Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: Kermit de frog on November 08, 2005, 11:59:56 PM
-
How about this idea.
Collisions should only hurt if BOTH planes collide.
For you numties, here is an example.
Let's say you are the one that collides with the guy, but the other guy manages to avoid collision on his computer, the server gets only 1 collision reported and not 2, so then the server says, ignore collision.
Mutual collisions should only hurt.
Sound like a good idea?
I see nothing wrong with it.
(I currently like the way it is now, but maybe this idea will be more acceptable by more people)
-
With the current model, thats an almost impossible scenario...
If your computer records the hit, chances are you differ with the opponent by at least a 1/4 of a second... Do you want to apply that rule to bullets too? because you'll never hit anyone.
I gotta admit that given the limitations the game works pretty well as it is... I don't think your idea would improve it.
-
At first thought I liked the thought.
then on second though I dont as it would only encourage even more HOs
-
Its impossible to have more HOs than we do now. I like that idea..and said something along those lines in another thread.
-
Originally posted by FiLtH
Its impossible to have more HOs than we do now. I like that idea..and said something along those lines in another thread.
Yea we can. it would reduce any attempt at avoiding a collision because odds are you wont collide.
-
on the other hand. I think if one side suffers a collision then both sides should
-
Thankfully HiTech already knows why none of this will work and won't change the way he does collisions.
-
Another thread, another dead horse beaten...
*runs to call PETA*
And Karnak, im all with you on this. I collide and take damage maybe 3 or 4 times in a tour. *shrug*. Dont really matter death wise.
-
in my early days when i was a young grasshoppa i looked down on HOs. Infact i biotched and moaned and cursed when i got HOd and tried to avoid every HOer.
I then saw the light, some little kid said "don't try to bend the spoon, that's impossible. Instead try to realize teh truth." I said what truth? he said "there is no spoon dood QUAH!"
i was like snap! from then on i HO everything that goes head on with me 110 or p40 i shall HO and 1 of us will end up in hell!
MegaDud
-
Today I got HO'ed and Collied with TWICE by the SAME PILOT and I dont know if the damage was from his guns or the HO But He did this to me in the same LA ie: he survived both collisions..... really blows when that happens. :furious
I can live with teh HOing as much as I hate it but why the sudden increase in collisions has somthing changed Is it school holidays over there in the US cause the HO and Collide rate has trippled.
Later All
-
I used to try to avoid all HO's but usually I would just end up being a bigger target. Now I take all HO's and this seems to be the only time I get a realistic colission. If neither 1 one of us kills the other or neither one of us gets out of the way.
So if you want a "you colided" and "he colided" all at the same time I suggest you HO more :D or don't HO so good I guess would be more accurate. :)
-
Originally posted by mussie
Is it school holidays over there in the US cause the HO and Collide rate has trippled.
Was probably BOP squadnight. :lol
-
Originally posted by DipStick
Was probably BOP squadnight. :lol
Musta been, cause God KNOWS the BK's never do anything wrong
:aok
-
Originally posted by MINNOW
Musta been, cause God KNOWS the BK's never do anything wrong
Preach it brotha'!
-
Both colide and both die is good, and it can work as far as the 'evil net' that everything gets blamed on goes.
However, I think people confuse the colision message (xxxx has colided with ya) with the damage they took from the gys guns or their own. If you got damage when you got a message that the bad guy colided with you, it because the guy shot you, or you shot him from really close range (for some reason you get more damage than him in that situation)
Since this is the first and only bug/troble free piece of software ever writen by humans, there is nothing to be fixed other than maybe removing the colision message. Thats not a coding issue and it would avoid these questions. Every one happy
:D
-
Originally posted by dedalos
Both colide and both die is good, and it can work as far as the 'evil net' that everything gets blamed on goes.
However, I think people confuse the colision message (xxxx has colided with ya) with the damage they took from the gys guns or their own. If you got damage when you got a message that the bad guy colided with you, it because the guy shot you, or you shot him from really close range (for some reason you get more damage than him in that situation)
Since this is the first and only bug/design problem free piece of software ever writen by humans, there is nothing to be fixed other than maybe removing the colision message. Thats not a coding issue and it would avoid these questions. Every one happy
:D
-
and how would you like this scenario:
you avoid the other plane and suddenly explode because on his FE he didn't move out of the way and you did collide.
no thank you.
