Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Wishlist => Topic started by: Dadsguns on December 03, 2008, 03:52:14 PM
-
Please make Collisions more realistic, BOTH aircraft no matter who is at fault either by a Hoing, colliding, kamikaze, should share the respective damage and die in disgust equally...... There are just too many Gamey collisions where only one will be damaged the other will be unscathed.
-
It's more gamey to make you pay for a penalty you didn't earn.
-
Please make Collisions more realistic, BOTH aircraft no matter who is at fault either by a Hoing, colliding, kamikaze, should share the respective damage and die in disgust equally...... There are just too many Gamey collisions where only one will be damaged the other will be unscathed.
Ahhahhahahahaahah
Cut and Paste from another thread.
Tangle's external from his front end the moment of impact.
(http://i114.photobucket.com/albums/n277/1bronk1/Tanglesview.jpg)
Same basic angle external, tangle's view from my front end moment of impact.
(http://i114.photobucket.com/albums/n277/1bronk1/myview.jpg)
How would you feel taking damage looking at your film and seeing tangles front end view, hmmmmmm?
I know I'd be pretty POed.
This also works nicely for the "none should take damage" people.
Yea I should be able to put the nose of my ac through another.
Don't hit nothing wont be nothing.
-
It's more gamey to make you pay for a penalty you didn't earn.
exactly my point, It seems as though there are a few that have mastered how to do it without any repercussions on the offender part, when I get the message that player A has collided yet I am the one in the tower is ludicrous.
EDIT:
Bronk, using your example, they both should have been towered. But I would bet that only one did.
Which view was decided by the computer that "collided" with the other?
-
exactly my point, It seems as though there are a few that have mastered how to do it without any repercussions on the offender part, when I get the message that player A has collided yet I am the one in the tower is ludicrous.
Pictures not enough for you? :rofl :rofl
-
exactly my point, It seems as though there are a few that have mastered how to do it without any repercussions on the offender part, when I get the message that player A has collided yet I am the one in the tower is ludicrous.
When you ONLY see a message "Player A has collided with you" you do not take damage from collision. Never.
If you still end up in tower, you simply have been shot.
And if HTC would ever, in a weird sense of humor, implement the "both should go down" for just one day, the players now demanding such thing would be the very first to flood the BBS: "WTF? He did fly 100 ft away from me and suddenly I go down by collision?? FIX IT"
-
DG, you only have to dodge em on your screen. It doesnt matter what devious things they do on theirs... If you get a consistent abuse of warps, mail em in or something. The collision model is as good as it's gonna get with the internet as it is.
-
When you ONLY see a message "Player A has collided with you" you do not take damage from collision. Never.
If you still end up in tower, you simply have been shot.
And if HTC would ever, in a weird sense of humor, implement the "both should go down" for just one day, the players now demanding such thing would be the very first to flood the BBS: "WTF? He did fly 100 ft away from me and suddenly I go down by collision?? FIX IT"
What if you see both? Player A has Collided and You have been shot....
-
In real life, there were many occasions when planes would collide, but not both would be downed. I do think the collision modeling is essed up something though, when someone's coming down to pick me, THEY run into ME, and it says I collide.
-
EDIT:
Bronk, using your example, they both should have been towered. But I would bet that only one did.
Which view was decided by the computer that "collided" with the other?
No, I did the hit I took the damage, tangle flew off untouched.
Your front end determines if you collide. If any part of your AC touches another You get "You have collided." in orange. The other guy gets a PM from your front end informing them why you went poof.
Why should tangle take damage? On his front end he was no where near me.
-
In real life, there were many occasions when planes would collide, but not both would be downed. I do think the collision modeling is essed up something though, when someone's coming down to pick me, THEY run into ME, and it says I collide.
LOOK AT THE GD PICTURES... it's self explanatory.
Edit: lusche could you link the trainers page? That gives the best explanation.
-
In real life, there were many occasions when planes would collide, but not both would be downed. I do think the collision modeling is essed up something though, when someone's coming down to pick me, THEY run into ME, and it says I collide.
Please note that "You have collided" just means that there was a collision on your Front End (=screen).
It doesn't mean it's your fault, that you did actively fly into someone else, it's not putting the blame on anyone.
AH Training Corps Website: How lag affects Aces High (http://trainers.hitechcreations.com/lag/lag.htm)
-
In real life, there were many occasions when planes would collide, but not both would be downed. I do think the collision modeling is essed up something though, when someone's coming down to pick me, THEY run into ME, and it says I collide.
Seen it many times,,,, its getting old. I even have experimented on merges where I dont fire or move the stick completely nose on and I get the tower.
-
No, I did the hit I took the damage, tangle flew off untouched.
Your front end determines if you collide. If any part of your AC touches another You get "You have collided." in orange. The other guy gets a PM from your front end informing them why you went poof.
Why should tangle take damage? On his front end he was no where near me.
Then how can My wing break off when it clearly says player A collided with me and he flys away unscathed?
-
Seen it many times,,,, its getting old. I even have experimented on merges where I dont fire or move the stick completely nose on and I get the tower.
Remember due to latency your opponents aircraft is not where you see him. On his front end he is so many milliseconds ahead of where you see him.
-
Pictures not enough for you? :rofl :rofl
evidently not! :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl
-
Then how can My wing break off when it clearly says player A collided with me and he flys away unscathed?
Do you have film? You either A. missed the orange text B. He fired on you before he hit. You have no way of knowing if he took damage or not... you don't have his film.
Look at lusche's link, very informative.
-
Then how can My wing break off when it clearly says player A collided with me and he flys away unscathed?
Two reasons.
A:) he shot your wing off. (Enemy cons tend to press trigger when getting close)
B:) There was not only "Player A has collided" message but a "You have collided" message as well. Which means a collision happened on both FE's. Damage
And just because you see him fly away it doesn't mean he's unscathed. I had collsisions here I just lost a flap, or even a gun, or got a pilot wound.
-
Do you have film? You either A. missed the orange text B. He fired on you before he hit. You have no way of knowing if he took damage or not... you don't have his film.
Look at lusche's link, very informative.
