Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: Kev367th on May 23, 2005, 07:04:38 AM
-
Feel free to add/discuss.
These are just some that IMO need addressed.
1) Ditch/Captured/Successfull landing - Doesn't work as it is supposed to. Had succesfull landings at enemy bases with cons around, and vice versa.
2) Ditch model - Just plain idiotic at the moment. Ditching planes in excess of 200mph without a worry in the world.
3)Buffs -
a) Far to easy to set wings/engines on fire.
b) Bombing from F6 view only.
c) Structural limits - Are there any? Seen and done manouvers in a buff that would make your average F-16 pilot green with envy.
4)Collision model - Sorry, if one plane collides, the other does. 'Ya cannae change the laws of physics'. Either a collision happens or it doesn't!
5) GV bouncy rounds - Especially against light skinned vehicles. Bouncing round off M3s etc at 800 and less is just silly. This may also be part of the greater bouncy rounds syndrome against hard skinned stuff.
6) Giant redwoods and grass big enough to hide whole battaliions behind.
I am sure there's more, but thats all I could think of the top of my head.
Oh, one more - Who's got all the sheep!!!
-
# 4 This one really grabs me when I live every time I read it. Its like come on people, grow up.
Hoof, hope this doesn't step on your toes, but I'm reprinting your excellent article on netlag here for AH pilots. My apoligies in advance. Please take the time to Read, reread, and read again until you comprehend it. Once you do you will understand why it has to be the way it is. (Note, was written for Warbirds, but the system's they use are virtually identical.)
Net lag is the phenomenon of plane position distortion resulting from non-instantaneous communication between all the computers running Warbirds. Translated into english, Net Lag is the inaccuracies of what you see on the screen vs. what the other guy sees due to communication delays across the internet.
It is *vital* to understand Net Lag to avoid frustration and to fight effectively in Warbirds. First I will describe my understanding of how the FE (Front End) to Host communication system works.. Once this is done, I will discuss the various situations in Warbirds, and how Net Lag alters reality.
Warbirds is a unique game, in that unlike regular games where all the action occurs in one spot (on your computer), Warbirds occurs on hundreds of computers across the world. Every player has a copy of the Front End, and all communicate with the Host. The Front End consists of the flight simulator and the gunnery system. All flying and shooting (including collision detection, plane flying characteristics, and gun hit determination) occurs on the Front End. Thus, the only computer that determines whether you hit another plane is your own, the only computer that tells what your plane does is your own, and the only computer that determines whether you hit someone/something with guns or ground ordnance is your own. No collision detection or ordnance hit determination for you or anything you drop/fire is done on any other computer including the host.
The host is Grand Central Station for Warbirds Information Exchange. Front Ends send messages to the Host, and the Host processes these and dispatches messages back to the Front Ends. The information that the Front End sends to the host are system commands (including plane selection, ordnance selection, base selection, and other commands such as ".fly), messages to other FE's (messages you type, including voice communication), positional information (what your plane is doing and where it is), and ordnance damage information (what you hit, how many rounds fired). The host receives all this and processes it. It sends out to the Front Ends positional information for other Front End planes, damage reports to the Front Ends (which includes FE's plane damage, other plane damage, and ground target damage information), Messages (those that others type to you as well as system messages, including kill messages), and System Commands (such as "your dead", or other system commands, including ejection and other administration commands).
It is vital to understand how the system works in order to understand net lag. The host has no idea of the terrain (except for damagable object information, and the status of the bases and task forces), nor does it do gunnery hit determination or collision detection.
So how does net lag fit into all this? All this message exchange and processing takes time. In order for a gun hit to register on the target's computer, the hit message has to be sent to the Host (anywhere from 1/8th to 1/4th of a second), processed by the Host (anywhere from 1/4th to 1/2 a second, depending on how busy it is), then sent to the target's FE (anywhere from 1/8th to 1/4th of a second). Thus a hit can take up to 1-2 seconds to register, assuming no other (net) delays in communication. Damage to the target gets bounced back to the shooter from the host (not from the other guy's FE), so that the shooter's FE can shows parts falling off and other effects. Positional Data is done the same way, each FE sends positional data for it's plane approximately two times a second to the host. This information is processed, collated, and sent to all the appropriate FEs. This can take a second or two. Here is where the delay occurs. It is vital to remember that any other plane you see in the air is actually their position 1-2 seconds ago on their FE, not their position on their FE at that instant. Thus their actual position could be 1-2 seconds "further along" in reality, on their FE. In addition, your position on their FE is 1-2 seconds old, thus is 1-2 seconds "further behind" in reality.
