Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: Exmoor on January 18, 2010, 08:44:27 PM
-
I have had enough of getting rammed by others and get the message XX collided with you and I get towered, this evening I watched a BF109 rams a fellow squad mate in an A20 squad mate dies, next he turns and collides with me in a P38, I get towered, and a fellow squad mate watches him fly off and lands the kills. This is happening more and more often, and only one plane goes down. It’s starting to take the enjoyment out of the game. Both Pilots should be towered,
1OHIO Hellcat Fighter Group
-
Film?
-
See Rule #4
-
If it says "XXX collided with you" -- you take NO damage.
What's killing you is the SOB is holding the trigger down when he does it.
You're being shot down, plain and simple. Take solace in the fact the bugger probably went down as well in a suicidal attack.
-
I have had enough of getting rammed by others and get the message XX collided with you and I get towered, this evening I watched a BF109 rams a fellow squad mate in an A20 squad mate dies, next he turns and collides with me in a P38, I get towered, and a fellow squad mate watches him fly off and lands the kills. This is happening more and more often, and only one plane goes down. It’s starting to take the enjoyment out of the game. Both Pilots should be towered,
1OHIO Hellcat Fighter Group
If it wasn't for the fact that Stigler a) would never hide behind a shade account to begin with and b) would never be caught dressed in American Iron even in a shade account, I might be wondering ... :noid :
-
I have had enough of getting rammed by others and get the message XX collided with you and I get towered, this evening I watched a BF109 rams a fellow squad mate in an A20 squad mate dies, next he turns and collides with me in a P38, I get towered, and a fellow squad mate watches him fly off and lands the kills. This is happening more and more often, and only one plane goes down. It’s starting to take the enjoyment out of the game. Both Pilots should be towered,
1OHIO Hellcat Fighter Group
so, when the guy tryin to ho me, misses me on my end, by about 10 feet, b ut on his end, he sees a collision, i should go down too?
more than likely, the dude was shooting, and they went down due to that damage.
-
I have seen alot more lately of tracers off HO's! That to me is ultimate deewbery!
-
so, when the guy tryin to ho me, misses me on my end, by about 10 feet, b ut on his end, he sees a collision, i should go down too?
I think this is a good point, I don't think the OP understand the effects of lag. Honestly I only partly understand it's role in collisions but basically you have to be aware that two people may see slightly different things in game.
Also, yeah, it's only a game, relax. I get upset from time to time but I try really hard to give myself a few hours to cool down and decide if I want to whine about it or not.
-
I have seen alot more lately of tracers off HO's! That to me is ultimate deewbery!
Hmm, seems like a great idea to try out in my A8! :aok
-
I have seen alot more lately of tracers off HO's! That to me is ultimate deewbery!
As long as there's a way to cheat another, there's always those who will take advantage of it. I think most of them ultimately work in the mortgage and banking industry.
-
I have seen alot more lately of tracers off HO's! That to me is ultimate deewbery!
You can still see the flash.
I can't help but laugh at the guys that are so intent on a Ho as to shove the stick as far forward as possible to get a shot at you while you trying to duck their Ho. Their brains should be splattered all over the canopy when their head hits it. That is assuming of course they have any. :D
-
On The Money!
If it wasn't for the fact that Stigler a) would never hide behind a shade account to begin with and b) would never be caught dressed in American Iron even in a shade account, I might be wondering ... :noid :
You are unable to collide with friendly planes........... FYI.
-
Yeah I got collided with so hard once I actually got whiplash. Something has to give... :noid
-
Actually had a Hurrican2 pass through my ditching zeke (he tried to strafe). I saw his cockpit dials for a brief moment as they passed through my cockpit. Neither of us got a collision.
-
I have had enough of getting rammed by others and get the message XX collided with you and I get towered, this evening I watched a BF109 rams a fellow squad mate in an A20 squad mate dies, next he turns and collides with me in a P38, I get towered, and a fellow squad mate watches him fly off and lands the kills. This is happening more and more often, and only one plane goes down. It’s starting to take the enjoyment out of the game. Both Pilots should be towered,
1OHIO Hellcat Fighter Group
almost forgot.....if you're getting rammed, you're letting him get close to ya, which means you're trying to return the ho........stop doing that, and you'll be amazed at how little ya get rammed.
:aok
-
I have had enough of getting rammed by others and get the message XX collided with you and I get towered, this evening I watched a BF109 rams a fellow squad mate in an A20 squad mate dies, next he turns and collides with me in a P38, I get towered, and a fellow squad mate watches him fly off and lands the kills. This is happening more and more often, and only one plane goes down. It’s starting to take the enjoyment out of the game. Both Pilots should be towered,
1OHIO Hellcat Fighter Group
I call shenanigans as it's clear you're not telling us the unvarnished truth and you have no clue how the collision model works.
ack-ack
-
Maybe the only time it might be useful to intentionally collide with someone and expect to get out alive is when your guns are empty :devil
-
See Rule #2
-
See Rule #2
-
See Rules #2, #4
-
You can still see the flash.
I can't help but laugh at the guys that are so intent on a Ho as to shove the stick as far forward as possible to get a shot at you while you trying to duck their Ho. Their brains should be splattered all over the canopy when their head hits it. That is assuming of course they have any. :D
HAHAHA if only that could happen!
-
See Rule #5
-
See Rule #2
-
See Rule #2
-
:uhoh
Skuzzmeister is among us.
-
Either get it on track or stop posting.
-
If one is becoming angry at invoking the collision model I would simply suggest keeing a bit more seperation, or at least moving to a less crowded server....like mid war, until one calms down.
-
If you pay attention to closure rate, fly a little smarter, and don't try to HO, you will rarely (if ever) collide. Collisions are 99.9% avoidable.
-
If you pay attention to closure rate, fly a little smarter, and don't try to HO, you will rarely (if ever) collide. Collisions are 99.9% avoidable.
:aok
-
If one is becoming angry at invoking the collision model I would simply suggest keeing a bit more seperation, or at least moving to a less crowded server....like mid war, until one calms down.
HA!! betcha to it!!If you pay attention to closure rate, fly a little smarter, and don't try to HO, you will rarely (if ever) collide. Collisions are 99.9% avoidable.
you too!!
:neener:
-
If one is becoming angry at invoking the collision model I would simply suggest keeing a bit more seperation, or at least moving to a less crowded server....like mid war, until one calms down.
Moving to a less crowded arena won't solve his problem of colliding with someone else, he's not crashing into people because it's crowded, he's crashing into them because he's not moving out of the way.
ack-ack
-
Collision issues?
