COLLIDE even more laughable.

[Ack-Ack]

You should know by now E25280 that there are just some uber experten players that the only way they could be shot down is if the other guy intentionally rammed him. 


ack-ack

[CAP1]

Have to look for it but wasnt there a Shane film posted on these boards where he caused a ram on purpose, came from underneath got in front and slowed down or something to that effect.  I'll have to find the film and see if thats the case.

yes....that's who it was.

[CAP1]

Yes, there is a film of shane doing it.  It was also a very odd circumstance where the other player was inexplicably flying straight and level and completely ignoring Shane's faster aircraft.  Then Shane got lucky that his manouever caused the other guy to register a collision on his computer while Shane missed the other player by feet on his computer.

To think this happens regularly is laughable.

It would also be absolutely impossible for the game to recognize when such a collision occurred intentionally or in the normal course of gameplay, making the suggestion there should be some kind of penalty on the plane that DID NOT COLLIDE even more laughable.

i don't believe it happens regularly.....and never intended to insinuate that.

i was simply stating that somone posted a film showing it being done.

[Hungry]

"I don't believe it happens regularly.....and never intended to insinuate that"

My feelings as well, cant remember yesterday but remembered that film.   

[mtnman]

When we experimented on it it was done because we had such a problem doing what we were actually trying to do.  We were initially trying to land a fighter on top of a bomber, piggy-back style.

Invariably, if I was in the fighter and lined up to land on the bomber, I saw myself just barely touch it and big parts would break off of me.  The bomber pilot, watching from the gunner position, would just see me break up and fall away while still behind him.  I'd see the smoke of my wheels touching him, then "bang!" I'd have no wing...

In my view, my main gear barely touched his wings.  In his view I was still behind his tail.  He could have shot me with his tail gun.  This was at nearly zero closure, where I would expect the results of lag to be the least.  I'd expect lag to be the most prevalent at high speed and opposite headings.

When we swapped positions, we had exactly the same experience.  I saw him fall apart behind me, while he saw himself touch his wheels on my "shoulder", and then he broke apart...  The lag was equal, regardless of who was following/leading.  This was with one of us on dial-up, and one on high-speed.  Experienced lag is supposed to be the "total sum" of both opponents, and that appeared to be the case.  My high-lag, plus his lower-lag combined to give us the total.

Now, had we practiced, I have no doubt we could have figured out a way to make that work so we could reliably cause collisions for the other player (for example, all I would have needed to do was "park" myself about 100yds in front of the bomber; he'd have seen a collision...).  But, what about other players with differing amounts of lag?  How would I know how much I'd need to adjust for each player?  What if we factor in different speeds and closure-rates?  It ends up just being luck...

[Dream Child]

i don't believe it happens regularly.....and never intended to insinuate that.

i was simply stating that somone posted a film showing it being done.

But you apparently missed the point. Shane missed the other plane on his computer. If you miss the other plane on your computer, you don't collide. It's not impossible for someone to hit you, but if you're in a fight it's almost certainly not going to be intentional, because he doesn't know where you are on your front end, just his.