-
Originally posted by DREDIOCK
on the other hand. I think if one side suffers a collision then both sides should
Yep, not both sides involved in collision should go down,
(http://www.gibbageart.com/files/p38dm/Picture23.jpg)
(http://www.gibbageart.com/files/p38dm/Picture18.jpg)
-
Originally posted by ghi
Yep, not both sides involved in collision should go down,
Looking at which way round that Halifax tail piece is................
That P38 HO'd the Halifax!
-
Hos and Rams Aside
AWSOME PICS
:aok
-
Originally posted by bozon
and how would you like this scenario:
you avoid the other plane and suddenly explode because on his FE he didn't move out of the way and you did collide.
no thank you.
I thought I said BOTH see it both die
-
in my early days when i was a young grasshoppa i looked down on HOs. Infact i biotched and moaned and cursed when i got HOd and tried to avoid every HOer.
I then saw the light, some little kid said "don't try to bend the spoon, that's impossible. Instead try to realize teh truth." I said what truth? he said "there is no spoon dood QUAH!"
i was like snap! from then on i HO everything that goes head on with me 110 or p40 i shall HO and 1 of us will end up in hell!
MegaDud
Maybe that's why people these days look down on you...
-
Originally posted by lasersailor184
Maybe that's why people these days look down on you...
go back to o'club where you belong. stop hijacking threads in general...
-
It's like that old saying.
Those insults based in truth hurt the most.
-
Originally posted by lasersailor184
It's like that old saying.
Those insults based in truth hurt the most.
See Rule #2, 4, and 5
(http://www.furballunderground.com/megasmiles/images/098_gif.gif)
-
the second photo of the 38 incident with the 24 happened on the ground and not in the air like reported.
-
what I'm talking about are collisions from not ho's, but from stall fighting. Sometimes both planes are so close to each other that 1 guy might actually end up colliding with the other because he basically stalled and fell out of the sky and onto his opponent. The other guy managed to roll his plane and avoid the collision. If the net lag didn't exist, both planes should have missed because 1 pilot managed to roll out of way. Therefore, the server should say, no damage unless collision was reported by both pilots.
I'm don't want both people to die because 1 person collided. I only want the collision to either affect both people or no one at all.
I think that this idea is worth thinking about and maybe we should vote on it.
-
No vote needed kermit: Only thought about that idea 10 years ago. It is not going to change.
HiTech
-
:cry :cry :cry
-
It just seems like I got into a lot more head to head dogfights in AW. I dont know if thats due to the mentality of the players these days, or the way HOs and Collisions are setup in AH.
-
Originally posted by dedalos
I thought I said BOTH see it both die
You see this is why this is such a pointless discussion. Personally I don't see why this is so hard to understand.
IF YOU SEE THE COLLISSION YOU TAKE DAMAGE. So therefor, if both sides see a collision then they will both take some damage. It's when one side sees the collision and the other does not that the discrepancy comes into play.
For the most part only you can prevent a collision. Now that gets tricky when you talk about bombers and attacking planes but the way it works still is true. If your FE sees a collision you take damage.
-
Originally posted by Clifra Jones
You see this is why this is such a pointless discussion. Personally I don't see why this is so hard to understand.
IF YOU SEE THE COLLISSION YOU TAKE DAMAGE. So therefor, if both sides see a collision then they will both take some damage. It's when one side sees the collision and the other does not that the discrepancy comes into play.
For the most part only you can prevent a collision. Now that gets tricky when you talk about bombers and attacking planes but the way it works still is true. If your FE sees a collision you take damage.
K, work with me. If my FE sees a colision, it does not mean only I could have avoid it. Quite the oposite. When the guy I try to make overshoot, breaks off at the last moment and does not colide, but due to 'nat lag' (60ms on my end since the change) plus HT server lag, my FE sees the guy hiting me, there is nothing I can do to avoid. This great system then decides to reward the guy that pulled up the last second, and penalise me based most likely on the other guys conenction status or the status of the server.
However, the colision did not really happen since the guy responsible for it, was able to avoid. If the system would require both FEs to see a colison in order to record it, bot of us would be happy. I would say that for the most part, you cannot avoid the colision unless you are talking for a true HO.
In any case, there are worse things in the game than this. What I dont understand is why a reason for not even thinking about changing it, is not given (and I am not about to go look at threads from 2 years ago tofind out)
Again, the botom line is that most times, my FE sees a colision that did not really happen since the other guy rolled out of the way. So why is my FE being penalised because if his or HTs lag?
