Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: Brenjen on May 01, 2006, 11:40:57 PM
-
I am not a computer programmer. I am not a complete idiot either. I know how to use & have used the search function.
That being said hold the "use the search function" snot-nosed comments.
I have read where HT has stated the "plane towing a target drone" X 2 is how the programming works. I think I understand that the FE or front end is the respective users own PC ( my FE is my own PC ) I have also read the article written about net lag for the warbirds set from here:
http://www.rdrop.com/users/hoofj/netlag.htm
But just when I think I understand how it works I seem to get confused again. Now, I am not complaining....I rarely have collisions, I am just trying to learn the facts & be sure I know whats going on.
If, for instance, I am turning for an angle & I end up in a HO with another plane & I see the message: "You have collided with X-pilot" That means that on my FE (my PC) it calculated from the positional information it has available that both aircraft occupied the same place at the same time right?
So how does it determine I hit X-pilot instead of the other way around?
Is it a split second communication between my FE & his FE via the HTC server that he was moving out of the way when we hit?
Or is it a split second communication between the FE on my end & the one on his end via the HTC server that says my view showed me hitting him & his view showed him missing me so I was the collider & he was the collidee?
I guess it's the lag & the fact that there aren't really two planes (or four as it were) flying in cyberspace hitting each other that's throwing me. I can't get my mind around how I see a collision (or X-pilot sees it) & the other guys sees a 100 yard close miss. Not being a 1's & 0's binary code sort of guy my brain tends to interpret images of this situation as "if I hit him...then he had to have hit me too"
When in this situation what is really happening is " one of us hit the other one...but the other one didn't"? :huh
Have I at least got it right that if it says "you have collided with X-pilot" then I have damage & that if the message says "X-pilot has collided with you" I don't have damage?
Am I really dense or has the discussion of this subject been described above my knowledge level in one thread & dumbed down too much in another? I still can't understand how there can be as many as 4 seconds between the views of the repective pilots & we still see a fluid scene either....dang I feel stupid.
-
I too have read all the threads and HT's explanation of how he thinks it works. But I really think there is something wrong with the programming.
I think your question really is:
Why is it when someone collides with me I sustain the damage and he doesn't.......and when I collide with someone I sustain the damage and he doesn't? (No guns have been fired by either party)
This happens to me as well....95% of the time.
I think the programming should be changed so that the person who the computer says did the colliding is rewarded with the damage and no one else. This would minimize the current ram mode utilized frequently in the MA.
-
Originally posted by Docc
I think the programming should be changed so that the person who the computer says did the colliding is rewarded with the damage and no one else. This would minimize the current ram mode utilized frequently in the MA.
Which would lead to thousands of complaints from people who did not see a collision on there FE getting damaged/destroyed.
Think about how you would feel if you were suddenly wingless with no visible collision (nor any other explanation).
Lag on an internet game is unavoidable, and while the "you see it, you get it" method has its' issues it is ultimately the best method.
-
Thats exactly what I am saying. I am getting the damage without seeing it and my computer says "so and so collided with you". He flies away undamaged.
-
Thanks for doing a search beforehand. It's much appreciated; I hope other posters who don't understand the current model also do the same.
It comes down to what you see is what you get. You see a collision, you collided. The other guy doesn't see a collision, he didn't collide. That's how you die and he doesn't.
The primary thing to understand is that AH uses a smoothing code... your FE is actually predicting where the other plane is going to be based on its last known trajectory/speed. Keep that in mind.
So now we've got 2 planes on a collision course. Three computers are involved: yours, mine, and the server. Let's say it takes 1 second for my computer to contact the server, and then another second for the server to contact you (and vice versa)
Say our planes stay on the collision course until the last second. 1 second before I see the collision on my FE, I jerk up on the stick. My FE, since it doesn't have up to the second info on where you are (remember, my FE is displaying 1 second old data), uses its smoothing code to predict that you continued flying straight at the same speed. Since I changed direction, my FE instantly displays that (no lag). However, the smoothing code assumes you went straight, and so on my FE you zoom under me. Collision avoided... or so it appears on my FE.
Now on your FE, you also see my plane 1 second from colliding with you. Say you take no evasive action and fly straight. In real life, I'm pulling up on my stick and avoiding the collision. However, that data will not reach your computer for another 2 seconds (1 to the server, 1 from the server to you). So your computer's smoothing code predicts that my plane flew straight. Your computer, based on this prediction, calculates a collision (as far as it knows I flew straight) and assigns damage... you take damage.
Now, your computer sends a "Brenjen hit Tarmac and died" message to the server. I didn't see a collision on my FE, so my computer simply sends a "Tarmac is climbing" message to the server... which relays that to you, and you see my plane climb away unharmed. The server sends me the "Brenjen hit you" message, along with the data that your plane has lost a wing and is in a death spiral. That data takes a second to reach me, so I see your plane fly unharmed for a second (since my smoothing code is still thinking you're flying straight and level), but a second later it loses its wing and begins to go down. Since I didn't see the collision on my FE, I take no damage.
Of course, the times are measured in tenths of a second, not full seconds, and these messages are sent multiple times per second. I used round numbers, but I hope you understand what's really going on.
-
Originally posted by Docc
Thats exactly what I am saying. I am getting the damage without seeing it and my computer says "so and so collided with you". He flies away undamaged.
Unless there's a bug, this is impossible.
-- if your computer says "Tarmac collided with you", that means tarmac's computer said "You have collided." If my computer said I collided, then I've taken damage. Maybe not lethal damage, but damage nonetheless.