Oh yeah,, he was firing the whole ho approach, then collided then it said I was shot down after I got the Collision message.
EDIT<, Oh yeah, did not mean I had film.
I will work on saving my next encounter, but I am still :mad: about seeing this numerous times knowing I am doing everything I can to avoid a HO shot and still getting the tower, I am doing my best to ignore the urge to fire on the merge and continue to maneuver but it just seems there are several regular players you will "run into" that have managed to circumvent and manipulate this to their advantage.
-
Oh yeah,, he was firing the whole ho approach, then collided then it said I was shot down after I got the Collision message.
Post the film. I'll be happy to analyze it.
-
it just seems there are several regular players you will "run into" that have managed to circumvent and manipulate this to their advantage.
Impossible.
-
For what it's worth..
Here is a small Zip file with two short .ahf clips. Both show the very same collision, but from both players point of view: http://www.mediafire.com/?vgxoiygthky
Here is a short (3MB) .wmv movie, where I used fancy editing to show both "realities": http://www.mediafire.com/?doynhxrgljy
Both are illustrating the facts explained on the AHTC page (see the link I provided above)
-
Impossible.
Nothing in this game is impossible.... I have learned that. Everything is possible until prevented.
-
DG all you have to do is avoid contact on your screen.
-
Nothing in this game is impossible.... I have learned that. Everything is possible until prevented.
The guy has to know his ping time, your ping time. Then he must predict which way you flew within that delay of time.
Again.... Impossible.
-
DG all you have to do is avoid contact on your screen.
Crazy talk .... it has to be someone else's fault.
-
For what it's worth..
Here is a small Zip file with two short .ahf clips. Both show the very same collision, but from both players point of view: http://www.mediafire.com/?vgxoiygthky
Here is a short (3MB) .wmv movie, where I used fancy editing to show both "realities": http://www.mediafire.com/?doynhxrgljy
Both are illustrating the facts explained on the AHTC page (see the link I provided above)
I like the way this illustrates the difference in screens, completely understood. However this does not show how that would affect a collision with two aircraft approaching Nose on.
If my theory is true, taking your example and putting the planes nose on approach only ONE plane would continually get the "You have collided" since he will always arrive to the merge first. Correct?
-
The guy has to know his ping time, your ping time. Then he must predict which way you flew within that delay of time.
Again.... Impossible.
It doesnt take someone long to figure out that on merges, collisions, etc. that he does or does not get to recieve the tower.
If he is the one that arrives first or last on the merge. Hence, gaming the game.
Again, Possible.
-
And if HTC would ever, in a weird sense of humor, implement the "both should go down" for just one day, the players now demanding such thing would be the very first to flood the BBS: "WTF? He did fly 100 ft away from me and suddenly I go down by collision?? FIX IT"
It was actually like that for a few days until a patch fixed it. Flying within 50 feet of a plane would cause a collision.
ack-ack
-
It doesnt take someone long to figure out that on merges, collisions, etc. that he does or does not get to recieve the tower.
If he is the one that arrives first or last on the merge. Hence, gaming the game.
LOL
How does he know everyones ping time... how does he know who his enemy is to know his ping time, to determine if he is first or last.
Get over it what YOU see is what YOU get. :rofl
-
To clarify, a collision has nothing to do with whos "arriving" first at all.
The kill credit is another story, that means who is getting the kill, who is dying "first". But that doesn't change the fact that when there's a collision on both screens, both take damage accordingly.
To succesfully "ram" an enemy while taking no collsion at all (=gaming the collision model), a player would have to aim for an empty point in air where he knows that on his enemies front end he and his enemy will collide.
To do that, you need to have the second sight. You don't know how things look on your enemy's computer. You don't now how big the combined lag is.
BTW, if "both go down" would be implemented, ramming would really work consistently for the first time, and it suddenly would be almost impossible to dodge them. It would be the reverse situation that we do have now.
-
LOL
How does he know everyones ping time... how does he know who his enemy is to know his ping time, to determine if he is first or last.
Get over it what YOU see is what YOU get. :rofl
So, you expect everyone that tries to do the right thing and not HO, collide, ram, etc. to ignore that the possibility is there for someone to at least know that they can usually get away with it even if the chances are on their side to come out with a kill.
Your one liner comments shows your true concern. You can insert your D/A's remarks here ________________________
-
how is someone going to get away with collisions? I don't understand what you mean in the context of how collisions happen.
-
BTW, if "both go down" would be implemented, ramming would really work consistently for the first time, and it suddenly would be almost impossible to dodge them. It would be the reverse situation that we do have now.
I would like to experience that, I know for some they would take advantage of it, however after time I would expect it to die down. You think.
How did it go for the one day it was ON.?
-
So, you expect everyone that tries to do the right thing and not HO, collide, ram, etc. to ignore that the possibility is there for someone to at least know that they can usually get away with it even if the chances are on their side to come out with a kill.
Your one liner comments shows your true concern. You can insert your D/A's remarks here ________________________
LMAO how do they know where you are in a point in space to ram you and not kill themselves. Please explain I'm reealy wanting to know HOW they do this. :rofl
-
how is someone going to get away with collisions? I don't understand what you mean in the context of how collisions happen.
Not sure, but I think its not the collision itself, I think it may be the combination of the HO with the collision, and gaming the timing aspect.
I was shot down 3 times by the same player on a ho merge, each time there was a collison message from Player A, and 2 of the 3 I ended up in the tower that said I was shot down.
Each time the Collision message came first, then the you were shot down message last.
This player ended up landing these kills.
-
If I died everytime I got within 50 feet of an airplane.....would be a short day. All to often I clear the enemy off my nose by feet during various manuevers. Those feet are the important ones too...
Race
-
Not sure, but I think its not the collision itself, I think it may be the combination of the HO with the collision, and gaming the timing aspect.
I was shot down 3 times by the same player on a ho merge, each time there was a collison message from Player A, and 2 of the 3 I ended up in the tower that said I was shot down.
Each time the Collision message came first, then the you were shot down message last.
This player ended up landing these kills.
What's the problem in that last anecdote? You collided, took damage, were assigned a death by enemy = shot down.