Still kind of odd to collide and have only one plane go down. How does that cannon mg thing work? If we think we hit the guy with our bullet stream they should die, unless they don't see the same thing? Is that happening as well? Because that might explain why I am a lousy shot at times.
Reasons for Hoe?
1.Coming in fast and the opponent at first looks like he turned away but reallly turned in. I get some intent on aimage I don't break off in time. :airplane:
2. I like it and I always assume that the ENY has turned tail and is running once they see my gleaming streak of aviation cartoonary.
Infidelz
-
this is all very simple.
1)you see collision on your screen.
2)you go down.
A)you see no collision on your screen.
B)you don't go down.
now, if you went down, watch the film. chances are good he was shooting at ya.
i'd be pissed if i gave up a shot, to avoid collision, missed your airplane, and still ended up with a broken airplane.
-
Collision issues?
Still kind of odd to collide and have only one plane go down. How does that cannon mg thing work? If we think we hit the guy with our bullet stream they should die, unless they don't see the same thing? Is that happening as well? Because that might explain why I am a lousy shot at times.
Reasons for Hoe?
1.Coming in fast and the opponent at first looks like he turned away but reallly turned in. I get some intent on aimage I don't break off in time. :airplane:
2. I like it and I always assume that the ENY has turned tail and is running once they see my gleaming streak of aviation cartoonary.
Infidelz
The person being shot with bullets will see the bullets miss behind him if he is turning. But if the shooter sees a hit, the hit counts. What the receiver sees has no effect on the results of the bullets.
HiTech
-
I've noticed that every time I die in a collision I usually deserved it...
-
I've noticed that every time I die in a collision I usually deserved it...
Same here. It's pretty simple, don't fly so close and you have a better chance of missing the collision.
-
I've noticed that every time I die in a collision I usually deserved it...
+1...i usually get em when i'm dumb enough to try returning the ho.......
or in one particularily funny one, i shot down 2 lancs, and flew directly into #3. it wasn't anything with them warping around...it was my stupidly planned attack.
i laughed my bellybutton off at that one. :rofl :bolt:
-
The last time i was hit was like a week ago, but before that i cant remember the last time i was in a collision.I was shooting down some 88's in early war with a 190 (perk ride),i told the guy to take his last 88 home i felt bad for picking on the 88's .I then flew next to him,he preceded to hard turn in to me i seen him coming but could not get out of the way fast enough.I told him good job,and thought it was a fine move on his part.But besides that i don't get hit,i don't ho.
-
Perception in AH isn't always reality, the environment is so alive (more so in a furball) that you can't always know what happened unless you watch the film later.
Here is a good example.
On Monday I had an enemy aircraft come flying straight at me, he started flying at 1.5k out.
I was flying an 190A8 at the time instead of my trusty P38 but I still refused to back down. I side slipped the 190 to one side and watched his fire pass to my right. Still closing rapidly, I yawed the aircraft to the other side and squeezed the trigger once as we got within 200 yards(I don't use tracers) and his left wing lit up and broke off the enemy plane. His 1 winged bird collided with me and exploded just as he flew past me. Not taking a single hit I flew past looking for more prey.
Immediately afterwards channel 200 came alive.
DeadMan:200: Nice pick Delirium I never even saw you 38 moran
DeadMan:200: wtg 190 thanks for the ram
(note: spelling/punctuation errors not corrected)
-
Rarely get into collisions these days but do still let myself get caught out out by getting close enought for the bad guy to make a shot that seems impossible on my end but (clearly) wasn't on theirs.
Long and the short of it is don't get too close and their won't be any nasty surprises.
-
i hate collisions i really do, so much so that whenever one happens, no matter if it was me, or the other guy, i pm and say sorry as soon as i can, as it ruins a good fight. So imagine today, when ******** rams me in an a20 (hes in a 38), only to start a purse fight on ch200 how i rammed him and how 71st squad are terrible etc etc... I then went on to shoot him down in a 1on3 battle and he claimed i HO'ed him. really is what they see there end SO different to what i see on my end?
My plane was half a plane length away from from his P38 when i saw his tail fall off. How did i ram him? And the HO arguement was laughable too. I got inside his turn, he had almost managed to do a 180 on me but i managed to shoot down on his cockpit/engine/wing. Apparently thats a HO. Sigh... all i want to do is fight.
-
i hate collisions i really do, so much so that whenever one happens, no matter if it was me, or the other guy, i pm and say sorry as soon as i can, as it ruins a good fight. So imagine today, when ******** rams me in an a20 (hes in a 38), only to start a purse fight on ch200 how i rammed him and how 71st squad are terrible etc etc... I then went on to shoot him down in a 1on3 battle and he claimed i HO'ed him. really is what they see there end SO different to what i see on my end?
My plane was half a plane length away from from his P38 when i saw his tail fall off. How did i ram him? And the HO arguement was laughable too. I got inside his turn, he had almost managed to do a 180 on me but i managed to shoot down on his cockpit/engine/wing. Apparently thats a HO. Sigh... all i want to do is fight.
There is always a small microcosm of people who need to explain away their suckage.
-
DeadMan:200: Nice pick Delirium I never even saw you 38 moran
DeadMan:200: wtg 190 thanks for the ram
(note: spelling/punctuation errors not corrected)
:rofl
-
SlapShot mind If I use that line?
-
There is always a small microcosm of people who need to explain away their suckage.
That is good. :D
-
SlapShot mind If I use that line?
Only if you let Stig back in long enough to see it then PNG him again...lol
-
Im not sure but I think the collision may bug out sometimes..
This was from last night in TT, I was on the ground in a tank, tracked and turreted just sitting there waiting to die taking base ack hits when this popped up. There was NO delay inbetween the two messages.
Can you explain this one? I cant.. /shrug Im not accussing anyone of "cheatery" or anything, but it was odd for sure.. how do you land kills and collide at the same time?
(http://i59.photobucket.com/albums/g315/sarmikgar/AcesHigh/ahss62.jpg)
-
SlapShot mind If I use that line?
Feel free Dale.
-
Im not sure but I think the collision may bug out sometimes..
This was from last night in TT, I was on the ground in a tank, tracked and turreted just sitting there waiting to die taking base ack hits when this popped up. There was NO delay inbetween the two messages.
Can you explain this one? I cant.. /shrug Im not accussing anyone of "cheatery" or anything, but it was odd for sure.. how do you land kills and collide at the same time?