-
Kermit,
You are looking only at the positive aspects of your suggestion. That is something I see very frequently.
What you need to do is look at your idea and think of ways that it could be abused.
For example, if you are flying along in your B-24s and my Ki-84 dives on you what is to stop me from flying right through your aircraft firing my guns from a range that I literally cannot miss at? After all, I know that on your FE you will see me pass 100 or 200 yards behind you and there will be no collision.
You need to try to think of exploits as well as benefits.
-
Originally posted by Karnak
After all, I know that on your FE you will see me pass 100 or 200 yards behind you and there will be no collision.
If this is true, this game is in big troble.
I do agree with you on looking for ways to abuse the system, but I could do this now. Fly real fast in front or in between the bombers and boom they gos since they saw a colision that did not happen. Ask 999 and tater, I ve done that to them many times, not intentionaly. Came in fast and di not line up corectly. Looked like I was gong to colide but I made it through. The bombers didn't. To make it worse, I have colided with bombers and lost an aleron :confused:
-
I really can't see why collission (between planes) should be handeled differently than bullet hits (collision between plane and bullet)...
... but beating dead horses servers no purpose until someone else release a fresh horse from its stable.
-
Originally posted by Kirin
I really can't see why collission (between planes) should be handeled differently than bullet hits (collision between plane and bullet)...
... but beating dead horses servers no purpose until someone else release a fresh horse from its stable.
One is an accident and people for the most part try to avoid it (and continue the fight)
The other is not. People intentionly tryign to hit you with their bulets.
I really dont think any one will ever complain to HT that the bud guys FE should have seen a colision while on mine I avoided it on time.
-
Again, the botom line is that most times, my FE sees a colision that did not really happen since the other guy rolled out of the way. So why is my FE being penalised because if his or HTs lag?
dedalos: The hole point is, IT DID REALY HAPPEN.
Repeat after me IT DID REALY HAPPEN, IT DID REALY HAPPEN.
What you seem to be missing is there is not 1 Reality. You can not describe AH in terms of 1 realaity, because it dosn't exist anywhere. There are always multiple realities, a different reality for each person playing. So when you say "it did not really happen", in whos world are we talking?
Because it deffently happend in the world that is your reality.
On a side note. Was waching cosmos . Carl Sagen gave a discription of what life would be like with a collision if light did not travel at the same vel realitive to everything. Supprisingly it was almost an exact description of realities in AH, each person seeing the same thing at different times.
HiTech
-
Originally posted by dedalos
Again, the botom line is that most times, my FE sees a colision that did not really happen since the other guy rolled out of the way. So why is my FE being penalised because if his or HTs lag?
Perhaps because you didn't attempt to avoid the collision ?
-
Originally posted by hitech
dedalos: The hole point is, IT DID REALY HAPPEN.
Repeat after me IT DID REALY HAPPEN, IT DID REALY HAPPEN.
What you seem to be missing is there is not 1 Reality. You can not describe AH in terms of 1 realaity, because it dosn't exist anywhere. There are always multiple realities, a different reality for each person playing. So when you say "it did not really happen", in whos world are we talking?
Because it deffently happend in the world that is your reality.
On a side note. Was waching cosmos . Carl Sagen gave a discription of what life would be like with a collision if light did not travel at the same vel realitive to everything. Supprisingly it was almost an exact description of realities in AH, each person seeing the same thing at different times.
HiTech
I dont desagree with that. I deal with it every second at work (electronic trading).
However, knowing that, and knowing we are talking a few milliseconds between the two worlds, maybe they can be combined (to a point) when a colision is detected, a few miliseconds later.
I guess its a question of do poeple see the same things at different times or slightly different things at the same time (if that made any sence, lol), and would it be a coding nightmare to implement.
-
dedalos,
It is more than a "few" milliseconds. It is hundreds of them, even between low latentcy connections it will still be more than 100 milliseconds different.
-
Actually Dedalos, the system is rigged to make whoever has your CPID to lose all collisions.
Sorry, it's just the way the code is written.
-
Originally posted by lasersailor184
Actually Dedalos, the system is rigged to make whoever has your CPID to lose all collisions.
Sorry, it's just the way the code is written.
That's because he's only paying for the basic service. Those on premium service always WIN collisions.
-
Originally posted by rshubert
That's because he's only paying for the basic service. Those on premium service always WIN collisions.
In the words of Hub:
:furious :furious :furious :furious :p for both of you