IRONICALLY not one word about the possible solution I posted. All ranting frithing at the mouth iver who posted it snd using AI.
Quote from: hitech on August 18, 2017, 08:55:33 AM
I only thought of that 25 years ago.
What your solution does 2 things bad for game play. And one annoying thing.
First it allows an attacker from the rear to be able to flying right threw another plane while shooting with out having to worry about a collision.
2nd it penalizes some one on a head on from pulling up and not colliding , because it allows the other guy to continue shooting and fly right threw the other plane.
And now because no damage can happen until the host receives and re transmits the collision, there would be a very noticeable lag between the visual collision and taking damage.
HiTech
There is nothing wrong with the collision model. What you must accept is that the other person did not collide with you.
So you are either asking
A. You intentionally avoid a head on collision, the other plane intentionally rams the plane he sees. And the YOU did even though you missed him.
or
B. You are in a bomber, a fighter dives in guns blazing and continues shooting as he flies right thew you.
Both of these option have far more detrimental effects to game play then the current choice.
HiTech
Consider how much you would like flying in a head on ,missing the other plane by 100 feet, and then being destroyed do to a collision.
HiTech
I still wonder if you understand the system.
Your statement above still has the thought process "WE" collide. Because it should be stated I collide not WE.
It is not only possible but likely probable that 90% of collisions are the the persons who was damaged in a collision fault.
HiTech
I know how the system works, I know how a collision can be caused in controlled circumstance. I also know that it is completely irrelevant to game play. But the fact that you COULD cause one is not really the issue.
Do you really think that people flying around trying to cause a collision is a problem in the main arena?
Also discussing the pros and cons, is an impossibility with some one until they understand how the system works.
I am one of the few people who flown all available options regarding collisions with 1 acceptation (no collision, 1 person collides both damaged, 1 person collides no damage, 1 person collides the other one damaged, and also damage only if both collide) I havn't done the 1 person collides only other takes damage)
And if you havn't flown with no collisions and found out how flying threw people completely changes the fight, then it is hard to describe.
1. Bomber attacks are high attacks flying directly threw the bomber.
2. Head on guns blazing fly threw become the norm.
HiTech
No one said collisions can not be applied equitably. Right now is the most equitable way I can think of. If YOU collide with an enemy plane, YOU take damage. If ANYONE collides with an enemy plane they take damage. 100% equitable, everyone has the same rules regardless of lag.
HiTech
I have no plans to change anything.
HiTech