(http://i59.photobucket.com/albums/g315/sarmikgar/AcesHigh/ahss62.jpg)
It would seem that when he towered, your FE saw it as a collission. I have seen planes jump towards the tower when folks tower out on the tarmac. Were you between where he was on the tarmac and the tower?
-
Can you explain this one? I cant.. /shrug Im not accussing anyone of "cheatery" or anything, but it was odd for sure.. how do you land kills and collide at the same time?
yeah, the collision happened on his FE just before he towered out. the server received the landed message from his FE and displayed it before the collision message was received by your FE and displayed.
-
yeah, the collision happened on his FE just before he towered out. the server received the landed message from his FE and displayed it before the collision message was received by your FE and displayed.
STOP THAT YOU!!!!!!!
NO COMMON SENSE ALLOWED IN THIS THREAD!! :bolt: :noid :aok
-
oops sorry :D
I'll get my coat :bolt:
-
oops sorry :D
I'll get my coat :bolt:
:rofl :rofl
I really find it hard to believe that there's yet another thread on this........
-
It would seem that when he towered, your FE saw it as a collission. I have seen planes jump towards the tower when folks tower out on the tarmac. Were you between where he was on the tarmac and the tower?
I have no idea where I was in relation to him, I didnt see him land. Ive seen the same happen when someone towers, and that does make sense.. but should it be happening? answer = no ... correct? :lol
One of you is saying it was my FE and one is saying it was his.. too complicated for me :lol
-
Last night in EW I had to fly a sector to defend our lone port on an enemy island. Got there just in time to blow past a B25 and A20 flying cap to kill half the meatsacks hanging in their chutes. Then I had to evade the C47 that was trying to ram me while I worked onl the other two. Just about to saw the B25 in half and lost my tail to the A20. :lol
-
Last night in EW I had to fly a sector to defend our lone port on an enemy island. Got there just in time to blow past a B25 and A20 flying cap to kill half the meatsacks hanging in their chutes. Then I had to evade the C47 that was trying to ram me while I worked onl the other two. Just about to saw the B25 in half and lost my tail to the A20. :lol
You expect us to believe there were at least 4 in EW.... and to boot some were on opposing sides??? Come on now.
-
You'll have to trust me :angel: ...didn't have film rolling as proof. :P
After that, I actually had some good fights against a couple of guys. Yes the arena is underpopulated, but there are still fun fights to be found. If you're like me and only care about the fight and could care less about score, K/D, K/S, K/H, etc. etc. flying EW planes is a good time. Showed 'em a thing or two about fighting against a Hurri Mk1.
-
STOP THAT YOU!!!!!!!
NO COMMON SENSE ALLOWED IN THIS THREAD!! :bolt: :noid :aok
Well, from the pic above it looks like the tank is not on paved surface. Don't planes have to land on paved surface in order to get a successful landing? If that is true and the tank is not moving since he is tracked how could he possible see a collision on his FE and get a successful landing before the collision message? If he was skidding towards the pavement upfront shouldn't the collision message appear first?
As for the common sense part, really, both the collision and the landing happened in the other guys FE in that order. What common sense explains the fact that the messages got to the other guy in reverse order? I know this is the one and only bug free software ever written but these attitudes don't help any one. If it is a bug HT will fix it and if its not well, nothing to do. No need to belittle every one questioning something.
So, if message A and message B originate at the same place in that order, how does B get to the destination prior to A? There are ways to do that if two different venues are used for the two messages but I am not sure RTs explanation included that. It could be as simple as two venues used for the two messages or it could actually be - oh my got, I am going to say it - a bug :uhoh
"the server received the landed message from his FE and displayed it before the collision message was received by your FE and displayed."
Common sense? really? Server displayed but FE received :lol
Let HT figure it out.
Can you post the film so we can see the sequence of events?
-
Well, from the pic above it looks like the tank is not on paved surface. Don't planes have to land on paved surface in order to get a successful landing? If that is true and the tank is not moving since he is tracked how could he possible see a collision on his FE and get a successful landing before the collision message? If he was skidding towards the pavement upfront shouldn't the collision message appear first?
As for the common sense part, really, both the collision and the landing happened in the other guys FE in that order. What common sense explains the fact that the messages got to the other guy in reverse order? I know this is the one and only bug free software ever written but these attitudes don't help any one. If it is a bug HT will fix it and if its not well, nothing to do. No need to belittle every one questioning something.
So, if message A and message B originate at the same place in that order, how does B get to the destination prior to A? There are ways to do that if two different venues are used for the two messages but I am not sure RTs explanation included that. It could be as simple as two venues used for the two messages or it could actually be - oh my got, I am going to say it - a bug :uhoh
"the server received the landed message from his FE and displayed it before the collision message was received by your FE and displayed."
Common sense? really? Server displayed but FE received :lol
Let HT figure it out.
Can you post the film so we can see the sequence of events?
Ummm ... the tank in the picture (flapsup) is not the guy that "landed" ... prs3rd2 landed his Il-2 on the runway/tarmac ... obviously ... :rolleyes:
-
Ummm ... the tank in the picture (flapsup) is not the guy that "landed" ... prs3rd2 landed his Il-2 on the runway/tarmac ... obviously ... :rolleyes:
Duh, that is what I am saying too :P so how did he collide with the tank if he was on the runway in his FE? Tank not moving so if he saw it on the runway in his FE then something is wrong. If he was skidding towards the runway and collided on the way there, then why are the messages reversed? Read old one, read! lol. It is ok to question things when something seems off. You may be wrong, but its worth it for the few times you are right. We have a bug forum, so that implies that once in a while we may have a bug. No need to dismiss everything right away. HT can do that since he knows his code and design. We are only guessing.
-
Well, from the pic above it looks like the tank is not on paved surface. Don't planes have to land on paved surface in order to get a successful landing? If that is true and the tank is not moving since he is tracked how could he possible see a collision on his FE and get a successful landing before the collision message? If he was skidding towards the pavement upfront shouldn't the collision message appear first?
As for the common sense part, really, both the collision and the landing happened in the other guys FE in that order. What common sense explains the fact that the messages got to the other guy in reverse order? I know this is the one and only bug free software ever written but these attitudes don't help any one. If it is a bug HT will fix it and if its not well, nothing to do. No need to belittle every one questioning something.
So, if message A and message B originate at the same place in that order, how does B get to the destination prior to A? There are ways to do that if two different venues are used for the two messages but I am not sure RTs explanation included that. It could be as simple as two venues used for the two messages or it could actually be - oh my got, I am going to say it - a bug :uhoh
"the server received the landed message from his FE and displayed it before the collision message was received by your FE and displayed."
Common sense? really? Server displayed but FE received :lol
Let HT figure it out.