-- If you are taking damage, it is because your FE saw a collision. Your FE is the one that assigns damage, not the server. You may have been looking in the wrong direction, but your computer saw it happen (even if your pilot didn't) and modelled our planes colliding based on where it predicted my plane would be.
-
I don't care whether you say its impossible or not.......it is happening.
I don't see a collision on my computer, I get a message that xxx has collided with me, and I get damaged while he doesn't.
I think the programming is too sensitive or has a bug that assigns damage to the wrong person.
I am used to playing with lag....I live in Malaysia and my normal ping time is 597 ms but it is rock steady.
-
The server has nothing to do with collision detection.
Your computer keeps track of where YOU are, and the server sends you position, speed, attitude information on every aircraft near you. If your position (plus the size of your plane) intersects with the position of another plane, your computer detects this coincidence as a "collision" and 2 things happen. You take damage, and the collision/damage information is sent back to the server.
This has NOTHING to do with what is happening on the other guy's computer, and that is what bothers people when they try to figure out the collision detection model. On the other guy's computer, the exact same calculations are being done. His computer is keeping track of his own position, and the server is sending him the positions of other planes. If any one computer determines a position conflict, even if it isn't seen on other computers due to network lag and the fact that it takes a certain amount of time for any maneuver to be sent from each computer to the server and then propagated to every client within a certain distance, then that collision is still valid because it occurred on that one computer and it will result in damage, and that collision/damage message will be sent to the arena host for propagation where appropriate.
It's really not all that tough to understand once you realize that what YOU see on your computer is 2 things - your own position as tracked by your own computer, and the position info for other planes sent to you by the host. This means that the position of other planes/vehicles you see on your screen is actually the position those players computers sent up to a full second ago. That lag results in the game "reality" not being tracked by the host, but by what every player individually sees on their own computers. So if a guy turns left but for whatever reason that left turn data is delayed in getting to your computer (a warp), and you see him flying straight and you shoot him, he's STILL DEAD even though he really turned instead of flying straight, because on your own computer you shot him fair and square.
This model relies on the fact that even with random errors, the internet is fairly consistent in behavior. Ping times, lost packets, and general latencies tend to even out for everyone, so everyone sees the lag effects nearly equally. People with very fast computers and very fast and reliable connections to HTC's servers may see some benefits, but on average everyone is playing with the same lag effects so nobody gets a clear advantage.
There are exceptions and in some cases a network setup that has less transmission lag than receive lag (or vice-versa) may see some artificial benefits, but it takes a real AH veteran to learn how to take advantage of that. And deliberately inducing a large difference between inbound and outbound network traffic would probably constitute cheating so I doubt anyone is seriously taking advantage of it. There was a guy with a really high ping time but with a very "clean" network connection, and he benefitted in a huge way from that network characteristic. He knew that there was a huge lag between what he was doing and what you saw him doing, and he used that to his advantage. But it's not cheating, because everyone has to deal with network lag. The difference is that while every single fight he had was under a large network lag condition, most other players only had to deal with that kind of lag when they were fighting HIM. So it worked to his advantage since to most players, he flew differently than almost everyone else.
-
First off just because you suddenly have damage does NOT mean it came from the collision. He could have shot you, you could have run into pieces. You might have jerked the stick hard enough to rip wings off. There are a whole realm of possible causes.
The solution is to not fly so close, AVOID those collisions.
See it coming, react sooner, don't fly it so tight to the edge.
The only way to really be sure of whats happening in the situation your describing would be to film it.
Then step through the film frame by frame to see what happened.
This was not written for AH, so the icon's are not right. But I think most of you are smart enough to figure it out. I read this back in the spring of 97, and a light bulb went on, AHAH!
Take the time to really read & understand what he's saying.
http://www.rdrop.com/users/hoofj/netlag.htm
-
A lot of people are under the misconception that the arena is somehow "inside" the host. That the current state of your aircraft's position, speed, etc. is actually calculated and held within the host. That is completely incorrect! The main purpose of the host is to receive position updates from everyone's computer and intelligently transmit those position updates out to only those other computers who might need to know that information.
This is why someone with a really crappy computer can still host 8 player H2H with pretty good results...
The real arena is a distributed "dream", held in the virtual minds of each individual player. The strict control of the client behavior is what makes this a consistent shared dream world, and it's why AH is theoretically susceptable to hacked clients - The host, within closely guarded limits, will 'believe' whatever positional data a client sends it, because the host trusts each client to behave consistently. So the war, the arena, whatever, doesn't really exist in some host somewhere. The arena is in your own computer! Each computer has a full arena, populated by your own aircraft's behavior calculated by your cpu, plus the positions of other vehicles sent to you by the host. But the host doesn't calculate ANY of those other positions.
Even the AI is done entirely on your own computer. Everyone's personal arena (their slice of the shared dream called the arena) starts off the same. The state of non-player objects within the arena is kept by the host, because everyone's arena starts off with the same list of objects. So the host only has to tell your computer which objects are destroyed right when you log on, and then to pass updates whenever an object's status changes. Player X blows up object 269, and the status message "object 269 destroyed" is passed to everyone. But when you shoot or collide with someone, that shot or collision does not occur on the host - it occurs on your own computer, and because the host implicitly trusts whatever it's told, when your computer passes the message "I shot player Y with 2 type 4 gun rounds in the left wingtip", the host believes you and passes that shot data to player Y's computer, which registers the shot data and resulting damage. The damage that occurs, say it's a wingtip that gets shot off, then gets passed back to the host and broadcast to everyone within visual range of player Y. So everyone sees player x shoot off player Y's wingtip, after the 4-way transmission lag of course.