Always keep in mind: What you see of the enemy is where he was and what he was doing 1-2 seconds ago (on his FE, he has flown for another 1-2 seconds). What he sees is what you were doing and where you were 1-2 seconds ago (you have flown for another 1-2 seconds, but his FE doesn't have that 1-2 seconds of positional info yet). In addition, any reaction you have to something he is doing gets seen in 2-4 seconds after he did whatever you were reacting to. For example, you see him rolling 180 degrees, so you counter that roll. He sees you counter that move 2-4 seconds *after* he did that move. If that move gave him a shot in less than that time, he may have bullets hitting your plane before his FE sees your countermove (which might be bad for your health Or, you hear a ping. By the time his FE sees your knee-jerk jink, he could have been firing at you for 2-4 seconds...
-
Thanks for the info on #4.
So basically -
Mr X living in Texas with a 'low' netlag is hosed.
Because Mr Y living in Outer Mongolia on a paper cup and string with a 'high' netlag can just go ahead and deliberately ram and get away with it?
Excuse the bluntness, never played Warbirds, so the your FE, my FE thing has always baffled the hell outta me. If a collision occurs it still seems ridiculous that only one FE sees it.
-
Originally posted by Kev367th
snip
Excuse the bluntness, never played Warbirds, so the your FE, my FE thing has always baffled the hell outta me. If a collision occurs it still seems ridiculous that only one FE sees it.
Nutshell: yes the collision occured, but the issue of when you see it on your FE depends on how long the data packet(s) that contain the information it occured take to reach you via the internet. If you and the other player have a significantly different ping time, you won't see anything simultaneously, including collisions.
I agree you're right regarding strict reality, but collisions could simply be exploited maliciously too easily if both planes died. Its one of the concessions for gameplay that are IMO correct to have.
Think of it like killshooter. If you could shoot friendlies, so could griefers. That could cause some significant problems in MA play.
culero
-
I'd like to add a suggestion in this thread: allowing bomber gunners to operate their weapons from the ground, rather than in-flight only. Perhaps only while accelerating, to avoid abuse (using spawned bombers as ad-hoc AA batteries), but it would seem reasonable that bombers should not be defenseless against vulchers while legitimately attempting a takeoff.
culero
-
Originally posted by culero
Nutshell: yes the collision occured, but the issue of when you see it on your FE depends on how long the data packet(s) that contain the information it occured take to reach you via the internet. If you and the other player have a significantly different ping time, you won't see anything simultaneously, including collisions.
I agree you're right regarding strict reality, but collisions could simply be exploited maliciously too easily if both planes died. Its one of the concessions for gameplay that are IMO correct to have.
Think of it like killshooter. If you could shoot friendlies, so could griefers. That could cause some significant problems in MA play.
culero
Thanks - So in which case people living at significantly greater distances from HTC HQ already have an advantage anyway in a collision? If so don't you have a sneaky suspicion that this is already being exploited.
I agree with the buff guns idea. Does seem they should at least have some defence, but when rolling only. (to prevent them being used as static gun platforms).
-
Originally posted by Kev367th
Thanks - So in which case people living at significantly greater distances from HTC HQ already have an advantage anyway in a collision? If so don't you have a sneaky suspicion that this is already being exploited.
snip
Not if I understand it correctly - my understanding being that the server kills the player it sees as having caused the collision. That's a different matter than what either player is seeing.
culero
-
Originally posted by culero
I'd like to add a suggestion in this thread: allowing bomber gunners to operate their weapons from the ground, rather than in-flight only. Perhaps only while accelerating, to avoid abuse (using spawned bombers as ad-hoc AA batteries), but it would seem reasonable that bombers should not be defenseless against vulchers while legitimately attempting a takeoff.
culero
it was removed because of "ack staring"
I thing the collision are resolved on the player FE not by the server.
So if you "see" a collision there is a collision else nothing happen.
-
Buffs used to be able to fire guns whilst on the ground.
Maybe it was changed to STOP the excessive mobile AAA defence tactics.
Seriously there is no valid reason to roll buffs from a capped field unless you intend to provide AAA cover.
It is a gamey tactic, you can still do it but you have to put up with no defence until airborne.
Although I think the real reason the guns were disabled was disabling all weapons whilst on the ground to stop the car bomb tactic.
Whereby the buff would wait until either gv's or aircraft were within range whilst parked, and then drop his bombs from 2 feet killing himelf and anybody else who happened to be within blast radius.
-
I thing the collision are resolved on the player FE not by the server.