Can you post the film so we can see the sequence of events?
I dont have film of it.. I just snapped that screenshot when I saw the two messages show up right after each other because I thought it was odd..
I have seen more than a couple odd things over the years, Ive learned to just ignore them pretty much and continue on with enjoying the game.
-
I dont have film of it.. I just snapped that screenshot when I saw the two messages show up right after each other because I thought it was odd..
I have seen more than a couple odd things over the years, Ive learned to just ignore them pretty much and continue on with enjoying the game.
Honestly, I don't think HT would want us to ignore them. Constant crying and whining about some things I am sure they don;t want, but if it is a real bug they would like to know and fix it.
-
Duh, that is what I am saying too :P so how did he collide with the tank if he was on the runway in his FE?
When someone towers sometimes you can see their plane "scoot" off the runway.. I never knew it went towards the tower(if it does?)
This is what Shuffler was talking about, so as prs3rd2 towered and his plane "scooted" off the runway it collided with my tank, which makes sense.. but how and why the game would allow a collision after someone has towered and ended their flight is beyond me :headscratch:
-
When someone towers sometimes you can see their plane "scoot" off the runway.. I never knew it went towards the tower(if it does?)
This is what Shuffler was talking about, so as prs3rd2 towered and his plane "scooted" off the runway it collided with my tank, which makes sense.. but how and why the game would allow a collision after someone has towered and ended their flight is beyond me :headscratch:
And that would be a simple explanation to that picture. I fail to see the need to attack the guy asking the question though. Plus, my response was not to sufflers post. He is a buff dweeb flying at 20K and has no clue anyway :D
-
snicker
umm what's a k :P
Is that something like measuring horses in "hands"?? I mean what if a squirrel with a camera wants to know how big a horse is and there are no humans around.
..... and about those jersey cows... they are udderly rediculous.... . . . . .
-
snicker
umm what's a k :P
Is that something like measuring horses in "hands"?? I mean what if a squirrel with a camera wants to know how big a horse is and there are no humans around.
..... and about those jersey cows... they are udderly rediculous.... . . . . .
Ahhhh, good question, and does the size of the horse change if a human is not around to see it? Its like the old riddle: If a man talks and there is no woman around to hear him, is he still wrong?
-
Honestly, I don't think HT would want us to ignore them. Constant crying and whining about some things I am sure they don;t want, but if it is a real bug they would like to know and fix it.
I used to think the same.. until I tried to get some feedback on a bomber scoring issue I had found, or thought I found. At least they finally did add attack to the TBM :cheers:
http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,218172.msg2620271.html#msg2620271
edit:
I used to be big on the TBM in EW and would follow my kill amounts in my score even though htey counted for nothing score-wise, Ive since moved on from worrying about score altogether.
-
I used to think the same.. until I tried to get some feedback on a bomber scoring issue I had found, or thought I found. At least they finally did add attack to the TBM :cheers:
http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,218172.msg2620271.html#msg2620271
Haha, I did not say they will not ignore it if they think it is not to their interest. Rather, they would like to know about it so that they could decide if something needs to be done or not. Our opinion does not count. And as much as I dislike that, if it was my company, it would probably be the same way. Maybe I d be a little nicer when talking to my customers. Then again, who knows lol.
-
The person being shot with bullets will see the bullets miss behind him if he is turning. But if the shooter sees a hit, the hit counts. What the receiver sees has no effect on the results of the bullets.
HiTech
I understood the first two sentences.
But what does this mean "What the receiver sees has no effect on the results of the bullets"? Who is the "reciever"....the guy getting shot at or the guy shooting or a third person watching the first two ?
-
I understood the first two sentences.
But what does this mean "What the receiver sees has no effect on the results of the bullets"? Who is the "reciever"....the guy getting shot at or the guy shooting or a third person watching the first two ?
the guy getting shot.. he doesn't know it until the shooter's computer sees hits and tells the guy getting shot "youre getting shot"
-
I understood the first two sentences.
But what does this mean "What the receiver sees has no effect on the results of the bullets"? Who is the "reciever"....the guy getting shot at or the guy shooting or a third person watching the first two ?
PM me your email, i ll send you a film of what he is talking about. You can see AKDog shooting at the water 20 or 50 yards behind me. Water splashing and everything, not a single hit on me. That is what me, the receiver saw. I exploded cause in his FE he was probably shooting at my head. What I saw, the receiver, did not matter.
-
I won't bore you with explaining my suckage I will show you! Here is a film of a collision last night. The antogonist fires and the protagonist (me) does not. I blow up, and he gets the kill. I did not bother to ask if he was damaged or not. It was my first or second sortie in a 61 ever, and I was a little suprised how fast it got around, and my reactions were a little slow. Maybe someone can enlighten us on the collision model for this scenario?
http://www.mediafire.com/?mj3dmhtmz4h (http://www.mediafire.com/?mj3dmhtmz4h)
-
I dont have film of it.. I just snapped that screenshot when I saw the two messages show up right after each other because I thought it was odd..
I have seen more than a couple odd things over the years, Ive learned to just ignore them pretty much and continue on with enjoying the game.
I tend to film everything....that is presuming i remember o turn it on. when i'm fighting against guys like snaphook, dedalos, cobia, shuffler, stang, strip, and others, i can go back, and try to learn from it.
it also serves, if someone wants to give me grief, i have stuff to backup what i say. then finally, if something like you're saying happened, i have something to send in, should i feel the need.
-
I won't bore you with explaining my suckage I will show you! Here is a film of a collision last night. The antogonist fires and the protagonist (me) does not. I blow up, and he gets the kill. I did not bother to ask if he was damaged or not. It was my first or second sortie in a 61 ever, and I was a little suprised how fast it got around, and my reactions were a little slow. Maybe someone can enlighten us on the collision model for this scenario?
http://www.mediafire.com/?mj3dmhtmz4h (http://www.mediafire.com/?mj3dmhtmz4h)
Sure.
Your planes appeared to touch on your Front End.
W/O seeing a film from the f4u we can't tell if they saw a near miss or he collided as well.
What exactly are you looking or here?
-
Common sense tells you if the gopher wears his mining helmet when he goes down the hole, then you wouldn't have collided. :bolt:
-
Lute,
To be honest, I don't know. It is just a film from my end that shows no doubt that we collided, and I blew up. So, it is possible that from his end he shot me down without colliding from his perspective?
This is all just for my personal knowlede not insinuating anything.