Collisions are no different.
-
I must say that the host code is pretty clever... If the host merely blindly passed along whatever it got whenever it got it, we'd see some very strange results. Planes would fly backwards, spin in place, warp all the time, etc. So the host code isn't simple by any means. But as intelligent as the host code is, it still doesn't track collisions or shots. All that happens on each individual client's computer and only the results are sent to the host for processing and distribution.
I suspect that this will have to change with the new combat tour because the AI will have to be consistent across clients, but it's still going to have to be done with virtual clients interfacing with a "simple" message passing host. The basic model can't change without compromising the consistency and integrity of the arena environment. You're not flying a plane inside an arena, you're flying a plane on your own computer and the results are sent to everyone else's computer through the host. Unless HT has figured out a unique way to synchronize AI vehicles across clients, the AI vehicles will have to be virtualized and sent through the normal host interface as if they're really just another player.
-
Docc said; I think your question really is: Why is it when someone collides with me I sustain the damage and he doesn't.......and when I collide with someone I sustain the damage and he doesn't? (No guns have been fired by either party)
No Docc, not really. In a way that's what instigated my research into this; but that's not a problem I am having. As I stated in my opening post, I rarely collide & when I do I don't always go down ( just 80% of the time ) At least two out of the last ten collisions I have flown away from, & the last one a few days ago, I & the fellow AH'r I collided with both flew away. He did eventually crash trying to land though, so he must have took damage ( I don't know if I did or not - I never checked )
Tarmac; right on man! The smoothing code is what was throwing me. I think I understand it now, There is a collision because one PC ( FE ) or the other of the two pilots PC's (FE's) has assumed due to the smoothing code....which is necessary due to lag for fluid motion....that one of the planes or the other continued to fly straight....or better stated; continued to fly into the path of the other plane.
So; if I pull up & the other guy pushes forward at the same time...my PC (FE) will not see a collision & neither will the other guy on his end. In that situation there is a WARP because the smoothing code is still actively assuming we are both flying in a predictable pattern when neither of us are in real time.
eagl said: The server has nothing to do with collision detection.
In a way that's true, but not entirely accurate becasue as I understand it, the smoothing code is there because of lag & lag is caused by the time it takes for our PC's (FE's) to communicate to the server & back to us again. So it's part of the "smoothing code loop" therefore it's part of the decision making; but it doesn't make the decision.
Ghosth said: First off just because you suddenly have damage does NOT mean it came from the collision. He could have shot you, you could have run into pieces.
According to HT in one of the threads I searched through he stated "you do not take damage from hitting pieces"
I can't read through all these posts because I can't tell if some of you are replying to me & my questions or Docc. He has a specific problem & mine are general questions. I think Tarmac covered the part that was confusing me anyway....Thanks Tarmac :aok
-
If you know so much about the code and the net then change the code so it works with the net as you describe it.
It is NOT even close to being right when I don't see a collision on my front end, I get a message that says 'xxxx has collided with you', and I die and he doesn't.
If I got the message that said 'you have collided with xxx' I would expect to take damage, but HE hit me on HIS front end (and was not damaged)according to your explanation...I did not hit him on mine.
No bullets were fired.
I didn;t hit debris......and anyway HT says debris collisions do not cause damage, only noise.......and I didn't hear any noise.
Bottom line:
If you get the message that says "YOU have collided with XXX" then you should get the damage or more damage than the person YOU hit.
If you get the message "XXX has collided with you" then HE should get the damage or a lot more than you get.
Too many people in the MA are using the current collision model to purposely ram people when they are out of ammo (where the guy you hit dies and maybe you live). Yes I know it really happened in real life......but this is a GAME....let's be fair to everyone
Sorry guys but this is one topic that gets me on my soapbox.
-
*Head explodes*
-
Originally posted by Docc
Too many people in the MA are using the current collision model to purposely ram people when they are out of ammo (where the guy you hit dies and maybe you live). Yes I know it really happened in real life......but this is a GAME....let's be fair to everyone
If you try this you will find it only (really) possible when in HO.
But your lag (whilst not contributing to rams directly) is so high that enemy manouvres to avoid ramming will appear to be carried out far too late.........
Also your enemy may seem to be getting hits on you when quite often the angle seems all wrong..............
If you get the message that says "YOU have collided with XXX" then you should get the damage or more damage than the person YOU hit.
If you get the message "XXX has collided with you" then HE should get the damage
This is how it works...................
Smoothing....................
There is a lot of discussion and assumption about smoothing code...........
I have never seen any AC sim publish how its smoothing code works or what it is written to achieve...............infact these folk seem to keep such cans of worms sealed and not open for inspection.
I have never seen it admitted that it predicts (how can it?) flight paths or locational data of the many dots that can be in the air around us at any one time.
As aircraft come closer to us the "update" rate for that icon increases...smoothing may fill in the gaps but once we are in close contact the update rate is so frequent that joining the dots will always present a fairly smooth curve made up of short straight lines. However in rapid changes or direction even an instant shift of 5 degrees can look wierd..this transition of attitude must be smoothed to generate a smooth flight path.
It makes sense to me that the rendering of the "attitude" of other aircraft flying through the air may require smoothing to ensure they point in the proper direction and bank at the proper angle etc etc and that transition from one location to another is accompanied by smooth transition of attitude.
This can be done on our FE's which is where the bulk of all code is most efficiently carried out. They are rendered with respect to the position we "see" them and as such their attitude is rendered and smoothed with respect to ours.