So if you "see" a collision there is a collision else nothing happen. [/B]
Lol now I'm totally confused :)
Hypothetical situations -
a) One plane 'creeping' up on another planes six.
b) Two planes flying directly at each other.
Both FE are more likely to register a collision in situation a?
Reason - Slower closure speed, therefore 'contact' would be for a significantly longer time than situation b?
Assuming one pilot has high net lag, other has low net lag.
Right or wrong?
Just trying to understand it.
-
Culero is explainin the intardnet, ya better listen!!! :mad:
Collisions are detected by your own puter, then that info is sent down the copper wire al the way from Tijuana to Texas. Information sends : You are dead.
Say you collided with Straffo, who lives in a hut on the coast of Normandy... the copper wiring is a bit rusted (The french maintenance was on strike), there's a helluvalota fish between normandy & Texas (More than in Tijuana)... when you see that you collide with him, he still sees you 300 yds away, and will not collide with your Tijuanian wreck... the Normand is free to carry on vulchin your little friends.
Saw (this is a long day...)
-
Originally posted by Saintaw
Culero is explainin the intardnet, ya better listen!!! :mad:
Collisions are detected by your own puter, then that info is sent down the copper wire al the way from Tijuana to Texas. Information sends : You are dead.
Say you collided with Straffo, who lives in a hut on the coast of Normandy... the copper wiring is a bit rusted (The french maintenance was on strike), there's a helluvalota fish between normandy & Texas (More than in Tijuana)... when you see that you collide with him, he still sees you 300 yds away, and will not collide with your Tijuanian wreck... the Normand is free to carry on vulchin your little friends.
Saw (this is a long day...)
Blunt but at least it makes sense now lol.
Better dig out that old 28k modem ;)
-
last but not least..
Fix the ata guage measurement for Fw-190A-5! The EB6 values are correct, but not the guage.
-
Originally posted by culero
Nutshell: yes the collision occured, but the issue of when you see it on your FE depends on how long the data packet(s) that contain the information it occured take to reach you via the internet. If you and the other player have a significantly different ping time, you won't see anything simultaneously, including collisions.
WRONG. That does not determine if you will see it. It only determins when you will see it. I have not won a single colision this year. As he said, if two planes colide, then two planes shoold die. Just like when you get shot from an impossible angle because in his FE the bad guy had a shot.
-
LOL Saw!
Kev! Lax! Now RElax!
The collision thingie ... up to the pilot to avoid `em. Bad connect, good connect .... wubba wubba no matter. Rubber bullets would be more the problem. There IS a black and white to collisions. If you don't avoid them, you collide. Why penalize the fellow who did? Now back to lag. IF you have an idea that'll eliminate it once and for all on the internet then I wanna hear it. Show me the money, baybee. I could use it.
HT's smoothing code. Best thing evar! Damn ... now my nose is brown and all. :D :aok
-
Originally posted by Kev367th
Blunt but at least it makes sense now lol.
Better dig out that old 28k modem ;)
Nope ... not quite makin' sense. LOL
The 28k modem is NOT an advantage. *chuckle*
1: Don't ram.
2: Don't ram.
3: Don't ram.
No matter what your hardware or connex is.
4: Don't ram.
Instant cure to collision woes. :D
-
1. never noticed
2. agreed. clever trick la7 from standing hard on one brake go full throttle.........you pivot dragging the wing tip on the ground without damage. I would not say you can ditch always without damage at 200 but its clear that where the odds should be against survival they are definately for it.
3.agreed inpart. Stuff should not catch fire if it has self sealing tanks and inert gas provision to the tanks. Also for engine fires switching that engine of should allow the fire to be blown out. (as in switching off the fuel supply)
Hits recieved could be used to lower structural limits.
4. Disagree what we have is the optimum. If your FE collides you collide period.
5.Never noticed
6.Yup halving the scale of the trees and shrubery would seem to be appropriate. i think the problem re trees is that if you halve the size you end up increasing the number with the relevant hit on FR.
7. Yup bring back sheep that go Baaa whilst your trying to hear enemy GV's. Ie link Baaa volume to external gv engine volume to confuse sonar type location techniques.
-
Lol Arlo, I'm totally laxed :).
Just trying to understand the workings.
Sometimes in a big furball a collision will happen because either pilot didn't see the other one. Or a missed shooting opportunity and you get rear ended.
Most are avoidable granted, some just can't be because they just happen.
Tilt - Love #7, then we could pay perks for a white noise anti sheep baa suppressor.