Thanx
-
Common sense tells you if the gopher wears his mining helmet when he goes down the hole, then you wouldn't have collided
Becinhu---
I am an alum of WVU and am now pissed they never taught me any common sense! :rofl
-
Lute,
To be honest, I don't know. It is just a film from my end that shows no doubt that we collided, and I blew up. So, it is possible that from his end he shot me down without colliding from his perspective?
This is all just for my personal knowlede not insinuating anything.
Thanx
yup quite possible.
Look over this link.
http://trainers.hitechcreations.com/lag/lag.htm
-
look at this pic.
(http://i200.photobucket.com/albums/aa135/1LTCAP/yaksho.jpg)
immediatly after this point in time, i got the white "XXX has collided with you"
it's plain to see in this picture, that we missed by at least 10 feet, if not more. so......why should i go down, because HIS computer saw us touch???
-
look at this pic.
(http://i200.photobucket.com/albums/aa135/1LTCAP/yaksho.jpg)
immediatly after this point in time, i got the white "XXX has collided with you"
it's plain to see in this picture, that we missed by at least 10 feet, if not more. so......why should i go down, because HIS computer saw us touch???
Because his Bullets collided with you as well.
The picture doesn't show a "we", it shows a you, from your perspective.
wrongway
-
Because his Bullets collided with you as well.
The picture doesn't show a "we", it shows a you, from your perspective.
wrongway
correct....if his bullets took me down.....fine. he missed me on this pass. not one single ping. he smoked the snot outta me on the first two passes.
my point was, that his end saw his plane collide with mine, and what i posted is what i saw.
i'd be pissed to suffer a wing loss due to midair collision seeing that space there.
-
Except that "XXXX collided with you" does you NO damage. No matter who and how many or how many times you see "XXXX collided with you", there's no damage from the collision.
The only time you get damaged by a collision is when you see "You have collided." - which is when your copy of the game on your system detects an intersection of your plane and another vehicle.
The reason you lose your wing (or whatever) at the same time you see a "XXXX has collided with you" message is that he was firing at you when he ran into you. It's his bullets that tore you up, not the collision.
Make sense?
-
Except that "XXXX collided with you" does you NO damage. No matter who and how many or how many times you see "XXXX collided with you", there's no damage from the collision.
The only time you get damaged by a collision is when you see "You have collided." - which is when your copy of the game on your system detects an intersection of your plane and another vehicle.
The reason you lose your wing (or whatever) at the same time you see a "XXXX has collided with you" message is that he was firing at you when he ran into you. It's his bullets that tore you up, not the collision.
Make sense?
yes, i DO understand. the op(i think)is/was trying to say that if he sees a collision on his end, that both aircraft should go down.
i was using this pit to show why that shouldn't be so.
what you see on your monitor, is what you get.
-
Bronk, that link was great I understand completly.
-
Life probably easier without those messages. Let people think they got HOed :rofl
-
Life probably easier without those messages. Let people think they got HOed :rofl
good point. :rofl :rofl
funny thing on that "fight". it wasn't really a fight.......it was more of a jousting match. all he wanted to do was ho......i couldn't figure out how to get an angle besides that, so from the 2nd pass on, i fired back at him.
the funny part? when my engine finally quit, i headed for the field below, and stayed in the ack till he gave up. he comes on open channel saying "go ahead and land p38, you obviously don't want to fight" :rofl :rofl
even funnier, i watched the film from his view....that statement came right after his engine quit. had i known that, i'd have gone and vulched his dumb arse just 'cause he was a dweeb...... :noid :rofl :bolt:
-
I have seen alot more lately of tracers off HO's! That to me is ultimate deewbery!
:rofl
-
Im not sure but I think the collision may bug out sometimes..
This was from last night in TT, I was on the ground in a tank, tracked and turreted just sitting there waiting to die taking base ack hits when this popped up. There was NO delay inbetween the two messages.
Can you explain this one? I cant.. /shrug Im not accussing anyone of "cheatery" or anything, but it was odd for sure.. how do you land kills and collide at the same time?
This is simple, you type .ef, the server receives this just like any other text command, Your computer is still flying, and it then collides and sends the text message "So and So has collided with you" , the host then sends a command to the client to exit flight and at the same time scores and sends sends the text message "Landed xx kills", the host recievs the Collided message and retransmits it to you.
Basically the collision happend immediately after sending the .ef
I.E. not a bug.
HiTech
-
This is simple, you type .ef, the server receives this just like any other text command, Your computer is still flying, and it then collides and sends the text message "So and So has collided with you" , the host then sends a command to the client to exit flight and at the same time scores and sends sends the text message "Landed xx kills", the host recievs the Collided message and retransmits it to you.
Basically the collision happend immediately after sending the .ef
I.E. not a bug.
HiTech
Im not calling it a bug, I did say "bug out" but I didnt mean a "bug" in the technical sense of the word.. meaning something wrong with the game.
If your flight was actually ending where your plane came to a stop on the runway then this instance of a collision would/could never happen.
The collision was "impossible" as I see it since I was no where near where the plane landed.. he didnt fly into me and I couldnt have driven to him..
At any rate I couldnt care less, I didnt come to the forum to post about it, the post "collisions bug exploit" was already there and I was just chiming in with something I caught the night before that I had not seen in 5 years of playing the game.
I gave up long ago trying to figure out how the game works, I just play it now.. to me your explanation is like trying to read Chinese.
edit:
Im not trying to be rude here, just stating how I see it from my point of view and I am also not claiming my point of view is correct in any way :cheers:
-
This is simple, you type .ef, the server receives this just like any other text command, Your computer is still flying, and it then collides and sends the text message "So and So has collided with you" , the host then sends a command to the client to exit flight and at the same time scores and sends sends the text message "Landed xx kills", the host recievs the Collided message and retransmits it to you.
Basically the collision happend immediately after sending the .ef
I.E. not a bug.
HiTech
But don't you have to be standing still in order to do a .ef? What did he collide with? There is nothing on the runway. Is this a case of what the host knows vs what teh FE knows? meaning, the host thought he had already stopped moving?
-
Becinhu---
I am an alum of WVU and am now pissed they never taught me any common sense! :rofl
alum here as well. Sorry but that line comes from an employee. I just change it to fit my crazy needs. The original quote went like this. "Common sense tells you if you break down the boxes then there won't be food on the floor." It comes from the same employee who used to be an EMT that cut his hand on a box cutter. When I asked him if he was an EMT how come he didn't cut away from his hand. He replied that he did. His visual aid was him holding his arm straight while pulling towards himself with cutter......
-
Bronk, that link was great I understand completly.