The only flaw in the collision model is something I've had happen maybe 3-5 times since 99. Sometimes you can fly thru another plane and get nothing. Very rare.
-
I would like to experience that, I know for some they would take advantage of it, however after time I would expect it to die down. You think.
How did it go for the one day it was ON.?
Ok.. I try it this way.
Let's imagine Player A wants to ram player B
Current collision model:
Player A has to guess correctly whats happening on Player B's front end. He has to steer his plane to a empty point on his screen where he knows ot will cause a collision on his enemy's screen. It's basically impossible for him.
Player B however has an easy task to avoid the collision. He just has to avoid players A plane on his (player B's own) screen. What B sees is what he gets
Result: Rams are hard to induce but easy to dodge.
Hyppthetic "both go down"
Now it's reversed:
Player A simply has to steer his plane on his screen into Player B's plane. No guesswork. Easy to do.
Player B however can't really avoid it. Because even when he manages to doge player A's plane on his own screen, we will still go down (as the new rule is "both go down"
He basically would have to dodge player A's plane on player A's screen. Or, in other words: Player B would have to dodge an invisible plane.
Result: Ramming is easy to accomplish and very hard to avoid.
-
LMAO how do they know where you are in a point in space to ram you and not kill themselves. Please explain I'm reealy wanting to know HOW they do this. :rofl
A good experiment would to take the two exact planes that Lushe had video of. Instead of colliding from the rear as in the video. Collide them head on with no stick input or shots. One of those planes will arrive first and collide on time, the other will appear to still have space between them.
Now, if a player has experimented himself and determined that he has the ability to have this edge, of being in or out of this collision zone without getting the collision message and the other plane recieves the collision due to this lag, then he has an advantage due to what, his internet speed, connection, servers making up for his connection, who knows? Not me, but it is possible to determine if that advantage is there or not.
-
Current collision model:
Player A has to guess correctly whats happening on Player B's front end. He has to steer his plane to a empty point on his screen where he knows ot will cause a collision on his enemy's screen. It's basically impossible for him.
Player B however has an easy task to avoid the collision. He just has to avoid players A plane on his screen. What B sees is what he gets
Result: Rams are hard to induce but easy to dodge.
Hyppthetic "both go down"
Now it's reversed:
Player A simply has to steer his plane on his screen into Player B's plane. No guesswork. Easy to do.
Player B however can't really avoid it. Because even when he manages to doge player A's plane on his own screen, we will still go down (as the new rule is "both go down"
He basically would have to dodge player A's plane on player A's screen. Or, in other words: Player B would have to dodge an invisible plane.
Result: Ramming is easy to accomplish and very hard to avoid.
Your assuming that there is a STEER involved, each HO I described was a nose on level flight pass.
-
A good experiment would to take the two exact planes that Lushe had video of. Instead of colliding from the rear as in the video. Collide them head on with no stick input or shots. One of those planes will arrive first and collide on time, the other will appear to still have space between them.
Now, if a player has experimented himself and determined that he has the ability to have this edge, of being in or out of this collision zone without getting the collision message and the other plane recieves the collision due to this lag, then he has an advantage due to what, his internet speed, connection, servers making up for his connection, who knows? Not me, but it is possible to determine if that advantage is there or not.
But everyones lag time is different... so what now?
-
What's the problem in that last anecdote? You collided, took damage, were assigned a death by enemy = shot down.
The only flaw in the collision model is something I've had happen maybe 3-5 times since 99. Sometimes you can fly thru another plane and get nothing. Very rare.
I could have told you the serial numbers on his prop as he flew thru my cockpit....lmao
-
I could have told you the serial numbers on his prop as he flew thru my cockpit....lmao
Then you collided problem solved.
-
I was shot down 3 times by the same player on a ho merge(level flight nose on), each time there was a collison message from Player A(he collided with me message), and 2 of the 3 I ended up in the tower that said I was shot down.
He also did not recieve any damage that prevented him from landing his kills, this happened twice with the same plane.
Each time the Collision message (he collided with me message) came first, then the (he shot me down message) you were shot down message last.
I know some of you are old and cant read to well,, I enlarged this for you senior folks. And the mentally slow, Bronk :D.
-
Then you collided problem solved.
Very scientific... must be it. :rofl
-
DG that reads like he simply gunned you down on his way to the tower from his collision.
-
If he flew through YOUR cockpit then YOU collided. Or are you lying about that?
-
In other words: because someone is not willing or able to avoid the HO, he wants to change collision model so that the whole arena becomes a ramfest with even more bizarre unrealistic results (as already shown above)
<- shakes his head and walks muttering away from this thread...
-
<- shakes his head and walks muttering away from this thread...
Think the following fits perfectly here lusche.
Some days darts get under my skin. especialy when some people are "Stuck on stupid." or my version "Clueless dolts."
HiTech
:aok
-
I am simply asking to fix this problem, I have no reason to Lie about it, make it up, or what ever else someone would think suspicious.
I encountered this before once in a while, no complaints then, but I am seeing it more, and have seen it too often for it to be coincidence.
This time was particurlarly odd since I did not recieve the message that I collided, it said HE collided, yet I died from the collision or the bullets after the message was posted. And he did this twice with the same plane and nothing happened to him.
COLLIDE twice with the same plane = land two kills. Thats not realistic. Its just this simple. And if the guy knows that he has that advantage would be the only thing I cant prove, but if he does, He is gaming the game. Very Possible.
-
I am simply asking to fix this problem, I have no reason to Lie about it, make it up, or what ever else someone would think suspicious.
I encountered this before once in a while, no complaints then, but I am seeing it more, and have seen it too often for it to be coincidence.
This time was particurlarly odd since I did not recieve the message that I collided, it said HE collided, yet I died from the collision or the bullets after the message was posted. And he did this twice with the same plane and nothing happened to him.
COLLIDE twice with the same plane = land two kills. Thats not realistic. Its just this simple. And if he guy knows that he has that advantage would be the only thing I cant prove, but if he does, He is gaming the game.
Film the next and post so i can point and laugh.
-
Film the next and post so i can point and laugh.
Cant come up with a better answer than that..... I explained what happened and yes its confusing, this is why its posted.