-
The other night..I experienced something in the game for the first time. I hit a guy...but i didnt die. Everytime I hit someone I die..sometimes they die too...often just I die. This was nice to see for a change. Must be my connection?
-
Did you move to Normandy?
-
Originally posted by FiLtH
The other night..I experienced something in the game for the first time. I hit a guy...but i didnt die. Everytime I hit someone I die..sometimes they die too...often just I die. This was nice to see for a change. Must be my connection?
Wish I could say the same, I'm batting 0 on collisions at the moment, never survived one, unlike the other guy(s).
-
I once heard that the guy with the better connection, will be the guy who dies. Not sure if there is anything to this, or just another rumor.
-
I once shot a B-17 pilot right tween the eyes headon and flew through the smoke and debris with my P-40. Got bullets? :D
(Things have been tweaked a lil since then. I miss the game. *sigh*)
-
Originally posted by FiLtH
I once heard that the guy with the better connection, will be the guy who dies. Not sure if there is anything to this, or just another rumor.
Would imagine better connection = lower net lag, so judging by whats explained earlier I would agree.
-
Originally posted by FiLtH
I once heard that the guy with the better connection, will be the guy who dies. Not sure if there is anything to this, or just another rumor.
Hehe. The guy who doesn't avoid the collision dies.
Here's the deal. Even 2 players with exactly the same hardware, connection speed, etc. can result in one colliding and the other not. Data packets take time. Even a half second can make a difference. So player A either flies straight at player B or turns into player B ... seen or unseen ... and his own FA says "Hey! My owner flew into the other plane!" Player A's own pc sends a signal to the server "My plane hit the other one."
Player B, otoh, made a correction that avoided a collision on his end. His own pc says "Nope ... we're good .... didn't hit a thing." and that packet delivers that data to the server. Half a second. Maybe less. So ... be it blind accident, intentional ram, etc .... player A is at fault for colliding with player B and penalized with pieces missing. BUT ... if player B managed to miss ... either by better reflexes, dumb luck ... or maybe even a lucky packet loss (yes, there's a chance of that, as well, but rubber bullets and warpage are more an issue already, in that case) then he isn't penalized. Why should he be? He avoided it. He's not at fault. It's more efficient than Geico.
The system's not a bad one. IF packet loss is the culprit then there's alot more at stake than collisions.
But ... I bet HT or Pyro can tell it better. And I'm sure they'll correct me if I'm having a misconception here.
-
Originally posted by Kev367th
Hypothetical situations -
a) One plane 'creeping' up on another planes six.
b) Two planes flying directly at each other.
A) Tail hit. We know that planes in the rearview mirror are closer than they appear. This is to say that when you see the enemy 200 behind you he sees himself sitting on your tail. The greater the lag diference between his FE the server and your FE the greater the error. In a tail hit along the same line the closure has to be very slow for the lead plane to incurr a collision.
Summary if you fly catch up into the back of an enemy you will collide with him on your FE before he even sees a collision.
B)Head on. If you fly down the same line (180 degrees)head on the lag is balanced out. It does not matter who has the greater lag its a matter of total lag (your FE to server plus his FE to server). If the line is true you will both collide.
As the angle of contact changes so the chances in crease that whilst one FE will see a collision the other will not. Start to add arcs of flight and you can almost guarantee that collision will be one sided. Also some wing tips never seem to collide with any thing.
-
Originally posted by Saintaw
Did you move to Normandy?
If you give all my ACM secret tricks we won't be friend very long you know ...
You know I can whistle a on the copper wire and fight at the same time ?
All my connect are hand made ... err mouth made :p
Btw on about 6 year in AH I made one single successfull collision (I mean a planned one :D) to kill an opponent when I was out of ammo.
Usually I simply die.
-
if you want to "collide and survive" you have to imagine you are towing a drone and he is being pulled by one.
Now you have to get your drone to hit his drone without you hitting him.
edited.get it right TILT!
-
i like the IL2 for HOing vulchers, but why the IL2 can up without ord. from bases with ord down, and the other bombers can't ??? am i wrong? are any other buffs enabled to take off from bases without ord?
-
Originally posted by ghi
i like the IL2 for HOing vulchers, but why the IL2 can up without ord. from bases with ord down, and the other bombers can't ??? am i wrong? are any other buffs enabled to take off from bases without ord?
Dead ord denies the IL2 its bombs and rockets. it still has the 23mm tho.
-
Originally posted by Kev367th
Tilt - Love #7, then we could pay perks for a white noise anti sheep baa suppressor.
Or you kill the sheep..............."Road kill!" (tm Big - T)
-
Originally posted by Kev367th
Thanks for the info on #4.