Untill I see other wise I will tend to believe that the bulk of "smoothing code" is predominently to do with attitude.
-
There I go getting confused again...just when I thought I understood. So you're saying the smoothing code is NOT predicting the probable next frame in the flight path according to what it sees in real time? I'm begining to get the urge to run a fibre optic drop from my house to HTC's server & demand I get played with by someone....put 'em up Skuzzy....put 'em up!:D
-
Originally posted by Brenjen
I am not a computer programmer. I am not a complete idiot either. I know how to use & have used the search function.
That being said hold the "use the search function" snot-nosed comments.
Brenjen. Too bad that for probably less than a dozens' puerileness, others must tolerate thier hi-jinx
hap
-
Originally posted by Docc
If you know so much about the code and the net then change the code so it works with the net as you describe it.
It is NOT even close to being right when I don't see a collision on my front end, I get a message that says 'xxxx has collided with you', and I die and he doesn't.
If I got the message that said 'you have collided with xxx' I would expect to take damage, but HE hit me on HIS front end (and was not damaged)according to your explanation...I did not hit him on mine.
No bullets were fired.
I didn;t hit debris......and anyway HT says debris collisions do not cause damage, only noise.......and I didn't hear any noise.
Bottom line:
If you get the message that says "YOU have collided with XXX" then you should get the damage or more damage than the person YOU hit.
If you get the message "XXX has collided with you" then HE should get the damage or a lot more than you get.
Too many people in the MA are using the current collision model to purposely ram people when they are out of ammo (where the guy you hit dies and maybe you live). Yes I know it really happened in real life......but this is a GAME....let's be fair to everyone
Sorry guys but this is one topic that gets me on my soapbox.
Docc, what you are saying is IMPOSSIBLE. So, you get damage when the other guy collides with you. That other guy SHOT YOU! Now, go back to the game and pay attention next time.
-
Originally posted by Docc
If you know so much about the code and the net then change the code so it works with the net as you describe it.
It works just fine.
It is NOT even close to being right when I don't see a collision on my front end, I get a message that says 'xxxx has collided with you', and I die and he doesn't.
He shot you and did not take enough damage to go down or leak fluids.
Also, notice that the message is in white text. What else is in white text? Private Messages. This tells you that this message came directly from his front end, NOT the host.
If I got the message that said 'you have collided with xxx' I would expect to take damage, but HE hit me on HIS front end (and was not damaged)according to your explanation...I did not hit him on mine.
Actually the message is 'you have collided' there is no with xxx. This message does not tell you that he collided. If you do not receive a message in white text then no collision was recorded on his FE
If you recieve the message 'you have collided' then you collided. It does not mean a guarantee of damage. You can collide and receive very small amounts of damage just like you can be shot and not receive major damage.
No bullets were fired.
How can you be certain of this. With tracers off there is now way to tell unless you see mussle flashes or you take hits. This is one area where lag can come into play. I can recall many times being shot by a plane that is already past me. Same can be true in this situation. He fires (tracers off) you pass, he collides and then bullets hit you recorded on his FE.
I didn;t hit debris......and anyway HT says debris collisions do not cause damage, only noise.......and I didn't hear any noise.
That is correct. small pieces of debris will not cause damage.
Bottom line:
If you get the message that says "YOU have collided with XXX" then you should get the damage or more damage than the person YOU hit.
Again, getting this message does not indicate that the person you hit registered a collision so they may take no damage at all. This is in most cases the way it happens. You hit him on your FE but he sees no collision.
If you get the message "XXX has collided with you" then HE should get the damage or a lot more than you get.
One more time, this message only indicates that the other players FE recorded a collision. Again, WHITE TEXT, the message came directly from his FE. If you did not recieve a 'you have collided' message then no collision was recorded on your FE. If you take damage it is most likely due to weapons fire.
Too many people in the MA are using the current collision model to purposely ram people when they are out of ammo (where the guy you hit dies and maybe you live). Yes I know it really happened in real life......but this is a GAME....let's be fair to everyone
Go to the DA or BMA with another player and try it. It's not as easy as you think. Like Ghost said, the best thing to do is turn early. Playing chicken in this game is not a good idea.
Sorry guys but this is one topic that gets me on my soapbox.
No problem, but please try and understand what we are trying to explain here. Too many players get wrapped up in what they believe to be true and resist any effort to correct thier incorrect thinking on this matter. This is probably the most misunderstood topic in this game.
-
Originally posted by Brenjen
So; if I pull up & the other guy pushes forward at the same time...my PC (FE) will not see a collision & neither will the other guy on his end. In that situation there is a WARP because the smoothing code is still actively assuming we are both flying in a predictable pattern when neither of us are in real time.
Glad to help out.
In this situation though, you wouldn't see a warp. Both planes would avoid the collision, but for different reasons. The guy who pushed forward would see himself dive under the other plane, which would fly straight on through and pull up a second after it passed him. The guy who pulled up would see the other plane go under him and fly straight for a second before diving.
If a third pilot were in the area, he would see the two planes fly through each other and then one would continue up, one would dive, but both would be undamaged. To him, it would look like they hit and took no damage... but again, that's his smoothing code that assumed they flew straight. Since his FE can't assign collision damage to another player, it just goes down as a "wtf net lag" moment in his book. :)
-
Originally posted by Hap
Brenjen. Too bad that for probably less than a dozens' puerileness, others must tolerate thier hi-jinx
hap
I'll admit it.....I had to use a dictionary on this -------> "puerileness"
EDIT: I will admit this too; i'm still a tad confused, the more I read, the more questions come to mind. But I think i'm getting it.