There is no explanation other than what I think is happening, this collision lapse or gap has a potential of being exploited knowingly or not.
-
There is no explanation other than what I think is happening, this collision lapse has a potential of being exploited knowingly or not.
LOL exploited has a certain connotation of "knowing" dontcha think?
-
Please note that "You have collided" just means that there was a collision on your Front End (=screen).
It doesn't mean it's your fault, that you did actively fly into someone else, it's not putting the blame on anyone.
AH Training Corps Website: How lag affects Aces High (http://trainers.hitechcreations.com/lag/lag.htm)
Ahh but lucshe, some ignorant people think it is :lol
-
To clarify, a collision has nothing to do with whos "arriving" first at all.
The kill credit is another story, that means who is getting the kill, who is dying "first". But that doesn't change the fact that when there's a collision on both screens, both take damage accordingly. The message I had was that Player A collided with me, I did not get a message that said I collided with him, this happened twice with the same plane and no visible damage on the second merge, he then landed both kills shortley after
To succesfully "ram" an enemy while taking no collsion at all (=gaming the collision model), a player would have to aim for an empty point in air where he knows that on his enemies front end he and his enemy will collide.
To do that, you need to have the second sight. You don't know how things look on your enemy's computer. You don't now how big the combined lag is. What if it is a NOSE on NOSE approach as was the case, no need to anticipate the location of the enemy.
BTW, if "both go down" would be implemented, ramming would really work consistently for the first time, and it suddenly would be almost impossible to dodge them. It would be the reverse situation that we do have now. Which is the lesser of the evils, both go down, or gaming the lag, at least with both go down the result is the same.
-
How did it go for the one day it was ON.?
It was a bug and they fixed it with a patch pretty quickly. You couldn't fly within 50ft of another plane without colliding even though neither player collided on their front ends. Basically, it sucked.
ack-ack
-
I was shot down 3 times by the same player on a ho merge(level flight nose on), each time there was a collison message from Player A(he collided with me message), and 2 of the 3 I ended up in the tower that said I was shot down.
He also did not recieve any damage that prevented him from landing his kills, this happened twice with the same plane.
Each time the Collision message (he collided with me message) came first, then the (he shot me down message) you were shot down message last.
I know some of you are old and cant read to well,, I enlarged this for you senior folks. And the mentally slow, Bronk :D.
He may have collided with your wreckage, which could explain why he both got credit for your kill and collided.
ack-ack
-
He may have collided with your wreckage, which could explain why he both got credit for your kill and collided.
ack-ack
On one of the 3 merges, not sure which, but the sequence happened so fast, the merge, then the bang from the collision, the messages.... could it be that it could not decipher the events fast enough and could get it out of sequence? this would explain why I got the "shot down" message AFTER the "Player A collided" message.
-
I will just have to catch it on film, to get everyone to take a look. I do appreciate any ideas of what it could be, and certainly do not want to change to something that may be worse.
There are some smart minds playing this game and just as with any other game, they find the loopholes that can give them the slightest advantage, this is my only concern to keep it a level playing field by what means it was meant to be.
On a brighter note, I did take a snap shot of what is under Bronks (avatar) mask, :rofl
If you have a weak stomach dont view it........ :D
http://s271.photobucket.com/albums/jj131/bayoubeach/?action=view¤t=images.jpg
-
I R 2 slow 2 figure out how collision model works so I fling poooo.
-
Want to go to the dueling arena, and crash into eachother, record films, email them to eachother and see what happens?
-
Want to go to the training arena, and crash into eachother, record films, email them to eachother and see what happens?
Thanks for offering, I am going to ask a squaddie to be my sacrificial experiment and try it out.
-
:aok .. make sure you both film.
-
:aok .. make sure you both film.
CC, I will also try to change up the approaches, like on merge, one fires and collides at same time if possible, switch, then no fire merge but collide, etc. try two of everything I can think of and switch roles.
I will pay close attention to who gets the collision and kill messages and try to duplicate that.
-
I am simply asking to fix this problem
There is NO problem to fix. As it stands if you intentionally ram someone you will get the collision, and they most likely will not. If it was modeled so no mater what if only ONE person sees a collision on their FE and both planes go down then ramming becomes a viable tactic for the desperate.
-
There is a problem to fix. As it stands I intentionally did not read your entire post and most most likely will not. If I did read the entire post and understood what the problem was that was being explained my reply would not seem so desperate.
EDITED for your convenience..... :rofl
-
DG I'm betting there is a fault in your gaming set up.
I think it's located between your chair and the keyboard.
-
:huh My desk,,,,? :rofl
EDIT
Hurry Bronk,,, I got to get some sleep, give us another of your funny ones.... :lol :lol :lol
Here Bronk,,, I will make a funny for you..
I did take a snap shot of what is under Bronks (avatar) mask,
If you have a weak stomach dont view it........
http://s271.photobucket.com/albums/jj131/bayoubeach/?action=view¤t=images.jpg
:rofl
-
You're repeating yourself now. Maybe you should take up something less complicated... say stamp collecting?
-
It is almost sad how some folks simply don't get it. :rolleyes:
-
It is almost sad how some folks simply don't get it. :rolleyes:
Not to mention:
(http://img183.imageshack.us/img183/3930/beatdeadhorseve6.gif)
wrongway
-
EDITED for your convenience..... :rofl
Wow, you figured out how to change the quotes, you're officially a forum ninja. Unfortunately I did read your posts and you're right there are two problems. First, you are too dense to understand the collision model. Second, apparently you are a complete HO tard. How about this. Dodge the other guys hot merge, acquire his six, and fill him full of lead. Problem solved.
-
dads have you ever flown right alongside a squaddie literally 0 from his wing and asked him how far away you are?
You need to film both parties flying at each other. Do it several times and watch back BOTH sides, You are bound to come across one where your film collides and the other guy misses.
-
I spent the time to read ALL of the posts in this thread, and was formulating a nice explanation on the "hows and whys", but I just don't want to waste the time of all that typing so instead this is what I have....
Don't fly nose to nose with anyone !!! This is NOT avoiding the HO it is encouraging it !! If you don't give "them" the chance to HO or ram you they DON'T !!
