Real Collisions at SEA

[artik]

I'm looking for an option to turn on damage at SEA for both pilots... Such that if a Zero rams B-29 the B-29 would be damaged as well or if mid-air collision occurs it is bed for both players.

It would be used in events, custom arena etc.

[MrKrabs]

As soon as you figure out the quandry of lag and differential latency in people's connections then sure...

Collisions are as they should be, deriving from what each end sees and hold fairly true despite popular belief.

[artik]

As soon as you figure out the quandry of lag and differential latency in people's connections then sure...

Collisions are as they should be, deriving from what each end sees and hold fairly true despite popular belief.

The collision of a bullet with a target is done? So what the difference?

In any case I don't suggest it to MA, it would be bad for MA. But for some SEA events it actually makes sense that a collision would make a damage to both planes.

[Lusche]

In any case I don't suggest it to MA, it would be bad for MA. But for some SEA events it actually makes sense that a collision would make a damage to both planes.

The SEA server is subject to the same laws of physics as the MA.

[Drano]

For the life of me I can't figure out how it's possible this same collision argument comes up it seems like once a month. sheesh! It ain't hard to figure out.

[Wiley]

For the life of me I can't figure out how it's possible this same collision argument comes up it seems like once a month. sheesh! It ain't hard to figure out.

I chalk it up to it not bothering people until it does, then they come to the forums and either can't find the explanation or don't bother looking, and we get to go round and round again.  It would be kind of nice if there were a few stickies in the Wishlist forum, but if it were going to happen it would've by now I assume.

Wiley.

[artik]

I chalk it up to it not bothering people until it does, then they come to the forums and either can't find the explanation or don't bother looking, and we get to go round and round again.  It would be kind of nice if there were a few stickies in the Wishlist forum, but if it were going to happen it would've by now I assume.

Wiley.

Wiley,

1st of all there are rarely requests for SEA, but for MA. Specifically I don't recall one for collisions at SEA (probably friendly only).
2nd there is a good reason to have single sided collisions this way at MA
3rd I don't buy "lag" problem (a) it is modeled for bullets for bombs and 101 other object I don't see why it can't be modeled for collisions (b) other games do it... so it is possible   maybe with different model. Finally we both get "x collided with y"

[FLOOB]

Single sided collisions? Is that how you think collisions work in the ma?

[Lusche]

3rd I don't buy "lag" problem

 Rejecting reality doesn't help

(a) it is modeled for bullets

Bullets are a totally different thing. As I typed above, bullets are not player controlled objects that do not suffer any damage. Therefore, it's possible to solve the 'lag problem' in a different way.

and 101 other object

All non player objects don't care about if they really collided on their screens or not. They actually do not take any damage from collisions at all.

I don't see why it can't be modeled for collisions (b) other games do it... 

Other games operate under totally different conditions. AH is a true world wide played (only a single server in Texas), client based massive multiplayer air combat game.

Finally we both get "x collided with y"

Actually most of the collisions I am involved are one sided, either only "XY has collided with you" or "You have collided." Rarely both.

[artik]

Single sided collisions? Is that how you think collisions work in the ma?

When plane A flying at straight line rams plane B flying at straight line from dead-6 and plane A is damaged and B is not (because of the hemisphere it was rammed into) than yes I call it Single sided collision.

You can call it one side damage or any other name - the fact remain the fact only one plane get damaged. It is perfectly OK for MA but for SEA sometimes the two-sided damage is better.

@Lusche - believe me I know what the model is, I had read it more than once.

But lets assume a model: a - had seen collision at point X - b hadn't because of lag now you can select: nobody gets a damage, both get damage and so on. Bullets, Rockets, Bombs, Shells all are player controlled in their initial path. And it works.

Quoting hitech

And again the connection speed has absolutely nothing to do with the determination if you collide or not. If your front end sees/detects your plane touching another plane, your plane will take damage. Your front end then display the message on YOUR screen "You have collided". It also sends a message to the person you collided with saying "BaldEagl has collided with you".

This what usually happens (at least to me).

In such a case you can make the damage to both players... that's it. i.e. Now if BaldEagl collided with me I take damage as well.

It isn't about "possibility" it is about modelling.

Finally if you want to solve "lag problem" remove "front end" and use any end

[FLS]

The collision of a bullet with a target is done? So what the difference?

In any case I don't suggest it to MA, it would be bad for MA. But for some SEA events it actually makes sense that a collision would make a damage to both planes.

Has it been two weeks already? 

Artik you are asking for collision damage even if you avoid a collision on your PC.

The collision of the bullet to the target only needs to happen on the shooter's PC. On the target's PC the bullets are sometimes far off the target. This lets the shooter shoot the target on purpose but does not allow the shooter to collide with the target on purpose.

The difference is what happens with the hit data from the shooter. Bullet hit data is sent to the target. Collision damage is not sent. Collision damage only occurs on the PC that had a collision.

Why should a player who avoids a collision get damaged by one?

[Wiley]

When plane A flying at straight line rams plane B flying at straight line from dead-6 and plane A is damaged and B is not (because of the hemisphere it was rammed into) than yes I call it Single sided collision.

You can call it one side damage or any other name - the fact remain the fact only one plane get damaged. It is perfectly OK for MA but for SEA sometimes the two-sided damage is better.

@Lusche - believe me I know what the model is, I had read it more than once.

But lets assume a model: a - had seen collision at point X - b hadn't because of lag now you can select: nobody gets a damage, both get damage and so on. Bullets, Rockets, Bombs, Shells all are player controlled in their initial path. And it works.

Quoting hitech

This what usually happens (at least to me).

In such a case you can make the damage to both players... that's it. i.e. Now if BaldEagl collided with me I take damage as well.

It isn't about "possibility" it is about modelling.

Finally if you want to solve "lag problem" remove "front end" and use any end

*sigh*  Okay, so what you're saying is, you would be perfectly ok with flying by a guy a couple hundred feet away, and your plane going boom?

Wiley.

[Lusche]

Finally if you want to solve "lag problem" remove "front end" and use any end

Moment of collision. You are the P-47 pilot, and this is your FE, this is what you see. Lusche, the P-51 pilot just induced a collision ("lusche has collided with you")

You should go down?

[FLOOB]

The collisions wherein only one takes damage only happens when someone is trying to get inappropriately close to someone else's behind.

[Lusche]

The collisions wherein only one takes damage only happens when someone is trying to get inappropriately close to someone else's behind.

No. They can happen in about any situation. I also collide "one sided" when doing my high front quarter slashing attacks on bombers.