So basically -
Mr X living in Texas with a 'low' netlag is hosed.
Because Mr Y living in Outer Mongolia on a paper cup and string with a 'high' netlag can just go ahead and deliberately ram and get away with it?
Excuse the bluntness, never played Warbirds, so the your FE, my FE thing has always baffled the hell outta me. If a collision occurs it still seems ridiculous that only one FE sees it.
also Kev,
i think collision model is broke somewhat. HT says if it happens on my FE then i get damage. well i have VISUALLY missed planes with my plane and taken damage. i have Visually flew right ded center of enemy planes and neither taken damage. ive had planes pass me on 1 side and i take collision damage on opposite side of plane that coulnt have hit him.
also 2 pilots went to DA and both purposely flew level @ eachother and rammed, 7 of the 10 the pilot with worst
con got damage the other didnt (so only 1 of the 2 rammers
took damage even though both collided).
if ur not gona fix it, then both FEs should see collision to dish out damage, if 1 says yes other no then no damage is done.
-
Originally posted by Tilt
Or you kill the sheep..............."Road kill!" (tm Big - T)
Thats it - I'm setting JOC on you!!!!
-
Collisions and bullet hit packets can not be droped with out being disconected. On occasion they can be delayed, but not lost.
Connection speed has no effect on if you collide or not. With collisions what you see is what you get. If you see your self collide you did. Just as with the other guy , if he sees his plane collide he will take damage.
HiTech
-
so basicly double standard in programming. in my FE shooting, Bombing, rocketing. i hit what i see because its where i see it. so therefore u shoot down enemy. but because its a collision of 2 planes instead of bullets/bombs/rockets on the plane, it suddenly
changes to " the enemy isnt where u see the" so 1 dies other flies off undamage.
to me either he is where i see him or he isnt, not just convienant
when u wana program it to be.
if u used the same standard of collision model detection on shooting. then if u fire on a enemy wwhere u see it, with delay of net, he can turn and avoid ur bullets and live, even though on ur
FE u hit him oh well u got feeked by net lag.
Originally posted by Arlo
Hehe. The guy who doesn't avoid the collision dies.
Here's the deal. Even 2 players with exactly the same hardware, connection speed, etc. can result in one colliding and the other not. Data packets take time. Even a half second can make a difference. So player A either flies straight at player B or turns into player B ... seen or unseen ... and his own FA says "Hey! My owner flew into the other plane!" Player A's own pc sends a signal to the server "My plane hit the other one."
Player B, otoh, made a correction that avoided a collision on his end. His own pc says "Nope ... we're good .... didn't hit a thing." and that packet delivers that data to the server. Half a second. Maybe less. So ... be it blind accident, intentional ram, etc .... player A is at fault for colliding with player B and penalized with pieces missing. BUT ... if player B managed to miss ... either by better reflexes, dumb luck ... or maybe even a lucky packet loss (yes, there's a chance of that, as well, but rubber bullets and warpage are more an issue already, in that case) then he isn't penalized. Why should he be? He avoided it. He's not at fault. It's more efficient than Geico.
The system's not a bad one. IF packet loss is the culprit then there's alot more at stake than collisions.
But ... I bet HT or Pyro can tell it better. And I'm sure they'll correct me if I'm having a misconception here.
-
Originally posted by hitech
Collisions and bullet hit packets can not be droped with out being disconected. On occasion they can be delayed, but not lost.
Connection speed has no effect on if you collide or not. With collisions what you see is what you get. If you see your self collide you did. Just as with the other guy , if he sees his plane collide he will take damage.
HiTech
Ok. Even better than I suspected. Thanks. :)
-
Originally posted by whels
/snip
so therefore u shoot down enemy. but because its a collision of 2 planes instead of bullets/bombs/rockets on the plane, it suddenly
changes to " the enemy isnt where u see the" so 1 dies other flies off undamage.
to me either he is where i see him or he isnt, not just convienant
when u wana program it to be.
/snip
So you want to die in a collision you just avoided just because the other player has collided ?
hmmm I don't think so.
-
Originally posted by hitech
Collisions and bullet hit packets can not be droped with out being disconected. On occasion they can be delayed, but not lost.
Connection speed has no effect on if you collide or not. With collisions what you see is what you get. If you see your self collide you did. Just as with the other guy , if he sees his plane collide he will take damage.
HiTech
But, if the packets are not droped, should't we both see the colision? Maybe a few ms latter, but we should see it. What's missing here?
-
whels: Your argument has nothing to do with reality.
