Collision Model Is BS

[68ZooM]

Geist got the kill on you because you hit the ground before he did, real simple.

[The Fugitive]

I've come to the conclusion that nobody actually knows how the collision model works and I have a film to back that up. For those that claim that your end has to see a collision to receive damage, that's BS.

In this film I clearly never make contact with him and receive the collision and lose a wing. Now if it had said "Geist has collided with you" I would have been fine with it, because I've always thought both should receive damage in the first place. But instead we miss on BOTH ends and I still get the "you have collided" message and I go down. He was going down anyways because I had already shot one off one of his wings off but now instead of me getting a kill on him, he gets a kill on me. 

As I said before, this wouldn't be an issue if both planes would receive damage already, I would have been completely fine with it, however this film is just to show that the collision model doesn't even work like its supposed to now.


http://www.mediafire.com/?er4bkzdmqzpcpck

From the lists of "fixes" in the newest version....

 

Version 2.27 Patch 0 Changes
======================


External view mode is now disabled in manned guns.

Icons now mask when the vehicle or plane is hidden behind vegetation.

Added a less obtrusive dialog box that appears in the upper left corner for items such as join requests.

Fixed some typos in the Panzer IVF loadouts.

Added a bomb loadout option to the 109E.

External engine sounds are no longer heard when your engine is running.

Changed the default fighter launch point at ports and vehicle bases.

Wirbel and Ostwind turrets can no longer take on indefinite damage after they've been destroyed without eventually destroying the vehicle.

Changed the cockpit head bounds on the F6F.

Changed the default skins of the P-47D-25 and Spitfire I.

Fixed a bug with the mission editor not saving missions properly.

Fixed a crash bug that happened when jumping between bombers in a formation after a bomber had been destroyed.

The film viewer now saves its window size and position between sessions.

Collision messages are now recorded in films.

I haven't tested it yet, but I AVOID collisions

[chaser]

I guess I should have taken a screenshot of the message but I had the "you have collided" message in the chat box.

Edit: As I mentioned before a blank message displays in place of the collision message. For some reason it shows up in the film veiwer as ":-"

[kvuo75]

here is where you lost left elevator from the HO.



here is close to the "collision"

[Karnak]

I thought the flight paths in the film viewer were not exact, just close.  As though the film recorder only takes position notes ever .5 seconds or so and then just draws the flight paths like connect the dots.

[Guppy35]

I've come to the conclusion that nobody actually knows how the collision model works and I have a film to back that up. For those that claim that your end has to see a collision to receive damage, that's BS.

In this film I clearly never make contact with him and receive the collision and lose a wing. Now if it had said "Geist has collided with you" I would have been fine with it, because I've always thought both should receive damage in the first place. But instead we miss on BOTH ends and I still get the "you have collided" message and I go down. He was going down anyways because I had already shot one off one of his wings off but now instead of me getting a kill on him, he gets a kill on me. 

As I said before, this wouldn't be an issue if both planes would receive damage already, I would have been completely fine with it, however this film is just to show that the collision model doesn't even work like its supposed to now.


http://www.mediafire.com/?er4bkzdmqzpcpck

Kinda hard to please aren't ya?

It's just a cartoon airplane, and you aren't really dead.  Get a new plane, go back and try again. 

[Shuffler]

I've come to the conclusion that nobody actually knows how the collision model works and I have a film to back that up. For those that claim that your end has to see a collision to receive damage, that's BS.

In this film I clearly never make contact with him and receive the collision and lose a wing. Now if it had said "Geist has collided with you" I would have been fine with it, because I've always thought both should receive damage in the first place. But instead we miss on BOTH ends and I still get the "you have collided" message and I go down. He was going down anyways because I had already shot one off one of his wings off but now instead of me getting a kill on him, he gets a kill on me. 

As I said before, this wouldn't be an issue if both planes would receive damage already, I would have been completely fine with it, however this film is just to show that the collision model doesn't even work like its supposed to now.


http://www.mediafire.com/?er4bkzdmqzpcpck

You can tell HTC he's wrong but he wrote it.

[EVZ]

I've come to the conclusion that nobody actually knows how the collision model works and I have a film to back that up. For those that claim that your end has to see a collision to receive damage, that's BS. In this film I clearly never make contact with him and

Are you ABSOLUTELY SURE ? He didn't shoot you with his .45 ?

Sorry, Couldn't resist ... I too think BOTH planes should GO DOWN after a collision ... The classic "NO" to this idea is based on the POSSIBILITY the guy on the other end isn't anywhere near colliding and should not be punished ... I've been there, seen the other guy go down ... but I've NEVER gotten a collision message that suprised me ... It's ALWAYS occured when a collision was inevitable, the suprise was flying away unhurt ... How MANY have experienced circumstances involving the OTHER GUY going down when they had NO REASON to expect a collision ?

[guncrasher]

most people understand how the collision model works.  and most hate it as a double standard.

-I can avoid somebody colliding with me on my end and I wont take damage.
-I can avoid somebody having gun solution on my end and I still die.  been killed many times by a fighter's tail gunner  .

the solution to that problem is I dont think about it anymore.  It's like trying to argue the  ho/front quarter shot thingy.

semp

[AWwrgwy]

most people understand how the collision model works.  and most hate it as a double standard.

-I can avoid somebody colliding with me on my end and I wont take damage.
-I can avoid somebody having gun solution on my end and I still die.  been killed many times by a fighter's tail gunner  .

the solution to that problem is I dont think about it anymore.  It's like trying to argue the  ho/front quarter shot thingy.

semp

If he hits you on his front end, collision or bullets, he hits you.

But I'm sure everyone would rather spontaneously blow up as they fly fifty feet under the plane they just dove under because, on his front end, there was a collision.

Flow chart please.



wrongway

[guncrasher]

If he hits you on his front end, collision or bullets, he hits you.

But I'm sure everyone would rather spontaneously blow up as they fly fifty feet under the plane they just dove under because, on his front end, there was a collision.

Flow chart please.



wrongway

like i said double standard, I can avoid crashes but not guns.  I spontaneously blow up as I can see on my end that his guns are never pointing at me.  understand it, yes I do, but I dont have to like it  .



semp

[IrishOne]

I'm sure that you're right that a lot, including yourself, have no clue as to how the collision model works.  Which is why you probably posted this but sadly it will fall on your deaf ears if we try and explain it to you as you've already made up your closed mind.

ack-ack

Q F T

[Wiley]

I thought the flight paths in the film viewer were not exact, just close.  As though the film recorder only takes position notes ever .5 seconds or so and then just draws the flight paths like connect the dots.

This seems highly likely to me.

Pretty close, but when you're closing speed is really high, not precisely precise.

Wiley.

[Scca]

Chaser, what was HTC's response to your film? If you haven't gotten his response then this is just a bitter "notice me" whine thread that will only result in pages upon pages rehashing the same old crap.  To save us all time please refer to the 29 pages on this subject  http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,325218.0.html from just a few weeks ago.

If however you really want to effect a change, send the film to HTC and see what he says.  Perhaps this is (God forbid) a bug, and not "BS" as you so claim.

 

[Shuffler]

Chaser, what was HTC's response to your film? If you haven't gotten his response then this is just a bitter "notice me" whine thread that will only result in pages upon pages rehashing the same old crap.  To save us all time please refer to the 29 pages on this subject  http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,325218.0.html from just a few weeks ago.

If however you really want to effect a change, send the film to HTC and see what he says.  Perhaps this is (God forbid) a bug, and not "BS" as you so claim.

 

I'm pretty sure he meant this thread as a joke. It would be embarrassing if he didn't.