-
"It comes down to what you see is what you get. You see a collision, you collided."
This is a fact...another fact is that although i die 99% of the time when colliding (as does everyone somehow) when I do "win" one i get a collision message with no damage even though i hear it , see it , and watch the other guy fall to pieces while i get the collision message
question..does processor speed have anything to do with winning or losing collisions? it would seem so as i have a dated system..
-
Not sure about the processor --
But as for "winning" a collision as you describe, the easy answer is you saw / felt a minor colision of your wingtip scraping his verticle stablizer or some other minor scrape. Meanwhile on his front end his nose cone appeared to go right through your fuselage. He disintegrates, as it should be given "his" collision, while you fly away with paint scratches, as it should be given "your" collision.
-
The easiest way to experience the "net effect" is to 2 people to target the same plane. Each will report a different distance. This works best on a freindly target as the distance report you see is more detailed- yard increments vs. 200 yard increments with enemy planes.
As to who gets damage, it appears that not only which computer "Sees" the damage applies, but also if the "pilot" is looking in the right view to see the impact.
Another aspect is that HTC has no control over routers between you and their servers. If a router hiccups, is slow, is overloaded or the electrons/photons want to be silly, anything can happen to data transmitted over the internet path your using. You can, and probably have seen, enemy plane do insane things. It ain't your fault, It ain't HTCs fault. It IS the nature of internet gaming.
So, Fly like you want to survive, stay out of the middle of DATA furballs(when your in the middle of a furball the amount of data generated can overwhelm your computer and the internet path) and accept that this is VR.
Itsa game! Even SHawk gets shot down regularly---I've seen it! :rolleyes:
If "IT" gets really bad, HTC has the reputation for making "IT" better.
They have in the past and you can bet, if they can do anything about it, they will. (re: recently seeking/moving game servers,etc)
-
Hey one way round is Direct dial to HTC
Lets go back to the old warbirds days of $2/hour *
And for an additional setup fee of... Oh I don't know $200 your can have you own personal modem and phone line at HTC**[/B]
I think a dose of history might scare a few people straight.....
NB I was not there so $2 an hour is just a guess
*+ Long Distance
**Ongoing line rental charges applicable
EDIT: I wonder how different the game would be if everyone had a direct dial connection.... I suppose then it would be a case of people on low gauge copper having crappy connects....
-
Originally posted by Crusher
The easiest way to experience the "net effect" is to 2 people to target the same plane. Each will report a different distance. This works best on a freindly target as the distance report you see is more detailed- yard increments vs. 200 yard increments with enemy planes.
As to who gets damage, it appears that not only which computer "Sees" the damage applies, but also if the "pilot" is looking in the right view to see the impact.
...snip.....
Interesting idea, and a nice experiemnt to "try at home."
However, I'm pretty sure that "looking" has absolutely no effect on kill data. I'll leave the definitive answer to HTC, but in the past I've read them say that all that matters is who landed the most damage prior to the kill bveing recorded. Period.
-
HTC has said in another thread that connect speed has NO effect on collisions, at all, in any way. This is entirely as expected if you understand that the collision happens 100% on your machine. Dont hit the things you see (wether you're looking that way or not) on your computer.
I cant think of a reason processor speed would affect collisions, because reactions are limited y their slowest step -- which is the net info coming to your computer.
And I claim no authority for that idea, just applied logic. I dont program anything tougher than a VCR.
-
Would it not be easier if we got three people to film the same event.
1 guy on dial up
1 on cable
1 guy on ADSL
Get two of them to fly Me163's at full pelt towards each other and collide.
Get the third to watch from the ground.
Have all three post the films.
Get someone who is good with films, Morph perhaps (no suckup intended) to edit them over the top of each other from the same view
and perhaps a few other views ect.
Maybe this will help people understand how each person see's a different angle of the same thing.....
Just an idea and not to well thought but hey I thought it might help
Later
EDIT: I only suggested Cable ADSL and Dial up to try and get three connections that are as different as possable, I know there is a hell of a lot more to it.....
-
It is what your computer detects. You do not have to visually see the collision for it to happen.
-
Originally posted by Crusher
As to who gets damage, it appears that not only which computer "Sees" the damage applies, but also if the "pilot" is looking in the right view to see the impact.
remind me next time I got a ton o' nme on my 6 to not look back. maybe they won't be able to damage me if i'm not "looking"
-
Originally posted by Skuzzy
It is what your computer detects. You do not have to visually see the collision for it to happen.
So this is why I get hit when the nose of the bad guy isn't pointing at me?
Further certain individuals SEEM to fly in the arena and their plane doesn't SEEM to be where I see it??????
I fire to NO, or very little, affect?
I've stated before, I have dialup at 37K and I have found what SEEMS to be a problem for me.
The people with the high speed connect SEEM to be able to hit me when their nose is NOT on me on my FE.
I can have REAL trouble trying to hit these people. Especially when I'm under 400 yds.
It's like they have about 1/2 a second on me. Like they are 1/2 a second further from the position I see them in.
I now have CAT 4.12 installed. Got other skins turned off. Got preload turned off. Using FSautostart and turning nearly everything off. Got Vsync on. Got my connect restricted to 37k with compression off. Tried about everything I can think of to remedy this 1/2 a second thing.
Not doing so well so far.
I've also noticed that the film recorder doesn't always SEEM to record what I saw but what the computer saw.