Stop ramming people and you won't have to worry about the collision model!
-
dads have you ever flown right alongside a squaddie literally 0 from his wing and asked him how far away you are?
You need to film both parties flying at each other. Do it several times and watch back BOTH sides, You are bound to come across one where your film collides and the other guy misses.
I understand that there is a difference in planes locations and views, I have never said that I do not understand that.
To answer your question, yes I have, and yes there is a difference in the location and spacing between the two films which was also shown in the film posted in this string, this is very evident in two aircraft moving relatively in the same direction. The real question is what happens if you take the same two planes and make the same film except make the planes head nose on level flight, then what happens?
Since the sensitivity is in the "nose" of the aircraft, what happens when they are heading nose to nose? One of these planes will most likely consistently be the one that is determined to "collide" due to this lag, the other will not. Right?
If this is true and can be answered as a yes, then it would be safe to say that someone would be able to take advantage of this lag and just conduct head on nose to nose attacks knowing that they will not receive the Collide message or any damage due to collisions regardless if they can consistently accomplish this it still gives them an edge.
This is what this is all about, not about avoiding anything, not about talking around anything, not about a plane ramming another in the rear, but a nose to nose approach knowing that one will in fact be lagging more or less than the other and the result of that merge.
If someone has figured out that they lag ahead or behind enough to not get the collision then they could in fact use it for an advantage, will this advantage be significant, who knows. If his lag or lack of is greater than most he could consistently repeat this and win on these merges than he receives damage from them.
This would be in fact gaming the game.
Thanks so little for your understanding, but I think I already know the answer I am looking for.
This is way over some of your heads. At least a few understand what the issue is.
-
Since the sensitivity is in the "nose" of the aircraft, what happens when they are heading nose to nose? One of these planes will most likely consistently be the one that is determined to "collide" due to this lag, the other will not. Right?
No.
In the current collision model the only thing that matters is your FE. If you run into him on your screen you will get a collision message.
Your real problem is flying HO into people. I and others would be happy to show you some easy avoidance moves.
-
No.
In the current collision model the only thing that matters is your FE. If you run into him on your screen you will get a collision message.
Your real problem is flying HO into people. I and others would be happy to show you some easy avoidance moves.
This is way over your head too..... blew right past ya. :rolleyes:
Can someone that can read and actually comprehend a paragraph answer or respond instead of the sniveling BBS bubbas. :lol
-
You don't seem to understand something.
The computer does not 'determine who collided'. The server doesn't look at the incident and decide who was at fault and then give damage accordingly.
If, on your computer ('FE') you touch another plane, you collide and take damage, period. If you don't you don't. If someone touches you with their plane on your screen but they don't touch on theirs, you will get damage and they won't, because they never touched your plane on their screen, and punishing someone who successfully avoided a collision would be unfair.
One of these planes will most likely consistently be the one that is determined to "collide" due to this lag, the other will not. Right?
No.
-
This is way over your head too..... blew right past ya. :rolleyes:
Can someone that can read and actually comprehend a paragraph answer or respond instead of the sniveling BBS bubbas. :lol
The issue has been explained fully. I think you just need something to blame your failures on.
But thanks for the "sniveling BBS bubbas" moniker. Your cooking with the weak-sauce.
-
Since the sensitivity is in the "nose" of the aircraft, what happens when they are heading nose to nose? One of these planes will most likely consistently be the one that is determined to "collide" due to this lag, the other will not. Right?
Wrong ... you don't seem to understand, that there are 2 (two) decisions being made ... My computer (FE) running AHII and your computer (FE) running AHII.
If I fly directly at you and jink at the last moment ... avoiding a collision with your airplane ... my FE says ... NO COLLISION !!! ... and I fly away unscathed.
If you fly directly at me and don't jink at the last moment ... NOT avoiding a collision with my airplane ... your FE says ... COLLISION !!! ... you are assessed the appropriate damage ... your damage is relayed to the server ... server sends updates to my FE and I see you falling to the ground in many pieces ... I then get the proxy "kill" message.
Collision "sensitivty", if I interpreted your meaning correctly, is not just in "the nose" ... the whole plane is taken into consideration when determining a collision.
This is way over some of your heads. At least a few understand what the issue is.
This statement is so ironic it's not even funny.
If your tired of getting rammed all the time, then you really need to take a look at your flying techniques and flying abilities.
I have been playing for since '02 and I can count on both hands and a couple of toes, the amount of collisions that I have been involved in ... and every single one of them was MY FAULT.
-
If I fly directly at you and jink at the last moment ... avoiding a collision with your airplane ... my FE says ... NO COLLISION !!! ... and I fly away unscathed.
If you fly directly at me and don't jink at the last moment ... NOT avoiding a collision with my airplane ... your FE says ... COLLISION !!! ... you are assessed the appropriate damage ... your damage is relayed to the server ... server sends updates to my FE and I see you falling to the ground in many pieces ... I then get the proxy "kill" message.
This statement is so ironic it's not even funny. You actually have stated the obvious, you can game the merge and its what I wanted to confirm all along.
If your tired of getting rammed all the time, then you really need to take a look at your flying techniques and flying abilities. again, this isnt me ramming all the time, as stated waaayyy below, I was rammed by someone who I think was gaming the merge by doing what you described. Intentionaly and matter of factley this player came directly at me every turn, Twice with the same plane, the system DID NOT say I collided, it said HE collided both times, yet I died. Isnt that odd?
This is exactley what I suspected, that the player would "Jink" at the last moment or "Jink" before or after me to not be penalized the collision.
And yes, the system said HE collided TWICE and landed the plane, with two kills.
-
Dadsguns, you are fighting an uphill battle because you refuse to accept the way the collision model actually works.
Slapshot explained it well.
There is no "penalty" involved. You either intersected another object, as determined by your computer, or you didn't. If the other guy manages to jink and avoid collision, then he did a good job of flying. If you did not jink and avoid the collision, then your plane is going to intersect with his. Your plane takes the damage.
