Collision Model Change

[Animl-AW]

It is!  When your end sees collision, you take damage.  When your end sees no collision, you do not.  What is not right about that?

What is preferable about dying to an invisible plane?

Wiley.

Because in reality both take it.

This stuff my end doesn’t see it therefore i don’t take it is an error that encourages bad game play. I go back to 50/50 and dweebs gambles on that.

So my connection can slap me with fault?

[Wiley]

I’m not going to get hung up on the two FEs.

They are the only thing that matters.  They are what determines if the two planes collide.  If we're not going to use the info from them, what do we use instead?

Technically is my stance wrong? Maybe. If it stops mirons from living in HOs and Rams I’ll take that error over the current. Yep I will

Ironically, I think it would increase suicide rams in situations like bomber/goon defense.

Because in reality both take it.

This stuff my end doesn’t see it therefore i don’t take it is an error that encourages bad game play. I go back to 50/50 and dweebs gambles on that.

So my connection can slap me with fault?

Where is this "reality" you speak of?  The only info that is available in time to calculate is is on the two FEs.

Wiley.

[Animl-AW]

Lets see hiw these go when I transfer to fiber optic next week. If I constantly win, it’s wrong.  If I constantly lose because it hits my FE first it’s wrong.
Currently 90% of the time I lose using cable.

[Wiley]

Based on that comment alone, you don't seem to get it.  Switching to a lower-ping connection will make the two FEs closer to agreement, but the same rules still apply.  Don't hit on your end, don't take damage.  Hit on your end, take damage.  The only "winning" is avoiding the other plane.

Wiley.

[Animl-AW]

Btw
I’m not angry. We just have a different POV

IMO the current is nit realistic, you disagree. I get it

Edit: IMO, The only deterrent is both take damage.

Sleep on it

[Wiley]

You still didn't answer where this "reality" is.

Wiley.

[Animl-AW]

You still didn't answer where this "reality" is.

Wiley.

Sure I did, many times.

[Wiley]

Sure I did, many times.

I must have missed it.  Where in the chain of these computers is this "reality"?

Wiley.

[Animl-AW]

Here’s where I think we collide

You are about reality to the FE, you are correct, we both agree on how FE works
I’m about reality to the sim and deterring bad game play.

[Wiley]

Here’s where I think we collide

You are about reality to the FE, you are correct, we both agree on how FE works
I’m about reality to the sim and deterring bad game play.

...By sacrificing being able to trust what we see and do.  To me that is unacceptable.  The FE is literally our reality on both ends.  There are slight differences.  There will always be slight differences.  I just don't see how making what we see on both ends untrustworthy improves anything.

Wiley.

[The Fugitive]

:neener:In my first buff example. It was my fault, he lost a buff. That is getting it wrong.

I can make many films of someone being the rammer and I take the damage, it’s almost nightly.

It’s getting it wrong to put it on one. The only correction is take em both out.

Some are conflating data alignment with realism. You have to look at both. I’m removing the FE differences that burn one and rewards another. If the system saw a collision between two names it can also apply the realistic damage to both.

To damage both you remove that flawed equation and return to realism.

People get rooted in their POV. I’m prolly not going to convert them to realism.  Which is,  a collision harms both. Damaging one and not the other is fubar. Screw that FE deflection. >IMO<
<shrug>

Saying it can be avoided distracts from my point. When it happens it should be right.

Send me the films, I'll expect 5 by the end of the week. I'll use them to make a youtube on how to avoid collisions

I’m not going to get hung up on the two FEs.

If you avoided it then there was no collision at all why does he take the damage? It works both ways.

Ya beed to set the FE thing aside. It’s excusing errors.

The objective is to get players to stop intensional HO snd collisions. If damage to both stopd that then I’m fir damage to both. Period. If we’re going to error do it in to the way it stops encouraging both.

Technically is my stance wrong? Maybe. If it stops mirons from living in HOs and Rams I’ll take that error over the current. Yep I will

You MUST get hung up on the "two front" ends as this is why we have the system we have. Data is not instantaneous so there is lag. That is why the two realities, one from your view, and one from the other players view.