You're welcome. Thank you for taking the time to read it. Most times people don't bother and choose to be ignorant.
-
Guys, all of this expert knowledge is great... what do the programmers have to say? what is the real collision model. I had a AR-234 fly through me from behind. He sustained no damage and I crashed. I do appreciate the knowledge of experience you guys have, but seriously HTC, what is the true answer, how does the collision model impart damage?
-
Guys, all of this expert knowledge is great... what do the programmers have to say? what is the real collision model. I had a AR-234 fly through me from behind. He sustained no damage and I crashed. I do appreciate the knowledge of experience you guys have, but seriously HTC, what is the true answer, how does the collision model impart damage?
This has already been explained ad nauseum in this thread and others.
If you touch another plane, you collide. Period.
Your computer "saw" the 234 fly through your aircraft. Therefore, you sufferred a collision, and you took damage.
On the 234's computer, he did not see his aircraft touch yours. So he did not collide, and sufferred no damage.
-
Guys, all of this expert knowledge is great... what do the programmers have to say? what is the real collision model. I had a AR-234 fly through me from behind. He sustained no damage and I crashed. I do appreciate the knowledge of experience you guys have, but seriously HTC, what is the true answer, how does the collision model impart damage?
The collision model is exactly as exlained countless times, in this thread and many, many others. Not only by us from "experience" only, but by the programmers too.
Read "How lag affects Aces High" on the OFFICIAL AH Trainer Corps Website. -> http://trainers.hitechcreations.com.
And you will (hopefully) understand why YOU did take damage and the Arado did not.
-
I still say if a collision occurs both should fall to the ground. My plane suffers damage even when the message says xxx crashed with you, or sometimes wont even say anything and my plane breaks apart. I dont intentionally ram anybody (ok sometimes I do but its for a reason :D). no way my plane can be at fault 99 of the time even when some guy crashed into me from behind.
semp
-
I still say if a collision occurs both should fall to the ground.
One question: Would you find it more fair if you see your enemy passing you by at 30yards or more, yet you suddenly get a collision message and go down? You would NOT complain if you would clearly dodge your enemy trying to ram you by tens to hundreds of feet, but you still go down?
See this example:
(http://img222.imageshack.us/img222/8728/ramotherfexg7.jpg)
You are the P-47. This is what happens on your screen. The pony never gets any closer to you than this. See the white collision message (the pony has collided with you)
Should YOU go down?
-
I still say if a collision occurs both should fall to the ground. My plane suffers damage even when the message says xxx crashed with you, or sometimes wont even say anything and my plane breaks apart. I dont intentionally ram anybody (ok sometimes I do but its for a reason :D). no way my plane can be at fault 99 of the time even when some guy crashed into me from behind.
semp
(http://i200.photobucket.com/albums/aa135/1LTCAP/yaksho.jpg)
in the above picture, i'm in the p-38.
should i have crashed, or lost any parts judging from that pic?
-
My plane suffers damage even when the message says xxx crashed with you, or sometimes wont even say anything and my plane breaks apart.
If you don't collide and take damage ... then you got shot up by his guns.
I dont intentionally ram anybody (ok sometimes I do but its for a reason :D).
Speaks volumes ... there is absolutely no good reason to intentionally ram anyone.
-
If you don't collide and take damage ... then you got shot up by his guns.
Speaks volumes ... there is absolutely no good reason to intentionally ram anyone.
Well, there is always the guy that tries to vulch you on takeoff but comes in kind of late and low, flaps down, stick all the way back, muahahahahahaha :D
-
Lusche, thank you for the thread, I will read up on it.
I think the majority of us are just saying that if damage occurs to me, damage should occur to them. All computer PHd / netstats / platinum member explanations aside, fair is fair. :salute
-
Lusche, thank you for the thread, I will read up on it.
I think the majority of us are just saying that if damage occurs to me, damage should occur to them. All computer PHd / netstats / platinum member explanations aside, fair is fair. :salute
Fair "is" fair.... if you collide you get damage... "if" you don't collide you don't get damage. That is how it is setup now.
-
I still say if a collision occurs both should fall to the ground. My plane suffers damage even when the message says xxx crashed with you, or sometimes wont even say anything and my plane breaks apart. I dont intentionally ram anybody (ok sometimes I do but its for a reason :D). no way my plane can be at fault 99 of the time even when some guy crashed into me from behind.
semp
Your error is that you are trying to think of it in terms of traffic accidents, wherein the guy who rear ends the other guy is at fault. That simply is not how it works in AH. AH does not make a value judgment about who is at fault. There is no "at fault", there is simply a collision or no collision. All that matters is if the aircraft on your front end (the instance of AH running on your computer) touch each other. Avoid touching your aircraft to other aircraft, from any direction, facing, side or heading, and you will not take any damage. It is that simple.
-
Lusche, thank you for the thread, I will read up on it.
I think the majority of us are just saying that if damage occurs to me, damage should occur to them. All computer PHd / netstats / platinum member explanations aside, fair is fair. :salute
How is it "fair" for you to take damage when you did not touch another aircraft?
-
Lusche, thank you for the thread, I will read up on it.
I think the majority of us are just saying that if damage occurs to me, damage should occur to them. All computer PHd / netstats / platinum member explanations aside, fair is fair. :salute
due to the time it takes for your computer to talk to the server and then relay that info to the other players computer.... even tho it's in milli-seconds it still means what you see is NOT what the other players sees. So if you see your plane hit the other plane, he sees you coming too close and moves out of the way so he DOESN'T see a collision. So because he flew out of the way its fair that his plane takes damage :rolleyes: I don't think so.
-
:)
-
How is it "fair" for you to take damage when you did not touch another aircraft?
If you took damage and did not touch another aircraft, IE: You Have Collided, then you are colliding with his bullets.
If you take damage and did not touch another aircraft, IE: SoAndSo Has Collided With You, then, again, you are colliding with his bullets.
Fair?
wrongway
-
look its this simple.
1 he can shoot me down even If i dont see him aiming at me because his computer says he's aiming at me. I die even If i didnt see him aiming at me.
2 his computer says he crashed into me but mine says i didnt. he dies, I take no damage.
so why do we treat his computer saying he's pinging me (even if I didnt see it the same way) but decide that his computer crashed but I take no damage as being two different things. its the same thing. due to delay i cannot see him aiming at me or crashing into me but in one situation I die and in the other i take no damage.
we have all been killed at one time or another by a plane that went by us and is a couple of hundred yards in back of us. even if when he went by we saw his guns were not being fired.
semp
(btw when I intentionally crash into you is if your taking town down and I need to bring somebody down anyway I can, be it ho, shoot or ram. whateever it takes, you would do the same thing :salute.)