That is not the other pilots problem, nor his fault. The onus in any collision rests directly in your hands. No one else. The other guy cannot intersect your plane. Only your plane can intersect with others. I realize the previous two statements are subtle, but if you understand the model, then they will make perfect sense. Until you get a firm grasp of that, you will not effectively be able to make any suggestions to improve the collision model.
Many people have tried to explain it to you, and all you have done is put most of them down, when they are, in fact, correct.
-
Guppy need to check the other guys FE when he lands,seems to be plenty of collisions happening. :D
-
Guppy need to check the other guys FE when he lands,seems to be plenty of collisions happening. :D
Thats because the ground cheats. :P :noid
-
This was not meant to be a war of words, which some of this has become. Different jargon, terminologies etc. I do not know. My apologies in this confusion.
But the underlying fact is I do understand the concept of what and how this works.
When I said "penalty" , that referred to the not "Jinking" in time or not at all which would give the collision message while intersecting.
Until 80+ posts later of responses that failed to answer the concept of my question of merges it boils down to whoever can "Jink" will avoid the collision yet still have not addressed the difference in the FE and how that plays a role in a nose to nose collision with NO "Jink".
I have asked several questions that either have been avoided, or simply received a smart answer. I never started out any of my questions or statements in a negative tone. Yet that's all I got in return.
Thanks.
-
DG I dont mean to repeat myself, but the answer is right there for you. If you got a 'shot down' message, it means you received damage from an enemy. That means from either a collision or enemy fire. IOW he landed bullets on you. Not hard to do from literaly point blank.
If you got a X collided with you message, but no white You have collided message, you can disregard it.. You're not affected.
The collision issue doesnt seem to be one unless you got the rare bug I described. All you have to do is dodge his plane on your screen, regardless of what happens on his. What you see is what you get.
-
What you see is what you get.
*Snicker
-
Your questions imply you do or did not understand how it works. They cannot be answered as they assume things that are not there or have no bearing on the collision modeling.
They are basically, based on incorrect information.
Moot said it well also.
-
Wow there is alot of arguing, but I am on DGs side. I have been playing for about 2 years, and I have been to all 3 countrys, and I have noticed, when i was bish, I would lose the collisions, ALOT. Finaly when i switched to rook, it seemed that it stoped happening... Let me guess DG, you are a bish right? and this fellow you "ran into" (pun intended) a nit? or a rook? (i think the nits have supereor collision models) This would explain every thing.
Now as much as this makes sence :lol I highly doubt that skuzzy is out to get the bish. I think it has something to do with the number of players on each country.
Bish: always have the most
Rooks: usualy behind by 20
nits: behind by as far as 50
BUT im still on DGs side.
-
Wow there is alot of arguing, but I am on DGs side. I have been playing for about 2 years, and I have been to all 3 countrys, and I have noticed, when i was bish, I would lose the collisions, ALOT. Finaly when i switched to rook, it seemed that it stoped happening... Let me guess DG, you are a bish right? and this fellow you "ran into" (pun intended) a nit? or a rook? (i think the nits have supereor collision models) This would explain every thing.
I suggest you read skuzzy's 1st post.... again.
-
DG I don't mean to repeat myself, but the answer is right there for you. If you got a 'shot down' message, it means you received damage from an enemy. That means from either a collision or enemy fire. IOW he landed bullets on you. Not hard to do from literally point blank.
If you got a X collided with you message, but no white You have collided message, you can disregard it.. You're not affected.
The collision issue doesn't seem to be one unless you got the rare bug I described. All you have to do is dodge his plane on your screen, regardless of what happens on his. What you see is what you get.
I hate to repeat myself any further, yet the answer is not here.
I did get the x collided with me message and he did get the kills for Ramming ME. I saw that he landed them flying back at least a half a sector.
This is what I have questions about, since I understand how the concept works. I wont even count him getting the kills, or shooting me while ramming.
If you see a message that says you collided, you receive damage to some extent, correct?
If I seen the message that says x collided with me, how could he not receive any damage?
How could he, or is he supposed to be able to do it TWICE with the same plane since I re upped immediately to kill the rammer?
I cant say this enough, I tried to avoid the nose on, I think I can hold my own for the most part, I don't go looking for nose on kills, sometimes it happens, and I can differentiate from an accident or intentional nose on's, and this dude did it each time I saw him, just nose on approaches. I avoided some earlier attempts, but the later ones is what I questioned since it was all he did and resulted in what I described which I found to be odd.
-
I hate to repeat myself any further, yet the answer is not here.
I did get the x collided with me message and he did get the kills for Ramming ME. I saw that he landed them flying back at least a half a sector.
This is what I have questions about, since I understand how the concept works. I wont even count him getting the kills, or shooting me while ramming.
If you see a message that says you collided, you receive damage to some extent, correct?
If I seen the message that says x collided with me, how could he not receive any damage?
How could he, or is he supposed to be able to do it TWICE with the same plane since I re upped immediately to kill the rammer?
I have had as little damage as loosing one gun, when I have collided. So while rare it might be possible your opponent lost a gun and 1/2 his elevator. Impossible to know without his film.
-
Impossible to know without his film.
I realize that, and even harder to explain without it appearing that I am being deceptive or truthful about what happened. But it happened as I have explained and that is all I can say.
-
I did get the x collided with me message and he did get the kills for Ramming ME. I saw that he landed them flying back at least a half a sector.
He may have gotten only minor damage on his plane. All you know was that there was contact, not how much. What looked like a fatal collision on your screen might've been a minor clip on his.
Next, are you sure you didnt catch any of his bullets?
Next, you couldn't not have taken any bullets if you specificaly remember not getting a white 'You have collided' message. (Unless Im remembering it wrong and its the X has collided with you message that's in white text).
If you see a message that says you collided, you receive damage to some extent, correct?
'To some extent' including only partial damage (sounds weird but it happens sometimes, pretty rare tho). That means you took damage but not enough to break something so it shows up red in the damage list.
If I seen the message that says x collided with me, how could he not receive any damage?
Same thing as above, only applied to him.
How could he, or is he supposed to be able to do it TWICE with the same plane since I re upped immediately to kill the rammer?
That has never come up in any conversation about collisions.. Why do you think a collision would happen twice? The white/orange collision messages are separate from ballistics and handled differently - whereas with collisions what you see is what you get, what the shooter sees is what both the shooter and shootee get.