One thing "Wiley" said is a bit wrong. If you avoid the collision you could still take damage. If the other guy throws a dozen rounds into your wing as he is coming through those rounds WILL cause damage. So you may avoid the "collision" but you lose a wing to a bunch of cannon rounds.

Btw
I’m not angry. We just have a different POV

IMO the current is nit realistic, you disagree. I get it

Edit: IMO, The only deterrent is both take damage.

Sleep on it

Its as realistic as a computer game can be across the world WITHOUT instantaneous data transfer. The best way to think of it is the only reality is on your computer. If you collide you take damage, if you avoid you dont (unless your hit by bullet rounds). In the case of the bombers where "you felt at fault", bail and give the guy a free kill if it bothers you so much. The system isnt perfect, due to lag, but its the best that can be done.

Changing it to "both go down" isnt going to stop the HO attempts. They still attempt them now and you have a good chance of killing yourself each time you HO. The only thing that will stop them is each player making the choice that they would rather fight and earn the kill instead of just jousting and maybe racking up an easy kill. Most players dont care about "dying" in a game as the planes are free and if you up at the base under attack your back in the action right away.

[Animl-AW]

...By sacrificing being able to trust what we see and do.  To me that is unacceptable.  The FE is literally our reality on both ends.  There are slight differences.  There will always be slight differences.  I just don't see how making what we see on both ends untrustworthy improves anything.

Wiley.

I’m repeating myself

If a avid HOer works off he has a 50/50 chance of not taking the damage he’ll take the chance.

If he knows both will take damage, not so much. He will be shamed much more harsh.

The current deters almost nothing. No more 50/50 based on connection ir who’s FE gets hit first.

Currently those who get away with it just laugh and repeat almost every flight. If it’s both no matter what, like reality, he will think twice.

I will take a constructive error over a nonproductive error.

[The Fugitive]

I’m repeating myself

If a avid HOer works off he has a 50/50 chance of not taking the damage he’ll take the chance.

If he knows both will take damage, not so much. He will be shamed much more harsh.

The current deters almost nothing. No more 50/50 based on connection ir who’s FE gets hit first.

Currently those who get away with it just laugh and repeat almost every flight. If it’s both no matter what, like reality, he will think twice.

I will take a constructive error over a nonproductive error.

Some players can increase the odds by practicing. If you get the timing right can can land hits and roll out of the way to avoid the collision. They may also avoid the collision, but the face full of cannon rounds is another matter. No lead needed, just point at the nose, settle up, squeeze off a burst, and roll out of the way. Its the easiest shot in the game, that is why they take it. Your not going to get them to stop doing it.

Count on them to go for the HO and plan your flight path accordingly to get ahead of them in the turn to the next merge. I've been watching some of "snuggie's" film and he is a master at it.

[Wiley]

I’m repeating myself

If a avid HOer works off he has a 50/50 chance of not taking the damage he’ll take the chance.

Where is this 50/50 coming from?  If he avoids hitting you, he doesn't take damage.  The same as if you do likewise.

If he knows both will take damage, not so much. He will be shamed much more harsh.

Citation needed.  People that HO are not terribly concerned with dying.  Additionally, in situations where you're trying to save a goon/bomber, kamikazeing you means you're guaranteed to go down, versus you maybe not taking damage.

The current deters almost nothing. No more 50/50 based on connection ir who’s FE gets hit first.

Once again, connection speed does not increase or decrease your chance of taking damage.  I will say it again.  How fast your reality gets updated has nothing to do with your chance of taking damage.  The only thing that matters is if your plane touches his plane on your computer.  Period.  Exclamation point.  Ellipses.  Tilde.  ... - --- .--.

If his last update to the system was ten minutes ago, and his plane was hanging in midair, if you avoid it, you will not take damage.  If you run into it, you do.

Which computer does "reality" exist on?  Please answer me this, I think that may be your sticking point.

Wiley.

[Wiley]

Count on them to go for the HO and plan your flight path accordingly to get ahead of them in the turn to the next merge. I've been watching some of "snuggie's" film and he is a master at it.

Could you link Snuggie's films please?  I just about never get hit on the way in unless I've chosen to give him the face full of bullets he's angling for, but I'd be curious to see if there are things to improve my situation off the merge.

Wiley.