This, IMHO, REALLY affect gunnery! Someone with a connect and machine closer to mine and I can hit em fairly easily using the same gunnery I've always used. Someone with a FASTER connect and maybe faster machine and in order to hit em IT SEEMS like I have to change where I shoot? Cause I shoot where they SHOULD be according to what I see at the time I fire and they don't seem to take much if ANY damage. Looks like my tracers pass right through em sometimes.
So ARE they about 1/2 a second further through their manuver then I see or????
Is it a MY video card and MY CPU are NOT seeing the same thing situation?
I would really like to understand this. It SEEMED to start for me with the introduction of the smoothing code.
-
Kind of off topic, but I will post it anyway for those who like to gripe about "winning" and "losing collisions."
From May 2006 issue of World War II Magazine:
Article "Typhoon Strikes", an interview with Harry Hardy, a Canadian WWII pilot with more than 100 attack sorties. Bold mine
WWII: You were posted to No. 61 Operational Training Unit at Rednal, England . . .
Hardy: . . . Nothing spectacular happened there, except I had a midair collision and lost a Spitfire.
WWII: What happened?
Hardy: We were practicing dogfighting. One guy would take the lead and the other would follow. You were expected to do everything you could to shake your opponent, and he was supposed to hang on. On this particular occasion I was out in front and being chased. In an effort to break away, I whipped my Spitfire into a tight turn and dropped a little flap to tighten up the turn. He wasn't watching and flew right into me. My Spitfire exploded. His was still flyable so he got it down. I was just left there in the seat and there was no Spitfire. I got rid of the seat and opened my parachute. I remember how quiet it was going down. There was fog on the ground. I went down through it and landed in a farmer's field. I wasn't hurt at all. They put the two of us in a hospital and checked us all over. They endorsed my logbook and said it was partially my fault.
-
Originally posted by wrag
The people with the high speed connect SEEM to be able to hit me when their nose is NOT on me on my FE.
This is network lag................and its effect is due to the total lag between your opponents FE and your FE............
A slow connect with a delay of 200milli is added to a fast one of 50milli producing total is 250 via the server.
Very common is when both parties are turning hard almost head to head and you see your opponent apparantly vainly fire (under your belly) behind you (not being able to pull to get angle) and yet he gets hits on you.
On his FE he got hits on you ................
Lead turns can look this way too................ except he seems to have passed you turned 180 and still got a shot.............. the bigger your lag the more this will seem to happen to you.
He shoots you on his FE you feel the pain.
He collides with you on his FE only he feels the pain. (unless your FE "sees" it too)
I would love to believe that lag explains my bad marksman ship.........it doesn't I am just a crap shot............ I have proven this to myself off line using the auto gun sight.
The only way I could not score hits is if my FE is not scoring them or they are being lost..........in which case other stuff would be lost..........and it isn't. I do not warp and my connect is smooth if delayed by 125 to 150 milli.
-
Originally posted by Skuzzy
It is what your computer sees. You do not have to visually see the collision for it to happen.
What If I put a blanket over my computer so it cant see?!?!?!!11!?:noid
-
Originally posted by Morpheus
What If I put a blanket over my computer so it cant see?!?!?!!11!?:noid
I did that. Then I beat my computer with a pillow case with a brick in it.:furious
-
It's funny how after all the complaining about collisions, I have yet to see someone supply a film of the event showing them reciving collision damage, when there was no contact.
-
Originally posted by Simaril
HTC has said in another thread that connect speed has NO effect on collisions, at all, in any way. This is entirely as expected if you understand that the collision happens 100% on your machine. Dont hit the things you see (wether you're looking that way or not) on your computer.
I cant think of a reason processor speed would affect collisions, because reactions are limited y their slowest step -- which is the net info coming to your computer.
And I claim no authority for that idea, just applied logic. I dont program anything tougher than a VCR.
Always had this theory regarding lag -
Lets take it to extremes
- guy (A) has a 2 sec lag
- guy (B) has a 1 sec lag
They fly straight toward each other and collide -
Guy (B) with less lag sees the collision and takes damage.
At that moment Guy (A) enters a climb.
By the time Guy (A) catches up there is no collision.
Who knows lol.
-
Originally posted by LLv34_Snefens
It's funny how after all the complaining about collisions, I have yet to see someone supply a film of the event showing them reciving collision damage, when there was no contact.
You want to see it? Then IMHO you will have to use a video camera and place it so it records what is on your monitor.
Cause the film recorder records what your COMPUTER sees.
What does this mean? IMHO If there is enough lag between your CPU and vid card and net connection what you see is NOT what is.
-
IMHO If there is enough lag between your CPU and vid card and net connection what you see is NOT what is
Belive this is a keeper. But since all of what is is just 1 & 0's in the computer would not it be the best judge of what is, is?
But now that we don't even know what is, is,and everone else is "ahhh this is hard" seeing there Is and Is's different how is is,is confused.
HiTech
-
Think my brain just went bye bye lol .
-
Originally posted by hitech
Belive this is a keeper. But since all of what is is just 1 & 0's in the computer would not it be the best judge of what is, is?
But now that we don't even know what is, is,and everone else is "ahhh this is hard" seeing there Is and Is's different how is is,is confused.
HiTech
? - O.K.; I'm lost again. I can't even tell when someone is replying to my question or someone else's comment.
The heck with it; when you figure the game crashes on me every few minutes, I suppose I don't really need to understand how any of it works if I can't even play it.
-
I think if y'all take some time to research IT, you might begin to understand.
What you see on your monitor is a result of you FE and all the data transmission pathways. What the HTC servers send to your FE is what the servers sees. There are so many variables in data transmission that anything can be possible.