-
whateever it takes, you would do the same thing
err no I wouldnt.
-
look its this simple.
1 he can shoot me down even If i dont see him aiming at me because his computer says he's aiming at me. I die even If i didnt see him aiming at me.
2 his computer says he crashed into me but mine says i didnt. he dies, I take no damage.
so why do we treat his computer saying he's pinging me (even if I didnt see it the same way) but decide that his computer crashed but I take no damage as being two different things. its the same thing. due to delay i cannot see him aiming at me or crashing into me but in one situation I die and in the other i take no damage.
we have all been killed at one time or another by a plane that went by us and is a couple of hundred yards in back of us. even if when he went by we saw his guns were not being fired.
semp
(btw when I intentionally crash into you is if your taking town down and I need to bring somebody down anyway I can, be it ho, shoot or ram. whateever it takes, you would do the same thing :salute.)
Well because your opponent can only fly to what he sees. That is to say I cant shoot where I think you are on your end.
It's real simple... read this slowly and let it sink in. What you see is what you get. Perfect solution for an imperfect internet.
-
If you took damage and did not touch another aircraft, IE: You Have Collided, then you are colliding with his bullets.
If you take damage and did not touch another aircraft, IE: SoAndSo Has Collided With You, then, again, you are colliding with his bullets.
Fair?
wrongway
Ummm ....
If you took damage and did not touch the other aircraft you will see ...
SoAndSo Has Collided With You ... but you took hits from his bullets
If you took damage and did touch the other aircraft ... you will see
You Have Collided ... and you may also have taken hits from his bullets
If you took damage and did touch the other aircraft and he touched yours ... you will see
You Have Collided
SoAndSo Has Collided With You ... and you may also have taken hits from his bullets
-
Well because your opponent can only fly to what he sees. That is to say I cant shoot where I think you are on your end.
It's real simple... read this slowly and let it sink in. What you see is what you get. Perfect solution for an imperfect internet.
And I cannot avoid if I think you don't have guns on me. All this could be reduced by increasing the time intervals the FE and the server are publishing updates.
-
And I cannot avoid if I think you don't have guns on me. All this could be reduced by increasing the time intervals the FE and the server are publishing updates.
The closer you get ... the more updates you get. I'm sure that HT probably has found the "sweet spot" as to how many updates will be viable within the operating parameters of the constantly changing internet ... that is why the FE runs "smoothing" code ... and when it's is doing it's thing, we see crazy zig zag warps.
-
The closer you get ... the more updates you get. I'm sure that HT probably has found the "sweet spot" as to how many updates will be viable within the operating parameters of the constantly changing internet ... that is why the FE runs "smoothing" code ... and when it's is doing it's thing, we see crazy zig zag warps.
I wish that was true. Updates go out every 250ms for the server and 250ms for the FE. That is why we need smoothing coad. The 30,40,50ms of internet lag don't even come into account. When you BnZ you don't see it, but when you get bounced and watch the film after, you see tracers 30 - 50 yards behind you and hit sprites on your plane. I am sure HT has found a sweet spot but that was the sweet spot back when it was found (5 maybe 10 years ago? i dont know the answer to that). Maybe the new hardware can handle a little more now.
I think from conversations on BBS a while back HT said the reason, or part of the reason, for that was to level the playing field between the guys on modem with big ping times and the guys with the fast connections. I am sure now times most have fast connections so maybe the playing field does not need that match of a leveling.
-
I think from conversations on BBS a while back HT said the reason, or part of the reason, for that was to level the playing field between the guys on modem with big ping times and the guys with the fast connections. I am sure now times most have fast connections so maybe the playing field does not need that match of a leveling.
And there you have it ... programming to the lost common denominator ... which is the correct way to handle it.
Maybe he could tweak it to be a little faster, but those who we see warping around constantly now ... imagine what they would look like if the updates were increased. Also, tweaking it higher may cause more warping than what we see now because those who are close to the "line" may just be pushed over it.
-
And there you have it ... programming to the lost common denominator ... which is the correct way to handle it.
Maybe he could tweak it to be a little faster, but those who we see warping around constantly now ... imagine what they would look like if the updates were increased. Also, tweaking it higher may cause more warping than what we see now because those who are close to the "line" may just be pushed over it.
I don't think so on the warping. Think of the faster rate of updates as counting from 1 to 10 by one and of the current as counting by 2s
1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10
2,4,6,8,10
If warps are caused by missed packets then if both cases miss one, the warp will be smaller with a faster rate since there was less position change info lost. I agree on the least common denominator. I am just saying, it is worth a look since things have changed since 2000. They don't do that with the graphics so why not with the rate of updates.
-
look its this simple.
1 he can shoot me down even If i dont see him aiming at me because his computer says he's aiming at me. I die even If i didnt see him aiming at me.
2 his computer says he crashed into me but mine says i didnt. he dies, I take no damage.
so why do we treat his computer saying he's pinging me (even if I didnt see it the same way) but decide that his computer crashed but I take no damage as being two different things. its the same thing. due to delay i cannot see him aiming at me or crashing into me but in one situation I die and in the other i take no damage.
we have all been killed at one time or another by a plane that went by us and is a couple of hundred yards in back of us. even if when he went by we saw his guns were not being fired.
semp
(btw when I intentionally crash into you is if your taking town down and I need to bring somebody down anyway I can, be it ho, shoot or ram. whateever it takes, you would do the same thing :salute.)
How would you do it?
-
Collisions and fairness. Yes, it is the same as a hit and run. Nobody likes flying for 20 minutes and then get some glitch related damage. The screen does not say "you have collided" and that is it. It says "XXX has collided with you". If it sends that message, the other guy gets damage, period. That can't be that hard to figure out. If the guy is unfortunate enough to be playing on a slower connection then so be it. He can figure out that if he gets to close he is going to collide. Change the rules and the behavior changes with it. This crew really is a tough crowd.
If there are "smoothing code" issues, and yep, I used to play on dial up (AOL), then maybe now is the time for fixing some of the code. Not being a professed code writer, I have no clue what an undertaking that may be. I do know as a client that having these "glitches" (glitch to me = things that seem hokey like a bush flipping a Tiger or the 7.7mm pintle gun PWing an IL-2 pilot from the front) is becoming tiresome over time. This game is the best thing out there, for now. I thought it was on us clients to articulate things that alter our perception of this game as the peak of the on-line gaming experience. Some of you are set on defending points which many of us find unpalatable instead of acknowledging there is ostensibly room for improvement. I have no idea who moved this post from the "bugs" to the "general discussion".