I cant say this enough, I tried to avoid the nose on, I think I can hold my own for the most part, I don't go looking for nose on kills, sometimes it happens, and I can differentiate from an accident or intentional nose on's, and this dude did it each time I saw him, just nose on approaches.
So he's a HOer.. Thats a separate subject from collisions.
I avoided some earlier attempts, but the later ones is what I questioned since it was all he did and resulted in what I described which I found to be odd.
It still remains to be clear exactly what the problem is with what you're describing. From everything you've said, nothing's wrong.. Only your apparent misunderstanding of how collisions work and what actualy happened in that encounter.
Gotta bug out
<S>
-
Next, are you sure you didnt catch any of his bullets?
Next, you couldn't not have taken any bullets if you specificaly remember not getting a white 'You have collided' message. (Unless Im remembering it wrong and its the X has collided with you message that's in white text).
Probably did on at least one of thos passes since he was (from my screen) straight nose on.
I did not get any message that said "You have collided", only "player A has collided". (I dont recall the color, but I did read them)
I was killed after the collision messages were posted, not before.
After the first collision I immediatly reupped and since he was close enough to the field and low, he rammed me again. I assume he immediatly flew home with what ever damage if any back to his field, I said at least a half sector, most 1 sector.
-
One of the issues I am having with your description, is you keep saying he "rammed" you.
That concept does not exist in the collision model. The proper way to say it, is as follows (and no, this is not about semantics), "My computer detected an intersection with another object." Or you can say, "My computer detected an intersection with another plane."
There is no such thing as "ramming" anyone. You can take your best shot at trying to "ram" someone, but it does not mean anything unless the remote computer decides your plane has intersected with his plane.
In the case where a head on happens, and one plane appears to fly through another it is almost always due to one of the planes being marked as destroyed, but the client has not had time to blow it up yet and dump you back to the tower. In other words, one of the computers decided it had intersected with an object and it was dead. More than likely, it was your computer that did that. The other computer had not detected the collision yet and by the time it arrived, your plane had already been marked as destroyed. Could have been gunfire as well.
Without a film it is all speculation.
-
I am using ramming to describe his action as it seemed that was his intent, sorry. :lol
If "My computer detected an intersection with another plane", what would the message I should have recieved been? That "I have collided with"?
-
IIRC...
SYSTEM:You have collided
Means that a collision was detected on your FE.
SYSTEM:Adonai has collided with you
Means that your Adonai's (just for the sake of example) FE has detected a collision.
-
I am using ramming to describe his action as it seemed that was his intent, sorry. :lol
If "My computer detected an intersection with another plane", what would the message I should have recieved been?
"You have collided". It would be in orange. One thing that has caused confusion in the past is that orange messages do not show on film (unless that has been fixed and I am unaware). So, while reviewing film, sometimes people see only the white "XXXX has collided with you", do not see the orange, and assume they took damage from a white message. This is NOT the case, it is only that the orange system text does not appear on the film viewer.
You can not know it was his intent to ram you. Quite the contrary, there is every reason to suspect that he attempted to jink at the last moment, and timed it a fraction of a second late. Due to the latency/lag, even after he jinks on his computer, for a fraction of a second he still appears to fly straight on your PC. That is why you see him "fly straight through" your plane (vaporizing your plane in the process, since that is what YOUR PC saw) when in his reality, he probably pulled up sharply and his PC detected your prop scraping a rear stabilizer or elevator or (as has happened to me on several occasions) his tail wheel. Although that part of his aircraft would be damaged, it would not be apparent to you during your second sortie. The second collision for him was likely just as minor, hence he was able to fly back and land.
-
You actually have stated the obvious, you can game the merge and its what I wanted to confirm all along.
again, this isnt me ramming all the time, as stated waaayyy below, I was rammed by someone who I think was gaming the merge by doing what you described. Intentionaly and matter of factley this player came directly at me every turn, Twice with the same plane, the system DID NOT say I collided, it said HE collided both times, yet I died. Isnt that odd?
This is exactley what I suspected, that the player would "Jink" at the last moment or "Jink" before or after me to not be penalized the collision.
And yes, the system said HE collided TWICE and landed the plane, with two kills.
You cannot "game" the merge ... you either hit/intersect with the other plane or you don't.
It appears that you found someone who comes "head on" ... guns blazing (without tracers maybe) ... and at the last moment (on his FE) he maneuvers to try and avoid a collision.
From what you have described it appears that he may have had "minor" collisions that didn't make his plane completely un-flyable ... and your demise was a result to getting a face full of lead and had nothing to do with the "collisions".
I don't think it's odd ... I think he was lucky ... twice.
-
Wow there is alot of arguing, but I am on DGs side. I have been playing for about 2 years, and I have been to all 3 countrys, and I have noticed, when i was bish, I would lose the collisions, ALOT. Finaly when i switched to rook, it seemed that it stoped happening... Let me guess DG, you are a bish right? and this fellow you "ran into" (pun intended) a nit? or a rook? (i think the nits have supereor collision models) This would explain every thing.
:rofl
:rolleyes:
:noid
-
Please note that "You have collided" just means that there was a collision on your Front End (=screen).
It doesn't mean it's your fault, that you did actively fly into someone else, it's not putting the blame on anyone.
AH Training Corps Website: How lag affects Aces High (http://trainers.hitechcreations.com/lag/lag.htm)
from my understanding if the letters show up in white you have been collided into by another player, if it's in orange you were the one that collided. By the way I have gone down from a collision that I caused while the other player did not. I was diving on a player and was compressing and ran into the back of his plane.
-
from my understanding if the letters show up in white you have been collided into by another player's image on your screen, if it's in orange you were the one that collided. By the way I have gone down from a collision that I caused while the other player did not. I was diving on a player and was compressing and ran into the back of his plane.
You need to understand that there are two realities at work at any point in time, as far as collisions are concerned. One on your screen, and another on the other guy's screen.
The only alternate reality which players are made to pay for regardless of how different it is from the one on their screen is that of gunfire hits. In that case, there's still two realities (one on your screen, another on the other guy's screen), but it's the reality of the shooter that has the last word (assuming nothing prevents his computer from telling the server about those hits).