It ain't a perfect world to start with, then add to that a Virtual reality game's aspects and at best, the VR becomes moderately predictable.
Lighten up! It's a GAME.
HTC does great with the part of IT they can control.
Just be happy that there is a game.
-
Click here for collisions explained (http://www.hitechcreations.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=172837&highlight=collide)
Ignore everything in that thread except HT's posts. He makes nice and simple analogies to explain how collision detection and lag work, and debunks some of the myths about collisions.
-
I have read where HT has stated the "plane towing a target drone" X 2
That was my opening post, but then again; you probably weren't talking to me...but I covered that as well.
-
Originally posted by hitech
Belive this is a keeper. But since all of what is is just 1 & 0's in the computer would not it be the best judge of what is, is?
But now that we don't even know what is, is,and everone else is "ahhh this is hard" seeing there Is and Is's different how is is,is confused.
HiTech
lemme know if anybody is able to translate this for me.
-
Just accept it's vodoo and move on:D
-
Originally posted by hitech
Belive this is a keeper. But since all of what is is just 1 & 0's in the computer would not it be the best judge of what is, is?
But now that we don't even know what is, is,and everone else is "ahhh this is hard" seeing there Is and Is's different how is is,is confused.
HiTech
:lol
-
best way to avoid colliding --- avoid the HOs
-
or just turn of collisions..i know this encourages hoing right?:confused: like 95% of people dont already do it?
-
If you want a translation of HT's post, you're gonna have to go to the con. I'm sure if you hand him a glass of scotch and a pencil/scratchpad, he'll be happy to explain it for the billionth time :) Face to face discussion with HT and Pyro is the best way to answer ANY question about the game, arena, etc.
As annoying as I've been sometimes, HT and Pyro NEVER blew me off at a con when I had a question, and that's pretty cool.
-
Correct me if I am wrong, but in the below diagram the Red pilot who perhaps could have avoided the collision takes the damage... and the blue pilot is told "Red has collided with you."
If the red pilot was firing as he collided then both would be damaged.
Red from the collision.
Blue from the bullets.
But Blue would still see the message "Red has collided with you."
Correct...?
Perhaps this is the root cause of the perceived problem with the collision system...
(http://members.optusnet.com.au/vstrom/FE%20Difference.jpg)
-
I think that about sums it up perfectly.
Doing a graphic seems so obvious that I dont know why nobody's posted one before...hopefully the pic will clear up any remaining doubts!
PS....Keep that pic at its current address, I ahve a feeling it will be linked when the NEXT collision complaint shows up!
-
Originally posted by hitech
Belive this is a keeper. But since all of what is is just 1 & 0's in the computer would not it be the best judge of what is, is?
But now that we don't even know what is, is,and everone else is "ahhh this is hard" seeing there Is and Is's different how is is,is confused.
HiTech
Ah, as with the tree in a golden forest...
-
"
Correct me if I am wrong, but in the below diagram the Red pilot who perhaps could have avoided the collision takes the damage... and the blue pilot is told "Red has collided with you."
Unfortunately in the game, the BLUE pilot takes more damage...even with no bullets being fired.
The RED pilot may lose an oil line or engine, But the BLUE pilot loses a tail and dies.
This is what is really wrong with the collision model...the BLUE pilot is penalized for something he didn't see or do.
-
But how do you know that the other pilot did not fire at the last moment....
If I had a gun sight full of Rook I sure as hell would be firing......
-
Tell me how a C-47 can shoot at you and I will start flying them all the time. Also has happened to me with other planes which private messages confirm were out of ammo. In each case I got the message that "XXXX has collided with you". In each case I lost a tail while he flew away apparently unscathed.
I play with a higher (but steady) ping time than most.
-
Docc, seriously, why do you even bother? The **** you keep stating as fact isn't possible according to anyone, and you won't provide any sort of "proof". You continue to describe situations that the programmers say aren't even remotely possible, but you dismiss their input, and respond with, "well so-and-so said this, so HTC must be wrong".
Has it occured to you, even for one fleeting moment, that the guy who coded this game, and oversees all aspects of it, probably knows a little bit more about it than you? Your inability to accept the obvious amazes me.
You show up in every one of these threads talking crazy ****, but you won't provide even one film of all these incidents which, if you could actually be believed, occur at 2 second intervals every time you fly.
-
I learned to ignore you a long time ago too.
As soon as I can figure a way to prove it to you I will.......as has been stated above filming won;t do it.
-
Not that I would have used the same words as hub...
I have to agree.
Film it, Post it....
EDIT: OK Assumeing your the blue plane above what would you film show?
-
What is on film is what happened. You could ask HiTech if you don't believe me, but you've already proven you are more interested in complaining than understanding how collisions work.
-
I'm not one of those know-it-all punks who think it's funny to interject their insulting or destructive comments in every thread I see.
I understand what they are saying about how collisions 'supposedly' work.
I am a mechanical engineer who is used to thinking logically. If I am the blue plane and I film it it shows a clean miss and my tail falls off about 1 second later when I get the message that XXXX has collided with me. I live 600 ms ping time west of Dallas. What I would like considered and explained by all you 'experts' is a collision on my blue plane by a guy who lives 300 ms east of Dallas.
Next time I have a film I will gladly send it to HT for review. There are many others in the MA who have the same problem with collisions, especially when in the drawing above the current damage model wipes out the tail surfaces of the collidee causing death and the collider loses an engine at most.
-
I really didn't start this thread for it to turn into an arguement between anyone. Only to clarify a few questions/points I wasn't clear on. I have this crazy problem where if I don't understand something I ask questions & research it until I do.
-
Docc, it's quite simple. If it looks like you hit him on your FE, you did. If it looks like he hit you on his FE, he did. If you take damage, and receive a "XXX collided with you" message, but not a "you have collided message", you were shot, and collided with.
Lag has nothing to do with it. But hey, you know all this. HT himself has told you all of this, and yet you still maintain that only your perception of how things work is correct.
I don't understand how you could expect anyone to take you seriously.
-
Docc: What you describe is inposible. The proccessing of a collision is realy simple. It is as simple as the following.
if( UserHasCollided())
{
print("You have collided");
SendMessageToOtherUser("Docc has collided with you");
ApplyDamageToPlane();
}
It apears one place only in the code. And it is aboslutly inposible to take damage from a collision with out having the message "You have collided"
Lag and graphics have absolutly no bering on this simple fact. You can not collide with out that message.
So there for if you took damage and did not have that message, there are only 2 other posiblities I can think of.
1. You were shot.
2. You overstresed the plane.
HiTech
-
I'm not going to argue with you Hub. Your credibility with me has been ruined in all the other threads you insulted people in.
I'll wait for a real answer from someone who has bothered to read the whole thread.
-
Originally posted by Docc
:cry
I'll wait for a real answer from someone who has bothered to read the whole thread.
HiTech posted again. There's your answer, AGAIN. Somehow I think you'll still call him a liar, and still claim you're right.
-
Thanks for an honest reply HT.
Next time I have a film of it I will send it to you.
But to be fair in the game I (and many others) would ask that you consider changing the damage model on collisions so that the person who never saw the collision on his front end receives less fatal damage than the person who did the colliding.
-
Originally posted by Docc
But to be fair in the game I (and many others) would ask that you consider changing the damage model on collisions so that the person who never saw the collision on his front end receives less fatal damage than the person who did the colliding.
:huh
Why should I take damage... any damage... if I never collided with you on my front end?
-- Todd/Leviathn
-
You've got to be kidding.
-
See Rule #4
-
Originally posted by Docc
See Rule #4
:huh
Why should I take damage... any damage... if I never collided with you on my front end?
-- Todd/Leviathn
-
Originally posted by Docc
the collision on his front end receives less fatal damage than the person who did the colliding.
OK but what about this situation:
I dove on a guy but ended up going to fast, he disappeared under me and about a second later i got a "You have" collision message.
I am pretty sure that on his FE he was pulling up to avoid the madman in the diving P47
But on my FE I think that the below happened:
(http://members.optusnet.com.au/vstrom/FE%20Difference%202.jpg)
Now:
I did not see the collision
I did not cause the collision
but I take the damage cause it happened on my FE.
Some might think that this is unfair but it is simply the way it goes.
Rember that he was not pulling up into me on his FE, he was pulling up into empty space either infront of or behind me.
EDIT: Its not about who caused the collision, its about which FE the collision occoured on.....
-
Todd, suffice it to be that I have been avoiding possible collision situations lately. But EVERY time I get a message that 'SOMEONE has collided with you" I take terminal damage. The same happens to other people in the MA.
When I collide with someone and get the message "you have collided with SOMEONE" I expect to get damage and I do, but not necessarily terminal.
I agree it's not right and I'm trying to find an explanation for it. Since there is no damage in the TA, looks like I'll have to get a squaddie to fly against me in the DA if it uses the same collision model and both of us film it. We'll use C47s to eliminate the bullet aspect once and for all.
-
Every ram or collision results in $1 being charged to your creditd card. Once you reach $25 in a month, it goes up to $2. Once you reach $50 you pay double subscription for Aces High. :)
-
Last time. Only the person who collides (gets the orange system message) takes damage from a collision. The other part involved in the collision that your PC detects (the guy who gets the white PM, and who doesn't register a collision on his PC) doesn't take damage from the collision.
Fair enough, Skuzzy.
-
O.K. I'm out, you guys can have the thread. Whuup & snap away.
-
Keep it civil folks.
-
I had a collision the other night where the only thing effected was my engine. I struck the other guys tail section trying to avoid an unknown HO pass by a Niki and it cut out the engine on my F4U-1. Needless to say I was deep in enemy territory and sat down for a pilot captured message.
-
Hubsonfire: Just had a flash of the monty python parot sketch.
-
For the uninitiated:
originially performed by Monty Python's Flying Circus
...snip...
C: Look, matey, I know a dead parrot when I see one, and I'm looking
at one right now.
O: No no he's not dead, he's, he's restin'! Remarkable bird, the Norwegian
Blue, idn'it, ay? Beautiful plumage!
C: The plumage don't enter into it. It's stone dead.
O: Nononono, no, no! 'E's resting!
....snip....
C: This parrot is no more! He has ceased
to be! 'E's expired and gone to meet 'is maker! 'E's a stiff! Bereft
of life, 'e rests in peace! If you hadn't nailed 'im to the perch 'e'd be
pushing up the daisies! 'Is metabolic processes are now 'istory! 'E's off
the twig! 'E's kicked the bucket, 'e's shuffled off 'is mortal coil, run
down the curtain and joined the bleedin' choir invisibile!!
THIS IS AN EX-PARROT!!
...snip....
I.E., having to repeat the same message endlessly without the other guy getting it....
-
:rofl
-
i have no idea the amount of times i have been rammed in scissors, only for me to die and them to fly off unscathed. just one of those things i guess...
sometimes your luck is just up... :t