It is a simple matter both case are the least of two evils face with the constraints of the internet.
Case 1 bullet detection.
Would you wrather have it that you have to guess where to shoot because do to lag. You would no idea where his plane is, on his front end, And hence where to aim would be a complete guess?
Or have gunnery function like it does now.
Case 2 Collisions.
Would you wrather die when a plane is 200 yards behind you, and can do nothing to avoid the collision. Or have it work as it does now.
I wish the internet was instantanious also, but it isn't there for we implement what we view as the best solution to each problem.
If someone ever comes up with a better Idea on how to implement it,I would be all for it, but so far any idea I ever see on collisions is from people who do not truly understand the out comes of their ideas.
For instance dedalos claims he never won a collision. I bet this is not the case. What realy is happening is, he has never seen himself collide and only the other guy collide. Well this is exatly as it should be. What he is missing is that he wins a collision and never thought of it as a collision, because he missed the guy who acctualy collieded with him. Therefore he never thought of it as a collision.
HiTech
-
Originally posted by whels
so basicly double standard in programming. in my FE shooting, Bombing, rocketing. i hit what i see because its where i see it. so therefore u shoot down enemy. but because its a collision of 2 planes instead of bullets/bombs/rockets on the plane, it suddenly
changes to " the enemy isnt where u see the" so 1 dies other flies off undamage.
to me either he is where i see him or he isnt, not just convienant
when u wana program it to be.
if u used the same standard of collision model detection on shooting. then if u fire on a enemy wwhere u see it, with delay of net, he can turn and avoid ur bullets and live, even though on ur
FE u hit him oh well u got feeked by net lag.
Not so much. With collisions, bullets, rockets et al .... your pc reports what it sees to the server and your opponet's does the same .... afaik. How else COULD it work? Lag is lag is lag. There is nothing HT can do to change that no matter how much we want it.
-
I bet hitech wish he had a dollar everytime someone argues over the collision model thang.... :)
-
>>Oh, one more - Who's got all the sheep!!!<<
I know a guy in the Cactus Air Force who can let ya have as many sheep as ya want...for a price of course :rolleyes:
Contact Faddah Odd if yer interested :aok
-
Originally posted by hitech
If someone ever comes up with a better Idea on how to implement it,I would be all for it,
HiTech
I think the only alternative for an arena like the MA is to not implement it (enemy collisions) at all. (I doubt buff pilots would appreciate its removal but they do have 3 times the fire power now)
Such an experiment is easily done.
Leave it for TOD?
-
Originally posted by hitech
For instance dedalos claims he never won a collision. I bet this is not the case. What realy is happening is, he has never seen himself collide and only the other guy collide. Well this is exatly as it should be. What he is missing is that he wins a collision and never thought of it as a collision, because he missed the guy who acctualy collieded with him. Therefore he never thought of it as a collision.
HiTech
How could I possibly miss it? Wouldn't I get the proxy? Wouldn't I see the comments on 200? I am just trying to understand. If the packets are not droped, we both will see the colision a few ms appart. I just don't get it
-
There is nothing to get. You are never where your enemy sees you and your enemy is never where you see him. You or he might have been there a half second ago, but not now.
You and your enemy are only ever at the same place at the same time at your house on your monitor.
If you could look over two players shoulder in two different places at the same time, you would be able to see their different positions.
...also, not everyone who has a collision feels the need to cry like a baby about it on ch. 200.
-
Originally posted by Furious
There is nothing to get. You are never where your enemy sees you and your enemy is never where you see him. You or he might have been there a half second ago, but not now.
You and your enemy are only ever at the same place at the same time at your house on your monitor.
If you could look over two players shoulder in two different places at the same time, you would be able to see their different positions.
...also, not everyone who has a collision feels the need to cry like a baby about it on ch. 200.
Look, no one is at the same place at the same time. Fine, I anderstand that. That does not mean they will never get there. Net lag, means that the same information is getting to everyone at different times and therefore, 200ms (or what ever the number is) latter the other guy should also see the collision which if you won, you will be rewarded with a proxy by the way.
The way you guys describe net lag is that different people get different info from the server. That would explain why one sees the colison and another does not.
Its not a whine by any means. I am just trying to understand something since what the BBS experts are describing as net lag does not explain it. Then again, if that would reveal too much about how the game is implemented thats cool too. But if the answer is net lag, I would like to understand why lag causes different info to get to different people.
HT, thanks for taking the time to talk about it
-
Never mind. I think I got it. FEs or the server don't transmit location info every single ms. Therefore, it is possible that between transmisions the two FEs get out of sequence and therefore have different info on the exact bad guy location. The bigger the lag, the bigger the location difference. Does that mean the best conenction will lose though?
Does that make sence HT?
Thanks.
-
I think people too often think of "lag" as something that can be completely overcome. It can't be. At least according to the laws of physics we operate under. It can only be better or worse. And by better there are still limitations. After all, the speed of light is constant. It's how far it has to travel and how much interferance it has to deal with that are the variables. That being said, any game over the internet at all, no matter how pristine the connection or how much horsepower the pc has or how big a pipe the data can run through, is going to have lag. And and air to air combat in AH is going to have lag. We have to get over lag.
HT *HAS* gotten over lag. He has, in my opinion, the best solution for any online dogfighting game in his smoothing and collision codes. While it may be in our nature to demand more and to demand perfection it may not be a practical request. And in the best interest of resources, there can only be so much time wasted on the same dead end over and over.
Perhaps it's time for HT to add specifics over what's practical and impractical dealing with aircraft collisions in the FAQ:
http://www.hitechcreations.com/ahhelp/faq.html
-
Thanks for replying HT, can't say I totally get what it is, apart from that people aren't where you really see them.
Which kinda sounds gaga, but what the hell.
Can you tell what exactly contributes to the lag, i.e. distance, connection speed, ping time etc. Thanks.
-
Think about what things look like if you are always seeing someone where they were 1 sec ago. Only if two people are not moving will they see eachother at the samep place and time.
As 2 lag, primarly 2 factors, distance and number of hopps. Connection speed is only a very small portion of lag.
HiTech
-
Originally posted by hitech
Think about what things look like if you are always seeing someone where they were 1 sec ago. Only if two people are not moving will they see eachother at the samep place and time.
HiTech
I know you were "exampling" but its far less than a second isnt it?
Kev I look at it this way............
My ping time at log in to the MA is about 120ms.
Assuming that is 60ms each way. and a location packet every 50ms smoothed to a delay of 25ms with a server delay of 50ms.
FE 1 = 25ms
FE1 to sever = 60ms
Server = 50ms
Server to FE2 = 60ms
Fe 2 = 25ms ??
Total = 220ms say 250ms (quarter of a second)
at 300 mph ground speed thats an error of approx 35 yards per plane.
Tail chasing the error is added so the chaser sees the chased 70 yards closer, than the chased sees the chaser, and collides with him 70 yards before the chased sees any contact.
HO the errors are subtracted so both collide at the same time (both die) but the collisions occur 35 yards apart on the respective FE's.
You must have seen folk comming late out of a tight loop merge and firing apparantly behind you to get a kill on you. REM you tow your target on a big elastic band 15 to 30 yards behind you.
-
Originally posted by Tilt
Tail chasing the error is added so the chaser sees the chased 70 yards closer, than the chased sees the chaser, and collides with him 70 yards before the chased sees any contact.
But the question is, is the chaced going to see the contact 250ms latter? And what ever the correct answer is, why do I seem to loose 99% of them? I got a ping of 30ms.
-
Originally posted by dedalos
But the question is, is the chaced going to see the contact 250ms latter? And what ever the correct answer is, why do I seem to loose 99% of them? I got a ping of 30ms.
The chased will never see the chaser catch him up......in my example at 300 mph the chaser will explode some 70 yards behind the chased.
if one party had a ping of 30 ms (instead of 120) giving a contributiong lag of 15 instead of 60 (diference of 35ms) then it happens at 65yards. If the server and FE lags are less then it happens closer still.
Obviously to collide one has to be faster than the other but this just make the calculation more complex it does not change the dynamic. eg one could have been at 299.999999mph
Why do you seem to lose them?
Ramming folks from behind or merging into them from the side you will always lose. ( as above)
So rolling sissors? reverse lead turns? If you practice hard high speed turns meeting at less than 90 degrees at the apex?
In each of these manouvres if your FE shows you collide there is little chance that the other guys FE showed the same. If these styles of combat dominate your play then collisions will seem one sided to you.
or else ....what HT said......:p
-
HiTech:
For instance dedalos claims he never won a collision. I bet this is not the case. What realy is happening is, he has never seen himself collide and only the other guy collide. Well this is exatly as it should be. What he is missing is that he wins a collision and never thought of it as a collision, because he missed the guy who acctualy collieded with him. Therefore he never thought of it as a collision.