-
How would you do it?
Faster updates = less discrepancy between the two FEs
-
It is still not clicking lol. It is not the slower connection. It is made this way. You ever take off from a CV and watch a plane land next you? Only he is about 50 yards out and over the water? This is not net lag. It is how the game is made. A faster update rate may not help collisions match (although it will increase the cases where both guys see it) but it will help on the getting shot from impossible angles future
-
(http://i200.photobucket.com/albums/aa135/1LTCAP/yaksho.jpg)
in the above picture, i'm in the p-38.
should i have crashed, or lost any parts judging from that pic?
still waiting for an answer on this one. :rolleyes:
-
still waiting for an answer on this one. :rolleyes:
No
I'm not going to answer :neener:
-
still waiting for an answer on this one. :rolleyes:
If the 205 collided with you but shot you down at the same time (you can see the smoke and a solid hit on your starboard engine cowl in the pic) you would go down. Not from the collision but from bullets fired on the HO. You would get the messages "so and so has collided with you" and "so and so has shot you down"
Lets see the text from the film.
-
If the 205 collided with you but shot you down at the same time (you can see the smoke and a solid hit on your starboard engine cowl in the pic) you would go down. Not from the collision but from bullets fired on the HO. You would get the messages "so and so has collided with you" and "so and so has shot you down"
Lets see the text from the film.
the smoking engine was from a previous pass........the engine hit in the pic was his only hit in that pass......and it happened(believe it or not) almost a full second before i got that message. in fact, he was behind me when i got the message.
my point was that we missed by what? 25 feet? on my screen. if he was filming, i'm sure he saw the collision.
-
Number of Posts: 1
-
Number of Posts: 1
That thar fella aint got enough ta make a fence yet.
-
I'll point out the obvious - the reason it shouldn't work the same as your opponent shooting you (where you see the bullets appear to pass behind you but take damage, because on his FE he nailed you) is that it TAKES SKILL to shoot a plane out of the air, and is what the game is about - and any moron can buzz around the arena trying to fly into an enemy aircraft until he smacks into one.
Demanding a similar set of rules - and allowing skilless rejects to take down an aircraft solely by ramming it - would destroy the sim. Pretty soon, the players would be frustrated and leave - after a few months, all that would be left is an ever increasing number of dweeby griefers.
HTC and co ain't stupid (TG!).
<S>
-
Glad to see some things never change. :D
-
I'll point out the obvious - the reason it shouldn't work the same as your opponent shooting you (where you see the bullets appear to pass behind you but take damage, because on his FE he nailed you) is that it TAKES SKILL to shoot a plane out of the air, and is what the game is about - and any moron can buzz around the arena trying to fly into an enemy aircraft until he smacks into one.
Demanding a similar set of rules - and allowing skilless rejects to take down an aircraft solely by ramming it - would destroy the sim. Pretty soon, the players would be frustrated and leave - after a few months, all that would be left is an ever increasing number of dweeby griefers.
HTC and co ain't stupid (TG!).
<S>
funny since most collisions occur not with new players but with players that had been around here for a while.
semp
-
Got a stat to back that up?
-
funny since most collisions occur not with new players but with players that had been around here for a while.
semp
You err in assuming that I believe that it's only new players that would prefer to kill a more skilled player via a cheap gamey tactic if it were available.
<S>
-
Got a stat to back that up?
i could go searching through my films if ya like. it'll take awhile, but it would provide one.
the rare time i get any collision messages, it's almost always a vet player. or it's my fault.
-
Got a stat to back that up?
I think the idea here is that a "vet" is more likely to get in to a close quarters fight and that increases the chance of a collision. A new player will probably collide because the re-entry speed locked up his controls.
-
I think the idea here is that a "vet" is more likely to get in to a close quarters fight and that increases the chance of a collision. A new player will probably collide because the re-entry speed locked up his controls.
Bingo... a winner!
+1
-
And I cannot avoid if I think you don't have guns on me. All this could be reduced by increasing the time intervals the FE and the server are publishing updates.
More packets would change nothing related to the discrepancies in distance you see do to lag.
It would make nada,0, null, difference.
HiTech
-
More packets would change nothing related to the discrepancies in distance you see do to lag.
It would make nada,0, null, difference.
If you wish to know why, look up my patent on a method of doing the smoothing.
HiTech
-
Where do I find it? :)
I think I understand what you are trying to say. The discrepancy is due to smoothing and not due to the lag? Meaning the choices would be to update positions more often with no smoothing, and that would lead to mini warps (as slap was saying) or use smoothing and I would not be able to see a difference from the way things are now due to the algorithm.
So, 250ms is like the optimum delay in order to have effective smoothing and planes not jumping around but also reducing bandwidth and CPU cycles spend on packet translation etc.
How far am I?
-
I think the idea here is that a "vet" is more likely to get in to a close quarters fight and that increases the chance of a collision. A new player will probably collide because the re-entry speed locked up his controls.
I always thought those were meteors, but now it makes sense.
Here ya go Ded- when all else fails, Google his name. :D
http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/6042477/fulltext.html
-
Where do I find it? :)
I think I understand what you are trying to say. The discrepancy is due to smoothing and not due to the lag? Meaning the choices would be to update positions more often with no smoothing, and that would lead to mini warps (as slap was saying) or use smoothing and I would not be able to see a difference from the way things are now due to the algorithm.
So, 250ms is like the optimum delay in order to have effective smoothing and planes not jumping around but also reducing bandwidth and CPU cycles spend on packet translation etc.
How far am I?
You were speaking about collisions. When you are seeing warps you are talking in the range of multiple seconds of no packets not MS.
HiTech
-
You were speaking about collisions. When you are seeing warps you are talking in the range of multiple seconds of no packets not MS.
HiTech
Not really, I am more interested in not getting shot from impossible angles than the collisions. On the collisions I just figured that if planes in the two FEs were closer to the real position it would increase the chance of both seeing a collision at the same time.
I am just curious why a faster rate would not help me with the getting shot from impossible angles problem. If the update interval makes no difference, then why not update every 2 seconds? To me that means that there is some algorithm optimized or tightly coupled to that time interval. In any case, it would be nice if that could improve. If not, thats fine also. I'd be curious to know why but if the answer is this is proprietary info so be it.
The "I know something you don't" answers don't help though. :D
-
If the update interval makes no difference, then why not update every 2 seconds? To me that means that there is some algorithm optimized or tightly coupled to that time interval.
good question :headscratch: