Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Wishlist => Topic started by: Norad on October 31, 2005, 01:38:09 PM
-
Okay i've held my tongue long enough about this subject..... i counted everytime I got "collided" with today, 8 times in 3 hours.... and everytime... i was the one losing a wing and tumbling down to the ground , i get the... "so and so has collided with you" and so and so flys away undamaged. If there is a "collision". BOTH planes should tumble out of the sky, not just the guy with the faster internet connection. This is getting ridiculous, I know i'm not the only one fed up with the collision model. All is takes is some dweeb to HO and collided with him and get the kill credit and fly away undamaged. having a plane fly away undamaged in a mid-air collision is totally unrealistic!!
-
Do some search on that topic. It has nothing to do with who has the faster connection. It has something to do with who actually *sees* the collision.
Now i can understand your frustration and venting. But would you rather have someone fly by 100 yds off and *you* loose a wing cause on the other guys FE there happened a collision?
-
Schatzi - partly WRONG.
It's not the speed but the latency (ping rate good indication).
Funnily enough spent some time today talking to Skuzzy about just this subject, heres the outcome -
1) A guy playing from Texas with a low (say 64ms) ping rate collides with a guy playing in Texas with a high (say 100ms) ping rate.
Guy in with 64ms will suffer collision almost 100% of the time.
2) Start applying that to Europe and rest of the World, where latencies will 'generally' be higher.
3) Asked him if one FE detects a collision why it can't be applied to both.
He said there'd be just as many complaints because people taking damage from a collision they 'didn't see'.
Basically if you have a low latency your hosed, just about any collision will result in you taking damage.
Reason - you see collision 1st, by the time the other guy has 'caught up',
the collision no longer exists.
I was speaking to him because I was in buffs today in the tail gun and a LA7 (surprise) comes up my 6, opens fire then flies right through me. I lose a buff, he flies on undamaged.
-
Originally posted by Kev367th
1) A guy playing from Texas with a low (say 64ms) ping rate collides with a guy playing in Texas with a high (say 100ms) ping rate.
Guy in with 64ms will suffer collision almost 100% of the time.
2) Start applying that to Europe and rest of the World, where latencies will 'generally' be higher.
I always thought that for both players to be certain of a collision then both pings would have to be low. ie if one pinged at 64 (round trip) then that is 32 + 32 if another pinged at 150 then that is 75 + 75. So lag from one FE to another is 107 plus the AH server lag.
Hence its FE to FE lag which determines how large a lag error is(with respect to collision). Not the FE to server.
Given this both players need to be in Grapevine to achieve a greater chance of mutually assured collision.
Once the FE to FE lag is high enough to provide "collision separation" then either player (short or long delay) could uniquely see the collision.
Is stuff "solid" during warping?
-
Im aware that ping rate has something to do with what you see/happens in a 'collision'. Im also aware that colision model is in a sense inaccurate and unfair. Actually, thats what i wanted to say with my post. Im sorry if it came across wrong (i guess i was 'venting' as well for seing the same beaten dead horse brought up again - i apologize :)).
But i also believe that any change in colision model wouldnt make it really more 'fair', just place the unfairness (and whines) elsewhere. Beat on dead horse with different colour fur.
I myself die from collisions every now and then. More often than someone else dies from colliding with me it seems - but then that might just be perception psychology. I usually am §$"%"§$%$§%&$§/ for a sec or two, then take a deep breath and reup.
Lord, grant me the serenity to accept the things i cannot change, the courage to change the things i cannot accept, and the wisdom to hide the bodies of those I had to kill today cause they got on my nerves....
PS: Tilt, im not sure, but id say things are not 'solid' during warp. I dont even think they *move*. Id say they just reappear at their corrected position. its just our eye/the film viwer, that shows it as 'warp'. If things were solid during warp, how could planes warp through hills and ground?
-
Originally posted by Schatzi
PS: Tilt, im not sure, but id say things are not 'solid' during warp. I dont even think they *move*. Id say they just reappear at their corrected position. its just our eye/the film viwer, that shows it as 'warp'. If things were solid during warp, how could planes warp through hills and ground?
Instinctively I would agree with this............... but then our FE is constantly "filling in" object movement between packets. This is normally on a very short time duration.............however we have seen folk with net issues just carry on their last trajectory prior to a warp..........and during this period our FE (or the server) is providing this data. Further stuff is solid during this period cos we can shoot it............ just before stuff is updated and it warps.
So when does the FE decide that the data loss is a warp?
-
Good question. Now if you got someone flying towards the ground and pull up at last moment. If our FE isnt fed the 'pulling up' info fast enough, we see him hitting the ground, right? Then we get the update and hes still flying.... Now... do/did we see him blowup flying into the ground or did he just warp through it? Does our FE wait for confirmation from his end till we see an actual crash? :confused:
Whoa, the more i think about it, the more confused i get...
-
I thought the white text "PLAYER ID has collided with you"...or something like that....was when the other player hit you...
"you have collided" is when you hit them...
is that correct?
Cause I'm still loosing crap with both white and orange text :D
-
Waffle is correct.
Kev either you missunderstood skuzzy. Or he stated it unclearly.
Connection speed has nothing to do with who collides.
HiTech
-
if i get message, "xxxx has collided with you" and that message only, why am i still taking the damage and he flies away cleanly?
"you have collided" message means im losing something...correct?
if you get both messages, we should both be losing something...correct?
-
if i get message, "xxxx has collided with you" and that message only, why am i still taking the damage and he flies away cleanly?
If that message only , you shouldn't be taking damage from a collision. He could have shot you. And you might not see the damage to his plane.
HiTech
-
Originally posted by Schatzi
Whoa, the more i think about it, the more confused i get...
Just imagine a system where everything happens at FE's and all the HTC server does is pass on location/status data and manage a terrain, and its objects whilst relaying the odd "system" report and radio traffic.
-
Originally posted by Tilt
Just imagine a system where everything happens at FE's and all the HTC server does is pass on location/status data and manage a terrain, and its objects whilst relaying the odd "system" report and radio traffic.
*bluescreen*
Fatal System Error.
Memory Overflow.
-
Originally posted by hitech
Waffle is correct.
Kev either you missunderstood skuzzy. Or he stated it unclearly.
Connection speed has nothing to do with who collides.
HiTech
Not speed, latency, thought I mentioned that?
Well in which case something is up.
I've had "xxx has collided with you" and I've taken damage while he flies off unscathed.
Also had "you have collided with xxx", same result as above.
Basically as it stands any collision whether I collide with him or vice versa, I take damage, the other party doesn't.
-
same here Kev...as have other in my squad. thats why i asked for clarification, just to make sure what i was telling them was correct about the messages. Maybe one of us will catch it on film, maybe one of the others have, ill have to ask.
-
Kev lag as nothing to do with collision detections. What you see is what you get, just like the other guy. If your front end detects a collision, you collide, if the other guy detects a collision he collides.
What you see is effected by lag, but you can only react to what you see. So hence if there is low lag or high lag, it has absolutly no effect on the outcome of a collision.
Basicly it is realy realy simple, If you see your plane collide with someone you take damage. What the other guy sees has absolutly no effect on you.
As to the messages being sent, I went and looked at it to make sure there was no bug.
If you collide with someone 2 things happen.
You send a private message to the person you collided with saying.
"Kev367th has collided with you"
the collision code also displays in your message box.
"you have collided" , this is all done on your FE, and is the only way a collision happens.
There is one way that you could collide and not get that message. And that is if you have already had a mid air collision with someone else durring the same flight. The messages will only be sent and displayed once per flight.
Ill be changing the one message next version so it will be 1 collision message every 3 secs. This is to prevent multiple messages as you pass threw a plane and have multiple collisions.
Now if you are saying you had a collsion with out getting the "You have collided" message, and didn't have a collision previously that sortie. Then you must have suffered damage from the other guy shooting.
HiTech
HiTech
-
This one shows it. Trax in a N1K collides with me. Message is "Trax has collided with you"
I lost my entire tail. He appears to have lost an aileron. He keeps driving.
Lots of collisions lately too.
http://www.furballunderground.com/freehost/files/27/TraxCollide.ahf
-
Look closly at him after collsion , you will see he lost some parts.
The message You have collided will not show in the film.
HiTech
-
Originally posted by hitech
Kev lag as nothing to do with collision detections. What you see is what you get, just like the other guy. If your front end detects a collision, you collide, if the other guy detects a collision he collides.
What you see is effected by lag, but you can only react to what you see. So hence if there is low lag or high lag, it has absolutly no effect on the outcome of a collision.
Basicly it is realy realy simple, If you see your plane collide with someone you take damage. What the other guy sees has absolutly no effect on you.
As to the messages being sent, I went and looked at it to make sure there was no bug.
If you collide with someone 2 things happen.
You send a private message to the person you collided with saying.
"Kev367th has collided with you"
the collision code also displays in your message box.
"you have collided" , this is all done on your FE, and is the only way a collision happens.
There is one way that you could collide and not get that message. And that is if you have already had a mid air collision with someone else durring the same flight. The messages will only be sent and displayed once per flight.
Ill be changing the one message next version so it will be 1 collision message every 3 secs. This is to prevent multiple messages as you pass threw a plane and have multiple collisions.
Now if you are saying you had a collsion with out getting the "You have collided" message, and didn't have a collision previously that sortie. Then you must have suffered damage from the other guy shooting.
HiTech
HiTech
Was thinking more along the lines of what happened a few nights ago -
In a B-24 in the tail gunners position.
LA7 comes up on my dead 6.
Fires a few rounds.
Flies through me.
I get a message "xxx has collided with you", not "you have collided with xxx"
Wing falls off my lead plane he continues on..NO damage at all.
In other words he collides with me (xxx has collided with you), I take the damage, he flies on totally untouched.
This open season for buff ramming? Hardly in a position for evasive manoeuvers.
-
Originally posted by hitech
"Kev367th has collided with you"
the collision code also displays in your message box.
"you have collided" , this is all done on your FE, and is the only way a collision happens.
HiTech
"Kev367th suffered collision"
or
"Kev367th has collision damage"
would indicate who the injured party is a little more clearly.
as would
"you suffered collision"
or
"you have collision damage"
I think I prefer the latter............
-
Originally posted by Kev367th
I get a message "xxx has collided with you", not "you have collided with xxx"
Wing falls off my lead plane he continues on..NO damage at all.
I think its being suggested that the wing was shot off your B24 and you could not discern what ever damage the La7 suffered.
I do get wierd collision damage some times....such as losing a flap or gear......................... .seems strange to do such a thing without some form of structural bit falling off.
-
First let me admit I don't have a clue as to all the tech details that have been discussed in this thread. I can not even imagine what must go into the modeling of a collision. What I do know is that I and every member of my squad is sick of this situation. A collision bewteen two aircraft is going to take both planes down. Whether I see it or not whether he see it or not should not make a difference. If I hit someone or he hits me we both go down. I can live with that. If I collide with parts from plane and I take damage, thats the way it was. But some players are using this as a weapon. They know by ramming another player their chances of survival are 50/50 they are going to survive. I have watched it and have heard it on the radio. Now lets quit talking about it and fix it. You can not have this many posts on a single subject without there being a problem. Ok I don't feel any better but I least I voiced my opion.
BLT280/Satans Playmates
-
watanna: What you are asking for is exatly what happens.
If you and the other player both collide, you will both take damage.
But you realy need to try to understand there is nothing to fix.
Because if you fly threw a plane, only YOU collided, not what you naturaly assume should be you and the other guy collided.
Because when you refer to BOTH planes you are not taking into account there are in reality 4 planes. 2 on your computer, and 2 on the other guys computer. So when you say both, you are only refering to the 2 on your computer. Because the 2 on the other guys computer did not collide.
HiTech
-
I think what watanna is saying is that if there is a collison between your plane and an enemy plane... both planes should go down. I totally agree. My squad mates and i have all discussed this issue also and like many others, are kind of fed up with the whole collision issue like other squads are. Ramming is being used as a weapon like watanna has said. In real life, if two planes collide head on.. there both going to go down, if not both suffer catastrophic engine and prop failure. It's almost not fun to play any more because 9 times out of 10, when i get collided with, i'm the one going down, watching the other plane fly off , undamaged, and shoot down more of my allies.
-
So if you don't collide on your front end but the other guys sees a collision on his front end with you, You want to take damage from what would appear to you as out of nowhere. I bet nobody would complain about that.
-
I think that any thing other than what we have now would be worse than we have now.
watana/norad it is next to impossible to game a collision where the perpetrator survives and the victim suffers damage.............
try it ........................try to do it in the DA you will see how difficult it is.
However if one FE forced a collision upon another even when that other never saw a collision (which is what you suggest) then ramming would become the sport of the desparate.
Presently its almost impossible to force a ram other than via a 180 degree HO. From any other approach the rammer is the only victim.
Now think of a world where you see a near miss and then find you have sufferred collision................ where some one can fly into your rear and bring you down thru collision..........(you cant do that presently.......the rammer dies before the victims FE sees collision)
The only way to avoid all this would be to dumb the collision model down such that both FE's have to see collision before one occurrs on any FE.............. unfortunately the HO shooter would then return to the game enmasse attempting to fly thru his victim.
-
I think some people don't wanna grow up and admit that they are wrong.
I agree that the collision model is great. Sometimes the fella I'm shooting at will cut throttle and force me to either overshoot or ram him from behind.
He will break left or right and make himself a bigger target, and I'll will continue to shoot at him and then boom, I rammed him and only I will get the collision message because He may have rolled his plane at the last second and didn't actually collide with me on his end.
For the people complaing about receiving damage from messages where it only states that the other guy collided with you, you are truly ignoring the possiblity that the other guy SHOT YOUR ARSE before he collided. After all, if he hit ya, most likely he was shooting at you right before the collision.
This reply is mostly for:
Norad
Watanna
Kev367th
killnu
-
Norad: I wish that both planes would collide also.
But my wish will not change the simple fact that from when you move your joy stick, to the time the other person sees your plane change roll or pitch, will always have a substantial delay simply do to the time it takes to send information threw a wire.
Your post are simple complaints about the speed of the internet. Wish I could fix that, but im not good enough to make things move faster than the speed of light.
So until your ready to discuss the issue in a manor that starts with the limitations of data transimtion . Im done with the discusion.
HiTech
-
Stay away from things on your screen.
Works most of the time.
-
HiTech: I appreciate you taking the time to reply! Am I more confused than I was before? Yes But like I said I am not the sharpest knife in the drawer.
-
Originally posted by Lye-El
So if you don't collide on your front end but the other guys sees a collision on his front end with you, You want to take damage from what would appear to you as out of nowhere. I bet nobody would complain about that.
That already happens. I have been colllided with several times from behind or below while never seeing him, and came up on the losing end of it. The thing about now is I get a message on who hit who. About 50% of the time I get collided with, Im the one that the goes down while he flies away. Same as if I saw him on my 'FE'. After reading all these posts I still dont have a clear idea on whats actually happening.
-
Originally posted by Slash27
That already happens. I have been colllided with several times from behind or below while never seeing him, and came up on the losing end of it. The thing about now is I get a message on who hit who. About 50% of the time I get collided with, Im the one that the goes down while he flies away. Same as if I saw him on my 'FE'. After reading all these posts I still dont have a clear idea on whats actually happening.
"Seeing" him does not refer to your eyes. It refers to the environment your FE is tracking. What it "sees" is the entire 3D environment, but it only renders one view of it for you to literally see.
-
Makes sense Karnak, thanks.
I have a question about the gunnery then.
But would you rather have someone fly by 100 yds off and *you* loose a wing cause on the other guys FE there happened a collision?
I dont know if this is an extreme example or if my 'FE' can be 100 yards away from an enemys 'FE' or not, but if they are even 20 yards apart, how are we shooting guys down? Is it coded that if I 'see' him and hit him, he takes damage regardless if his 'FE' is 20 yards further to the right? Im asking not bltching.
Some one give me a quik run down on this 'Front End' thing and why is it called that.
-
hitech, Sir, will you answer a question for me? And I think it's the crux of the issue here.
First... If two planes collide, .i.e. they both get a collision message, shouldn't they both take equal damage? I frequently lose 1/2 an elevator or an aileron during high speed HO collisions while the other guys loses a wing or more. Second, how is it even possible to lose an aileron or elevator in a head on collisions without losing more substantial parts first?
I can probably dig up some video or find someone to do some collision testing if you'd like.
g00b
PS: Slash27, you got it. Everyone's front end displays our in game universe differently. Planes are NEVER where you see them, when viewed from that players perpective. When flying in tight formation with good pings all around, the distances displayed are about 20-30 yrds different. As in, I see you 50 yrds behind me. You see you are only 20 yrds behind me. This is the best case scenario. I'd guestimate in a good furball, rarely is a plane within 50 yrds on your FE as he is on his(or hers!). What you see on your FE is what happens. I.e. When you see your bullets hitting the enemy, they ARE taking damage. Sometimes you will see bullets flying by your aircraft apparently missing, when all of a sudden, you are going down in flames. This is because on their FE they saw the bullets hitting your plane. When you see your plane colliding with the enemy, you ARE colliding. If they don't see it, they take no damage. If they see a collision, but you do not, only they take collision damage. I hope that makes some sort of sence.
-
Makes enough sense for me g00b:aok
If two planes collide, .i.e. they both get a collision message, shouldn't they both take equal damage?
Thats the biggest issue. Should they both take catastrophic damage and go down? Will that only make things worse if two guys clip wing tips and explode?
-
I think the collision messages are more there to just tell you that it has happened. It really doesn't mean anything.
Slash, Hits, as well as collisions are monitored on your Front End, and then relayed to the server.
That's why if you're being shot at, you can hear the bullet pings, even though you see the bullets clearly missing.
However, it does not work the other way around. Manytimes on your FE you'll see bullets pass through your plane. These are meaningless. The only ones that count are what is on his FE.
Remember, no one wins a collision, or loses a collision. All that matters is what is seen.
If you get hit on your FE you are at fault for not avoiding the other guy.
-
Originally posted by Kermit de frog
I think some people don't wanna grow up and admit that they are wrong.
I agree that the collision model is great. Sometimes the fella I'm shooting at will cut throttle and force me to either overshoot or ram him from behind.
He will break left or right and make himself a bigger target, and I'll will continue to shoot at him and then boom, I rammed him and only I will get the collision message because He may have rolled his plane at the last second and didn't actually collide with me on his end.
For the people complaing about receiving damage from messages where it only states that the other guy collided with you, you are truly ignoring the possiblity that the other guy SHOT YOUR ARSE before he collided. After all, if he hit ya, most likely he was shooting at you right before the collision.
This reply is mostly for:
Norad
Watanna
Kev367th
killnu
Not ignoring anything, your ignoring a few things, in fact your just being ignorant full stop.
1) If a guy dives on me blows his pass and then pulls up misjudges his climb and climbs THROUGH me, why should I be the ONLY one to take damage.
2) If a guy misjudges his buff strafing run and rams me, why should I be the only one to take damage, hardly in a position to 'evade' in the tail gun position.
3) If I'm saddled up behind a con at 400, he warps behinds me, warps back forward again, and on the way goes though me why is it only me taking damage.
4) I've even been collided with by guys above me blowing their dive and going right through me without me ever seeing them, no pings, just a you "xxx has collided with you".
5) Even with the law of averages I should have 'won' at least one collision by now - STILL WAITING.
Maybe change the message -
"xxx has collided with you, you have low latency - SUCKER"
[edit] I have won ONE collision (thinking about it) but that was in the AH2 Beta. Guy dove in on my six, misjudged his speed, rear ended me, and died.
-
Originally posted by Kev367th
1) If a guy dives on me blows his pass and then pulls up misjudges his climb and climbs THROUGH me, why should I be the ONLY one to take damage.
On his FE he flew up ahead of you not through you........... If you try to game this you will find it very difficult to achieve.
2) If a guy misjudges his buff strafing run and rams me, why should I be the only one to take damage, hardly in a position to 'evade' in the tail gun position.
This only occurs via head on and the circumstances given above. From all other angles total lag will cause collision to occur on his FE before impact is seen on yours
3) If I'm saddled up behind a con at 400, he warps behinds me, warps back forward again, and on the way goes though me why is it only me taking damage.
I too would like to know how the COAD treats warpage movement.
4) I've even been collided with by guys above me blowing their dive and going right through me without me ever seeing them, no pings, just a you "xxx has collided with you".
If that is the only message you got then you did not suffer collision damage. That is the message sent by an FE that suffers collision damage. It has to be accompanied with a system message "you have collided". If you do not see "you have collided" you have not suffered collision damage. (Unless you have seen the message once before in that flight) You have incurred damage via other means.
5) Even with the law of averages I should have 'won' at least one collision by now - STILL WAITING.
Maybe change the message -
"xxx has collided with you, you have low latency - SUCKER"
If you see a collision on your FE then you should not be a winner.
-
Originally posted by Kev367th
5) Even with the law of averages I should have 'won' at least one collision by now - STILL WAITING.
Im 100% sure you *have* won collisions. You just didnt *see* them as collisions....thats why you 'won' them in the first place.
-
Sigh.
This discussion just never goes away.
Bottom line; If you do not come too close to your target, you will not collide.
Period.
If you're always colliding, you will always lose. On your computer, if you try a simple BFM move -- a yo-yo, a displacement roll, ANYTHING -- you can continue on the 6 and not collide. If you get him lined up at 300, start firing, and keep firing through 200 you will collide. If you are setting up the slashing snap shot and try to fly right under him at the pass through, you can easiily collide. If your FE gets the info about his evasive that happens to be in the direction of your extension, just as you rip past him -- you're going to hit him. And its realistic. In real life -- waht happens if you come too close to a terget that's independently piloted? If he does something unexpected, you can collide. SO, dont come too close!!!!
It is YOUR fault, not the computer's, not the internet's, and not the coder's.
Others do collide with us -- and we blame those "victories" on the other guy augering, or stalling, or our good marksmanship as we sprayed through the merge. That fluttering 190 may have lost a collision, not just a stabilizer -- so dont feel victimized. Just dont get too close!!
I R teh dweeb -- and I hardly ever get collisions, maybe once or twice a tour. When they happen, its because I cut the spatial edge too closely. Its never my connection, because those few I get correlate with MY flight positioning mistakes -- not with my ping that day.
Skuzzy or HT -- a question. If I am flying straight, and his avatar on MY front end banks hard into me -- will the system return a "You have collided" or a "He has collided message? In other words, will the computer text say I did it because it was on my front end, or will it say he did it because my plane was actually hit by his? I hope that for clarity's sake its the former --
-
Maybe this would help:
A lot of your complaints have the implicit assumption that the game is happening on HTC's server, and that what you see is what "happens" in the game at large. With this logic, it would be entirely reasonable that a collision should be equally distributed between both planes. BUT -- In reality, the game only happens on YOUR computer.
Think of the HTC server as the AI, not the game. When you "log in", you're actually booting up the AI. The game isnt happening in Texas at all. Think that the major difference between AH2 and a boxed sim is this:
In this game, AI is provided by volunteers all over the world on a real time basis. The server coordinates the AI messages, it doesnt "host" the game the way, say, counterstrike servers do.
Some AI providers (oh, like Leviathan) give really challenging opponents on your PC. Others (like 2weeker 7865437290) fly straight and let you shoot them. However, all the action happens on your computer, jsut as if you were playing a boxed sim. So, all collisions you see happen locally.
The wrinkle comes when you realize that 1) you are providing AI for everyone else, so your messages run to the server too; and 2) the game system tries to smooth out the unavoidable delays (in update times spread out all over the world) be "filling in the gaps" on the fly. So you may see things that didnt actually happen, because the "AI" had a net induced hiccup.
The wrinkles mean that your collision death may be invisible to another player who saw your plane in the position it held a half second before -- WHICH MEANS A 75-150 yard displacement. (300 mph = 150 yards per second).
The moral is simple -- if you dont want to get hit, stay out of the imaginary, 150 yard bubble that includes everyplace his plane could show up in the next 0.5-1.0 second.
-
All very good suggestion, but wuth a few caveats -
a) The AH2 gunnery model requires you to get closer than Ah1 (remember the 'I keep missing threads' from way back :) )
b) Kinda hard to stay out of an imaginary bubble in a buff when guys are attacking you.
-
I dont know about y'all, but whenever I see a report on the TV tube thats about ANY midair colision, betwen a small/large plane, small/small plane, plane/helo, or any combination of jets, they all die.
So, since both planes eventually get a message, make them both crash to the ground, and no one get the credit. Having no-credit will definately take the "using it as a weapon". This wil just result in some chastizing, but as I see CH 200, that is the norm anyway. Maybe you can make the "You colided with" public.. so otheres will see who the rammers are. If you need to you can make is a MASS thing. Meaning that a plane with smaller mass takes proportionatly more dammage than a larger plane. This will prevent the LA7 rammers into a B17.... a bit.
All this has nothign to do with the speed of the internet, which incedentally, does not travel at or near the speed of light. BTW, so you know, I wipe my ethernet cables down with high performance racing grease... that really helps too.
This looks like a goal to me:
but im not good enough to make things move faster than the speed of light.
-
Originally posted by pigface
I dont know about y'all, but whenever I see a report on the TV tube thats about ANY midair colision, betwen a small/large plane, small/small plane, plane/helo, or any combination of jets, they all die.
So, since both planes eventually get a message, make them both crash to the ground, and no one get the credit. Having no-credit will definately take the "using it as a weapon". This wil just result in some chastizing, but as I see CH 200, that is the norm anyway. Maybe you can make the "You colided with" public.. so otheres will see who the rammers are. If you need to you can make is a MASS thing. Meaning that a plane with smaller mass takes proportionatly more dammage than a larger plane. This will prevent the LA7 rammers into a B17.... a bit.
All this has nothign to do with the speed of the internet, which incedentally, does not travel at or near the speed of light. BTW, so you know, I wipe my ethernet cables down with high performance racing grease... that really helps too.
This looks like a goal to me:
Pig, if people think they are using collsions "as a weapon" they are fooling themselves -- on the level of the guy whose "lucky rabbits foot" keeps him from getting hit by a drunk. Collisions happen on YOUR computer, so what the other guy does cant affect your collision unless he KNOWS what you're going to do before you do it -- and if he knows that, he'll shoot you down instead of ramming you.
Rams are annoying, but if you read the posts above it might be easier to understand whats happening in the program -- and thus how to prevent them. 99% of rams can be prevented if you fly smart, regardless of what the other guy does.
And Pig, thnk a little more about the effects of your suggestion. I'm dogfighting you, and I pop on your six with lots of E after a vertical move. I drop in too close, though, an dit takes me too long to get the crosshairs right -- so I open fire at 150. By the time you're taking hits, I'mm too close, and I ram you. Menawhile, on your computer, you saw me above, guessed what i was going to do, and broke before I got to the 6. So, YOU see me 200 yards off your 9 o'clock flying away from you. You hear me get a couple pings, but missing wildly now, and you figure you broke jsut in time to get clear of the guns.
Current system: I die, you get what amounts to a proxy.
Pig system: we both die, and you get punished even though you made a move that burned me.
Which seems more fair?
(The exceptions -- unpreventable rams -- happen when you're flying straight and the opponent maneuvers, based on 1 second old information about where you are, right into the space you're occupying on YOUR computer. In a buff, i guess teh only way to prevent it is to kil him before he gets that close. In a fighter, you're sunk. I guess this rare unpreventable collision is the prioce to pay for a workable game.)
-
Seems to me the fix would be if one person sees a collision, it should send that data to the host which would report it to the other guys FE. If either guy sees collision, both should get damage, whether it's from the FE or the server (in the case of the guy who didn't "see" it). This would prevent guys with high lag from doing HO's because they know they can pull up at the last second and their FE would not "see" a collision but the other guy would. Far fewer guys would HO if they knew that a collision on either FE would be a collision for both no matter what.
-
Thanks for the reply Simaril,
Although I agree with you, "if people think they are using collsions "as a weapon" they are fooling themselves". I approach this subject as a simple simulator of a real flight model. And yes, I did read the lengthy thread. It is all very interesting, and I added my opinion is all. What computer the collision happens on, time lapses, and all that is besides the point from my prospective.
Current system: I die, you get what amounts to a proxy.
Pig system: we both die, and you get punished even though you made a move that burned me.
I would have to go with the Pig system. Not because it is fair, or because it would be named after me :) , but, if we were in a WWII battle, flying planes and I pull a bonehead move, you run your plane into mine, we would still die. It does not matter how many pelts I had gathered, rank or anything, rather on just flying. It would then benifit both to attempt to avoid colisions. Just today, for example, it happened all too fast but a guy I was fighting, I was tailing and, as I was overtaking him, he turned into me from below. Colision. I died, he lived. He want on to crash into yet another guy, both of us died. He was in an LA7, I was in a much bigger, stronger F6, the other guy was in a NIK, yet he "bumper cars" us both out of the sky. However can someone hit two planes, with a nose prop, and survive? I did get retribution, eventually, but that would just not be possible in real life, that, I know for a fact, this is not fair. So, I vote for the Pig sytem.
How it is reported, or viewed is a totally different issue, and a distant second.
-
Jebus, do you tards even read the thread before you post? It's been explained 10 times right here, a few times by the guy who made the freaking game, and you're still saying the same damn thing -- "If one plane takes damage, both should!!!"
The collision model is exactly as it should be. I'm no programmer, but even I can understand how it works.
-
pigface,
You don't understand what you incorrectly term "timelapses".
Latency does not just cause a delay in what we see, but we all end up seeing the same thing at slightly different times.
Latency causes us to all see slightly different things. Two aircraft can, without any manuevering at all from first sighting, fly straight and level, one exactly east and one exactly west and on one FE they collide and on the other FE they pass 15 yards from eachother. The second FE will never show the collision.
Intense manuvering only makes this more dramatic.
As to your claim that raming people who don't even have a chance to know that they should dodge would not be exploited if neither got a kill, well, your looking at it as a utopia. What would happen, in this game of kamikaze P-51s and Typhoons, is that Bob would gladly crash into Charlie because it took Charlie 10 minutes to get there and Bob only 30 seconds. That is a 20 fold gain in time efficency for Bob's side.
No colisions results on other highly distorted and gamey actions, such as flying through other aircraft firing your guns from ranges that cannot possibly miss.
The solution used in AH is the only viable solution unless somebody figures out how to do instant communications between computers. As it is the .6 to .8c that data travels over the net limits us to this fudged system giving us the best available results, though still flawed.
-
something has changed with it in the last couple of months, there is a problem with it, everyone in my squad and many on range channel talk about it constantly
-
Nothing has changed with the collision code in the last 1.5 years.
The only thing we have added is to simply put in 2 text messages.
HiTech
-
Originally posted by Kev367th
Basically if you have a low latency your hosed, just about any collision will result in you taking damage.
once again the cheap bastages with 56-kbps get the advantage, another example. WARPING ALL OVER THE ****ing place!!!!!
-
Sigh.
Some people just refuse to get it.
Low latency is not a collsions advantage, despite the popular wisdom on your squad channel. Do a search.
-
Originally posted by toadkill
once again the cheap bastages with 56-kbps get the advantage, another example. WARPING ALL OVER THE ****ing place!!!!!
Except it doesn't work that way at all.
If he sees a collision on his FE he takes the damage, not you. It doesn't matter what his ping time is at all.
-
Its WYSIWYG
Its WHSIWHG
It aint MAD
It aint WYSIWHG
It aint WHSIWYG
-
Originally posted by Karnak
Except it doesn't work that way at all.
If he sees a collision on his FE he takes the damage, not you. It doesn't matter what his ping time is at all.
I disagree because they can warp though you, and warp into your path..... that is where low-speed vs high-speed really matters..... and upstream is almost always slower than downstream for home users..... this is true with dial-up..... 33.6 was max upstream last time i used dial-up years ago (that's with v.90/56k downstream) lower bandwidth means more time to update, and typicaly higher ping, and less packets means more chance of you loseing vital UDP packets.... if you send out more(high bandwidth) ... if some gets lost in transmission there is less of an impact.
so I disagree.
___________________
does AH use any kind of anti-lag? how much time do they use if they do 500ms? 250ms? I'm guessing from the 'what you see is what you get' that there is not anti-lag as I understand it. But might be a bad idea for a sim.
Running some game servers in the past, anti-lag helped alot (FPS not sim tho)
Also I wonder if there's any thoughts for the future ... IPv6 is still not used really, I think it offers more QoS options..... and OSPF works decently .... but we aren't all arriveing at HTC at the speed of light from our homes. There is still room for improvment before we actually hit the speed of light barrier.
-
Well, though I don't play much any more my experience in playing AH for about five years on DSL with sub 100ms ping times disagrees with you. I can recall many times where the enemy warped out of a gun solution, but I cannot recall a single instance of the enemy warping through me and killing me.
I have seen some really bad and persistant warping on the part of high latency players though, so bad they were pretty much impossible to kill.
Last time I checked, last week, my ping time to the AH server was 62ms, I have 160k/sec down and 40k/sec up.
-
I disagree because they can warp though you, and warp into your path..... that is where low-speed vs high-speed really matters
Connection speed has nothing to do with warps. Let me put it a different way.
It has bubkiss. noda, not even a small jitter would it cause.
Infact running at 28k with no compresion on your modem would be better for smoth play then a lot of cable connects.
What DOES Matter is how much the lag varies from one packet to the next.
This is typicly caused by your position on earth, who your provider is, what routers you must go threw, but the first hop hop of your connection has very little to do with warps.
Or as it applies to AH, if your netstatus top line is flat, it makes no diffence what you connection speed is.
HiTech
-
hitech, my ping is locked on 150, despite upgrading from 1mbs to 2mbs cable.. even since you switched servers.
is this just based on the routers my connection has to go though?
-
Furball,
My SBC/Yahoo DSL service in the Bay Area jumped from 72ms pings to 150ms pings after they moved the servers. I just switched to Speakeasy DSL and my pings are now 62ms to the AH server.
I don't think you'll see a significant decrease in ping times unless you switch ISPs.
-
What surprises me is folk seem to except the gunnery implications of lag ............
On our FE's
We get shot down by folk who are apparantly firing at some spot behind us
We suffer collision when we run into folk..............
Which is the wierdest of the two?
Warpage to one side I control whether I collide or not......the risk is mine.
Yet I have no control over the the varing lengths of string between my apparant location and my apparant location on some other FE. Which means that if I want to cut a merge fine a big lag may give the oncoming straffer the shot because on his FE I jinked too late!
-
I was only expressing my opinion here, and no, I am not mistaken. I simply said that in any midair colision I ever heard about, both planes go down. That is not how it happens here. Fair or not I don't care. I never said anything changed in all the time I been on. It is what it is.
Re-analyzing a piece of a quote, does no one any good, and incinuating I'm some sort of a dufus only makes you half right.
Peace, see you in the air.
-
Originally posted by Tilt
Just imagine a system where everything happens at FE's and all the HTC server does is pass on location/status data and manage a terrain, and its objects whilst relaying the odd "system" report and radio traffic.
you can't do that Tilt... The golden rule of online gaming is that you never trust the client installation to do the work... The reason is that it opens you up to hackers. If you have a client program that makes the decision to call it a kill, then its just a matter of time before some hacker figures out how to trigger the kill code on demand... All of the scoring and killing has to happen on the server or you can never trust the system.
-
Originally posted by Karnak
Furball,
My SBC/Yahoo DSL service in the Bay Area jumped from 72ms pings to 150ms pings after they moved the servers. I just switched to Speakeasy DSL and my pings are now 62ms to the AH server.
I don't think you'll see a significant decrease in ping times unless you switch ISPs.
I'm on SBC and noticed a similar jump, but the thing is, the delays are in the ATT network when I run a Trace. So while you may have gotten lucky and got a better route in your installation, I'm pretty certain that the problem is within ATT's network.
-
Originally posted by Kurt
you can't do that Tilt...
they can and do
-
Originally posted by Tilt
they can and do
Way to quote out of context... Nicely done. Now go read the rest of the post.
Of course they CAN.. but it would be pretty stupid.
-
Originally posted by Kurt
Of course they CAN.. but it would be pretty stupid.
I believe they do.................
AFAIK
When firing guns one FE reports hits on player X and ground object Y
if they are against terrain objects then the server adds up damage and reports destruction.................. ..
if they are against another player then the other players FE adds up damage and reports destruction ..........
your rides present damage status sits in your FE that way server work load and packet size is minimised.
The server can modify the lethality of stuf thru arena settings but it has no influence over ride/component hardness which sits with the flight model in the FE.
-
Thanks for calling us stupid Kurt.
HiTech
-
Originally posted by hitech
Connection speed has nothing to do with warps. Let me put it a different way.
It has bubkiss. noda, not even a small jitter would it cause.
Infact running at 28k with no compresion on your modem would be better for smoth play then a lot of cable connects.
What DOES Matter is how much the lag varies from one packet to the next.
This is typicly caused by your position on earth, who your provider is, what routers you must go threw, but the first hop hop of your connection has very little to do with warps.
Or as it applies to AH, if your netstatus top line is flat, it makes no diffence what you connection speed is.
HiTech
æ
So if I'm loseing some packets on a 28.8k modem, and I'm loseing some packets on a DSL line, your saying the fact that more packets are being sent on the DSL will not effect things?
Usally, if your cut off it stops the flow of packets and you just don't loose a few .. you lose them all until packet flow resumes,.....
but I think it is possible, and does happen, like when something goes wrong with a router and OSPF has to reroute.... More packets means less of an impact when you do lose packets. I'm not saying brute speed/bandwidth makes you faster somehow, but does have the POSSIBLITY to make you more stable. I'm agreeing with you basicly, I just think high speed has the potential to be more stable.
like you said it's about getting a stable number of packets, in time, to HTC and back agin. If you lose the same number of packets from a broadband vs. a dial-up/smaller bandwidth connection, the impact is less. 100-5=95 5% loss and 10-5=5 50%loss..... "10-5" has more impact, ½ are lost. Wouldn't that mean the broadband is more 'stable'?
No need to answer me HiTech, I Just think I'm right about that point. I'll shutup already, but just thought this was a 'diffrant' way of interpreting speed/bandwidth effects. Not that these reasons would have much effect, but I do think they are there. Maybe I'm just wrong, I don't take my advanced routers class untill next semester :D
You did already say I was wrong, not sure if I was clear in what I was saying in my frist post however.
-
More packets means less of an impact when you do lose packets.
DSL and modem both use/have exatly the same amout of data ie number of packets from AH.
HiTech
-
Originally posted by hitech
Thanks for calling us stupid Kurt.
HiTech
PWNED ... :O
-
Why the collision is not modelled same way as weapon hits?
If on my side shot is registered other guy is hit, whether from his perspective I had a shot or not. Collisions should be the same.
Example:
I fly in straight line (auto pilot). Other guy dives on me. He pulles up and misses my tail for some 10 yds and avoids collision. Due to lag, on my side his flight path change isn't registered soon enough and he hits my tail. I die due to collision, he lives.
Both of us should die.
-
2bighorn,
Why? He didn't do anything wrong. Why should he die when he missed your plane by 50 yards? You are the one who messed up by not avoiding a collision.
-
Because on your FE you did not avoid it. It doesn't really matter whether there is any lag or not, or if rams you on his FE or not. You still get rammed either way. Only difference is he avoided the ram on his FE thus he is not penalized for it. I doubt anyone would enjoy getting damaged by a ram they did not see. At least the current method keeps a consistent reality. What you see is what you get.
g00b
-
Originally posted by 2bighorn
Example:
I fly in straight line (auto pilot). Other guy dives on me. He pulles up and misses my tail for some 10 yds and avoids collision. Due to lag, on my side his flight path change isn't registered soon enough and he hits my tail. I die due to collision, he lives.
For this form of collision to occur he has to pull up infront of you on his FE. This distance in front has to be exactly equal to the distance you travel during the delay period...........
If the delay from his FE to your FE is 120 millisecs and you are travelling at 240 TAS then the distance infront of you has to be between................
35 to 45 feet assuming his path is thru your intended plain of travel for the full length of his AC
Then on your FE you will see him pull up into you............
-
When should I take damage? When I collide or when Im collided with?
-
Originally posted by Slash27
When should I take damage? When I collide or when Im collided with?
Define precisely what you mean by "When I collide" and "When I am collided with". I suspect you are working under a real world mindset such as determining who collided with whom and is at fault in an auto accident. What we are talking about is strictly from a networked computer program's perpective.
To answer your question, you should take damage whenever a collision happens on your FE. It doesn't matter who's nose is pointing which way. If the collision happens on your FE you are the one doing the colliding.
-
Originally posted by Karnak
Define precisely what you mean by "When I collide" and "When I am collided with". I suspect you are working under a real world mindset such as determining who collided with whom and is at fault in an auto accident. What we are talking about is strictly from a networked computer program's perpective.
To answer your question, you should take damage whenever a collision happens on your FE. It doesn't matter who's nose is pointing which way. If the collision happens on your FE you are the one doing the colliding.
No, Im working under a AH world mindset. I understand the if the collision happens on my 'FE' Im the one that collided. I want to know why I take damage if the other guy hit me. The only reason he would get the "You have collided" message is if he hit me on his 'FE' correct? The why do I sometimes take damage, and sometimes I dont. And Im not buying the "he may have shot" you on every incident. Ive been playing for over 4 years, I know when Ive been shot.
-
What I'm trying to say is that single AC collisions are very unreal and that is somehow killing immersion.
No mather how brilliant current technical implementation of collision model is, fair or unfair, it is very gamey solution.
Just imagine, you collided with... err... what? Something what wasn't there? Or was it?
There should be cutoff distance for collision where both planes take damage no mather the individual FE. For the sake of more believable realism, if nothing else.
Same with the collision messages. It should be enough to say: Collision!
Why simple if it can be complicated, right?
-
Slash27,
That message means his avatar on your FE collided with your avatar on your FE. It is to make it clear what happened to you. It does not mean his avatar collided with your avatar on his FE.
2bighorn,
We are having a fundamental disagreement then. I disagree that being detroyed when I didn't collide with anything is more realistic. Further I disagree that you should be able to ram me and destroy me when I have no way of even knowing I should try to dodge. That is sooooooo exploitable it isn't even funny.
-
Originally posted by Karnak
Slash27,
That message means his avatar on your FE collided with your avatar on your FE. It is to make it clear what happened to you. It does not mean his avatar collided with your avatar on his FE.
Ok then, does he get the same message? If mine says "Karnak collided with you" and I take no damage, does yours say "You have collided"?
-
Hmmm. I am not sure. I think we need HiTech to clarify all the messages and what they mean. There is a degree of abiguity here.
-
Originally posted by Karnak
Further I disagree that you should be able to ram me and destroy me when I have no way of even knowing I should try to dodge.
But hit detection works that way. Sometimes one FE has shot solution and on the other side it appears it doesn't.
And not many are complaining about, because it's close enough to real stuff.
On the other side, one plane collisions aren't even remotely close. So we got some space-time continuum solution in the best startrek fashion.
If collision model can't be made real enough, then get rid of it completely and nobody will cry about.
-
If you ram someone on your FE it says "you have collided" the other person gets a "XXX has collided with you" message. That's it.
2bighorn you have not proposed any other solution other than to turn off collisions. That would be even more gamey than the current situation. I think the current method is the best possible implementation.
g00b
-
Originally posted by g00b
If you ram someone on your FE it says "you have collided" the other person gets a "XXX has collided with you" message. That's it.
g00b
Thats fine if I have indeed rammed the guy. But if on sortie #1, Karnak and I merge, and on his 'FE' he collides with me . I get the " Karnak has collided with you" he gets "you have collided". He takes damage and loses parts and crashes. On sortie #2 we merge, on my 'FE' Karnak hits me and we again get the same messages, only this time I take damage. Now Im sitting here going "wtf, he hit me and I get damage?!?!?!?" There is the immpression in the community by alot of players that if you are the one that gets rammed you dont take damage. Or atleast there was. Now many dont know what the hell is going on because some times they get rammed and take damage and sometimes they dont. Maybe it should be adjusted to where if the collision happens on the the other guys 'FE' the other player shouldnt get a message at all. I think the would ease alot of the confusion.
-
Originally posted by Slash27
Ok then, does he get the same message? If mine says "Karnak collided with you" and I take no damage, does yours say "You have collided"?
No he does not get the same message.......
Yes if your FE says "karnak has collided with you", Karnaks FE should say "you have collided".
HT above stated that currently the frequency of the message is damped to one per mission which he says he plans to change.
I think it may help folk if the message explains who the victim of the collision was (who incurred damage).......
"Karnak has collision damage" and on his FE "You have collision damage" or some such wording..........
-
Originally posted by 2bighorn
But hit detection works that way. Sometimes one FE has shot solution and on the other side it appears it doesn't.
On the other side, one plane collisions aren't even remotely close. So we got some space-time continuum solution in the best startrek fashion.
If collision model can't be made real enough, then get rid of it completely and nobody will cry about.
The collision model is the most real one of the two! ....if you collide you get damage.................if you dont collide you dont get damage. Its really very simple!
So for collision its What You See Is What You Get.
For bullet strikes its What He Sees Is What You Get.
So from the victims perspective he suffers damage from a collision he saw happen and also suffers damage from bullets he did not see strike his plane.
Which is the most unreal?
Whilst the two are determined differently they both deal with the problem of positional offset due to delay in the optimum way. In the fairest way IMO.
-
g00b is correct in his assesment of the messages.
It is realy simple, what you SEE is what you get.
The hole point of the messages is so people would know if they had been collided with, or had been shot.
If you do not see the message "you have collided" , then you were shot.
The complant about not understanding is what the messages were ment for people to understand.
HiTech
-
jes HiTech your such a troller, i might have to report you to the HTC people
no im not a retard, its a joke. :lol :lol :p :p :lol :lol
-
Originally posted by hitech
Thanks for calling us stupid Kurt.
HiTech
WOW! Sorry HT, I had no idea thats how you were doing it... I thought it was well accepted that was never done in online gaming because of the hacking threats.
I really didn't mean any offense, I had no idea AH worked that way.
I don't claim to be a flightsim programmer (although I am a programmer professionally - I work on secure systems, so maybe i'm just being paranoid..), so I'll defer on this.. If I had a better way I'd have my own flightsim.
Anyhow, much of the reading I've done into online gaming supports the idea of clients reporting only that they have issued the shot, the server then determines the hit or miss based on comparing that to the relative position of the opponent from the server's point of view). However, I can understand that this would be tricky to impliment when you've got opponents moving at relative closure rates that sometimes exceed 1000mph...
None-the-less...If the projectile code exisits in the client then you risk tampering.
For instance, I have always wondered if some people might have figured out a way to enable the training arena red bomb cross (the one that shows where exactly the bomb is going to hit) in the MA... This would explain some dive bombers who never miss. And now, it seems that maybe someone could do that based on the knowledge that the decision is in the client FE?
-
Boy, I've collided more in this thread than I have in AH in the last two years. :p
2bighorn,
Sorry, but that doesn't fly. You can easily believe that you just misjudged his firing solution and accept the results. There is no way to accept that I am flying along and the guy who dives through a spot 200 yards behind me has collided with me and killed me. That breaks immersion too much.
Further, as I have said in this thread already and many before it, that leaves open a massive exploit and if you think that people who happily dive-bomb in Lancs and kamikaze in P-51 won't be able to do the simple math that a mutual kill cost them one minute and me ten minutes is a ten to one win on their part you're in a utopia.
-
Originally posted by Karnak
Sorry, but that doesn't fly. You can easily believe that you just misjudged his firing solution and accept the results. There is no way to accept that I am flying along and the guy who dives through a spot 200 yards behind me has collided with me and killed me. That breaks immersion too much.
OK, agree with that. Somewhere above I have mentioned cut-off distance where both participants would die, beyond cut-off only one, but all in all, it can stay as it is.
Originally posted by Karnak
Further, as I have said in this thread already and many before it, that leaves open a massive exploit and if you think that people who happily dive-bomb in Lancs and kamikaze in P-51 won't be able to do the simple math that a mutual kill cost them one minute and me ten minutes is a ten to one win on their part you're in a utopia.
I see that it would cause some exploits, but that's not really collision model problem.
Stuff like that should be discouraged with score or penalty system.
In fact there's plenty what could be done to improve playability of the game.
I just hope when majority of the work on ToD is done, that HTC will look into few aspects of MA play.
-
On the subject of what determins if a hit was made, I think the only realistic solution is if the FE thinks a hit was made. Think about it: My FE tells server a hit was made. Server contacts the targets FE and says at such and such a time a bullet passed through a place in space. Were you there? What exact position were you in? Of course we all know that where I thought he was in my FE is not where his FE says he was at any particular time. So of course almost every time his FE will say he was not there and it will record a miss. As I recall, Warbirds tried something along these lines and failed miserably. In the end, the FE of the shooter has to determine what got hit and how bad, and hacking has to be dealt with at another level.
And while I agree that lag exploiting is not exactly hacking, there should be a minimal connection quality that has to be acheived consistently, or else you get dumped. I know that will piss a lot of people off, but hey, that's my place in life.
And btw did I mention that overall I think this the best dam sim ever made? For all our whining about how it could be better, can we have a moment of kudos that we even have something so awesomely cool as a playable WWII flite sim?
-
Originally posted by slimpikn
And btw did I mention that overall I think this the best dam sim ever made? For all our whining about how it could be better, can we have a moment of kudos that we even have something so awesomely cool as a playable WWII flite sim?
hallelujah
-
Ok I know this is beating a dead horse and if read will be jumped on from a 1000 different angles. But what if they just did away with the collision code and went to the way it is in the TA. No collisions, no rams, no kamakasi. Subject would be a mute point then. Problem sloved. Everybody happy. (not a chance right) Just a point to ponder. Cant have this many threads wihtout something being amiss. Well have at me boys.
-
Originally posted by watanna
Ok I know this is beating a dead horse and if read will be jumped on from a 1000 different angles. But what if they just did away with the collision code and went to the way it is in the TA. No collisions, no rams, no kamakasi. Subject would be a mute point then. Problem sloved. Everybody happy. (not a chance right) Just a point to ponder. Cant have this many threads wihtout something being amiss. Well have at me boys.
Because the risk of collision drastically alters tactics. If you do away with that you end up with people flying through their targets so as to guarantee hits from ludicriously short range.
Collisions and the avoidance thereof are an integeral part to WWII guns air-to-air combat. It cannot be dispensed with.
-
Kurt: Doing stuff server side realy dosn't prevent hacking. It only changes the types of hacks that can be implemented.
For instance lets take a purly server side implementation.
In this basic implementation your client only does 2 things.
1. Gathers control input such as Joystick and keyboard and relays it to the server.
2. Displays the world as all plane information, including yours is relayed back to it.
This would be the absolute minimim type of Client server setup , nothing else realy can be eliminated from that system.
Now some one could still write a tracker and duplicate model simulator that fires all the needed control inputs back to the server, and hence made perfect bomb drops or tracking shots.
So you havn't realy changed the ability to hack, and still have to implement lots of other prevention methods.
In the end it is much more about making things difficult to hack, and then methods of detection when it does occure. Ill never discuss the methods we use of detction.
HiTech
-
Originally posted by hitech
In the end it is much more about making things difficult to hack, and then methods of detection when it does occure. Ill never discuss the methods we use of detction.
HiTech
I'd certainly never expect you to discuss that...
Thanks though for explaining what you have though. Gaming and simulation is such an interesting type of programming and every time someone explains a little more to me I learn something each time. My stuff is all financials and database.. Just names and numbers.. Nothing ever blows up... well, not in a good way anyhow!
My flight instructor was a simulation programmer for Nasa Dryden, but he would never say a word about what they were working on, kinda sucked the fun out of it :-)
Thanks again for taking the time to give me a little education.
-
I got the deathly white text last night and the other guy kept cruising around...... then went on to land his kills. I lose my tail and he keeps flying around for 5 more minutes and lands....??? :furious
-
Originally posted by ChristCAF
I got the deathly white text last night and the other guy kept cruising around...... then went on to land his kills. I lose my tail and he keeps flying around for 5 more minutes and lands....??? :furious
Read the thread; what happened will become clear.
-
Originally posted by Simaril
Read the thread; what happened will become clear.
DOH!! (Smacks head against table)
Thanks for helping me with my stupidity....reading just the first page and last page of the book....and nothing in between.... :confused:
Got it now.... :rolleyes:
-
Originally posted by ChristCAF
DOH!! (Smacks head against table)
Thanks for helping me with my stupidity....reading just the first page and last page of the book....and nothing in between.... :confused:
Got it now.... :rolleyes:
Hehe -- no problem, and no reflection on you....
I've had entire months like that...:aok
-
here my 2 cents in this
i have gotten 15 rams to day all witch were done by the other players. i tend to fight fair get on their six and shoot them down unless i killin vulchers then i ho or base defence. i dont ram.
out of all those 15 rams i lost all of them i fell to the ground while these jerks fly on to fight again. heres one typh was vulchin me he ran out of ammo and started to ram me he did it 8 times then flew away and landed his kills
the ram as it is, is not fair play to others i can tell you know if this 15-20 rams keep up then sorry hitech thats not why i give you my money so if it keeps up then the fun has been stolen from the game and you will lose mine
-
I haven't collided 15 times in the five years I have played AH.
Remember, the collision has to be on your FE for it to hurt you. That means you can dodge it. That is your job. He has to guess where you are and where he is on your FE. He doesn't know.