I guess that makes some sense, but here's what doesn't. If two planes "collide" {IRL} or game would seem both planes are going down period. I could never see how two A/C hit each other and only scratch the paint? I guess I could be missing something
-
First off there is a huge difference between real life 2 planes colliding. (yes both take damage)
And in AH 2 planes colliding, where all the planes really are is a bundle of data moving through a 3d space.
Go back & reread the WHOLE thread Moil.
Let us know what parts you don't get.
:)
Its all about what you see on your end.
-
Anybody heard of the "Sturmstaffle"???? There in lies the tactic of ramming.
-
Originally posted by Matrix
Anybody heard of the "Sturmstaffle"???? There in lies the tactic of ramming.
don't confuse SturmStaffle with Rammjäger
-
Don't like the sound of either of those imports. I think they're marketed to the homosexual crowd.
-
Originally posted by hitech
Collisions and bullet hit packets can not be droped with out being disconected. On occasion they can be delayed, but not lost.
Connection speed has no effect on if you collide or not. With collisions what you see is what you get. If you see your self collide you did. Just as with the other guy , if he sees his plane collide he will take damage.
HiTech
ok, make sense.
but that doesnt explain the wierd dammge you recive when colliding with another planes.
I lost ailrons got fuel and engine oil leaks.
how can that occour in a collision?
please explain mr. wizzard :)
-
Hey Flyboy
Its one thing to ask for clarification, its another thing to poke the COAD with a stick....
Someone once said to me "what you are doing is either very brave or very stupid" (long blurry memory don't ask)
which do you think "please explain mr. wizzard" falls into
and yes I saw the smilie
:D
-
I have an issue with the stupid sun on the horizon degrading the graphics on this game. It looks like it's half a sun around 0700 hours and the same around 1900 hours.
Is my prefrences set wrong or is this the same for everyone?
(http://TheSproge.com/uploads/ahss28.JPG)
-Paul
-
Originally posted by Paul
I have an issue with the stupid sun on the horizon degrading the graphics on this game. It looks like it's half a sun around 0700 hours and the same around 1900 hours.
Is my prefrences set wrong or is this the same for everyone?
-Paul
Yeah, I've noticed this for a while. I just ignore it.
-
Well, I make AH films so I tend to take note in the things that make my films look bad...
This is one that is really anoyying me, lol.
-
In Jan 1944 a small elite group of luftwaffe fighter pilots was formed to defend germany against the escalating allied bomber assaults. All were volunteers. A dedication to their country along with their own personal convictions led them to become members of "Sturmstaffle": the Luftwaffe's volunteer bomber ramming unit. Flying specially armored and equipped Fw190s, they made a simple declaration in defense of the Reich. "I volunteer for the Sturmstaffle of my own free will. I am aware of the basic objective of the staffle. The enemy will be shot down at the closest range. If that becomes impossible, ramming will be the only alternative. If these fundamentals are violated, I will face court-martial or be removed from the unit."
And no it is not to be confused with whatever you suggested.
Unit designation was: Sturmstaffle 1 (JG) 3 UDET
Get a copy of Flight Journal special issue "German Fighters" and go to page 20.
that is all!!
-
Matrix you posted ramming was the tactic of the SturmmStaffel when ramming was only an alternative.
Ever heard of "Taran" (taranyy) btw ?
In this case it's a tactic.
-
straffo what is it you don't get?? never mind, it's obviously pointless. Matrix you said it was blah blah blah. LMAO
almost forgot, ignorance must be bliss huh straffo?? (shaking head)
-
Shacke your head all you want it was not a primary tactic but more a last ressort.
The primary tactic of the Sturmstaffel was to come close and use onboard guns not to collide.
Do we agree ?
Ps: do you really think your comment about ignorance was necessarry ? I'm not having an argument with you, at least I don't think so.
-
this is nice i like that you replied swiftly as I. First of all it's not an argument, second of all never did I imply it was a primary means of use, you did on your own. third there are second/third and possibly even more actions to take based on previous ones not being successful. each independently being considered a seperate tactic all on it's own. If you'd spend the time reading the article by one of their pilots that served in the unit you'd come to understand this. and Yes they were to intentionally collide their planes with the bombers to bring them down, again I point to the pilots own accounts of his missions where he did this to a B-24. However as I said things are tried sequentially so the first tactic to bring down the bombers was infact using the guns, if that failed the next tactic was ram.
-
Well what about some lecture so ?
read this about SonderKomanndo Elbe/RammKommando Elbe
http://pub157.ezboard.com/fluftwaffeexperten71774frm22.showMessage?topicID=5.topic
http://pub157.ezboard.com/fluftwaffeexperten71774frm9.showMessage?topicID=104.topic