-
You need to understand that there are two realities at work at any point in time, as far as collisions are concerned. One on your screen, and another on the other guy's screen.
The only alternate reality which players are made to pay for regardless of how different it is from the one on their screen is that of gunfire hits. In that case, there's still two realities (one on your screen, another on the other guy's screen), but it's the reality of the shooter that has the last word (assuming nothing prevents his computer from telling the server about those hits).
I was on a guys six.... no bullets fired from him. Bullets fired and landed by me, I ran into his plane I went down he didn't . So do I take my computer to the tool shed for not tell AH's server that I am the guy shooting not him?
-
I was on a guys six.... no bullets fired from him. Bullets fired and landed by me, I ran into his plane I went down he didn't . So do I take my computer to the tool shed for not tell AH's server that I am the guy shooting not him?
In this case, your bullets had hit, but you did not enough damage to him to shoot him down.
Then you collided with him and you took catastrophic damage from it.
He didn't, because on HIS screen there never was a collision.
If you didn't have yet, please download that very small zip file I posted earlier in this thread. It shows such a collision, with films from both players. You can clearly see that the collision happened only on one player's screen. http://www.mediafire.com/?vgxoiygthky
-
I was on a guys six.... no bullets fired from him. Bullets fired and landed by me, I ran into his plane I went down he didn't . So do I take my computer to the tool shed for not tell AH's server that I am the guy shooting not him?
What's the problem? You ran into the image of his plane on your screen, accordingly took damage, while he didnt collide with the image of your plane on his screen, and correspondingly flew off unharmed. It sounds like shooting wasnt the deciding factor.
See what Lusche said above.
-
What's the problem? You ran into the image of his plane on your screen, accordingly took damage, while he didnt collide with the image of your plane on his screen, and correspondingly flew off unharmed. It sounds like shooting wasnt the deciding factor.
See what Lusche said above.
well in the real world both planes would go down, I think that's what most people want rather than one guy who comes outta it scot free. HT has tried to do the best to make everything realistic however the collisions are not.
-
well in the real world both planes would go down, I think that's what most people want rather than one guy who comes outta it scot free. HT has tried to do the best to make everything realistic however the collisions are not.
The so called "real world" hasn't to deal with latency, and thus has not the "multiple realities" problem.
Actually I can only admire the way collisions are handled in AH. It's the best compromise possible. It's actually much more realistic than any other proposed solution - It's the only "what you see is what you get"
"Both go down" is no viable solution unless you get faster-than-light internet.
-
well in the real world both planes would go down, I think that's what most people want rather than one guy who comes outta it scot free. HT has tried to do the best to make everything realistic however the collisions are not.
Right, so you want to go down from a plane that is 100 feet away from you.
Brilliant . :rolleyes:
-
Right, so you want to go down from a plane that is 100 feet away from you.
Brilliant . :rolleyes:
go back to your hyerhole. I dont really give a @$%^ what they do anymore or why I even waste my time in these pointless discussions. JUST KEEP IT THE SAME!!!!!!!!!!!!
-
:cry :cry :cry :cry :cry
:aok
-
well in the real world both planes would go down, I think that's what most people want rather than one guy who comes outta it scot free.
That's what we have already. What you see is what you get.
-
go back to your hyerhole. I dont really give a @$%^ what they do anymore or why I even waste my time in these pointless discussions. JUST KEEP IT THE SAME!!!!!!!!!!!!
:lol
-
:lol
Post potato +1
-
there's still two realities (one on your screen, another on the other guy's screen),
This is where the discrepancy in reality or lack there of resides.
Unfortunately, As this has been noted that "What you see is what you get", would also mean "If you don't see it you don't get it".
-
This is where the discrepancy in reality or lack there of resides.
Unfortunately, As this has been noted that "What you see is what you get", would also mean "If you don't see it you don't get it".
Sorry, but there is no way in hell you are going to be happy, if you successfully avoid a collision, by 50 feet and then blow up because the other guy decides not to avoid the collision and takes you out.
What you want is to give the other player control over what happens to your plane. Right now, you have control over whether or not your plane collides.
As much as you are complaining about the current collision system, I can only imagine the tirades if we gave control of your plane being blown up to the other player. That is essentially what you are asking for.
Unless you are asking for every computer in the world, connected to the game, to have the exact representation of the game at the exact instant in time. That would be cool! Now,...tell us how to violate the speed of light and we will be all over it, while you are receiving your Noble in physics.
I am not trying to be a smart-aleck or disrespectful, but I cannot figure out what the heck it is you want. First, you complain about players "ramming" you and them not dieing, then you want to give those same players the ability to destroy your plane by "ramming" you so you will die even when you avoid the collision. Quite the conundrum.
-
I am not trying to be a smart-aleck or disrespectful, but I cannot figure out what the heck it is you want.
Skuzzy, there is a particular crowd... that when out of ammo they think they can ram.
I'm not saying DG is one. There are those who would love to see Kamikaze like effects implemented.
-
Im no computer wizz nor am i a code man i always wandered is there some way to code it to where if there is any type of collision from a head on crash to touching the wings that the game can cause both planes to go down that would stop alot of the purposefull collisions and make each pilot refrain from flying directly into the presumed path of the other plane. I understand that what one player sees on his screen is not necessarily what the oposeing player is seeing, So this may not work but its just what i was thinking.
-
Im no computer wizz nor am i a code man i always wandered is there some way to code it to where if there is any type of collision from a head on crash to touching the wings that the game can cause both planes to go down that would stop alot of the purposefull collisions and make each pilot refrain from flying directly into the presumed path of the other plane. I understand that what one player sees on his screen is not necessarily what the oposeing player is seeing, So this may not work but its just what i was thinking.
You have the ability to avoid the collision now.... don't fly into the other guy.
Look at the pics/films posted. It is almost impossible for the other guy to purposefully fly into another. Where you see him is not where he is on his screen. Only 2 situations i can think of purposely colliding.
1. You accept a HO and do not jink. You are partly responsible for this.... after all you accepted it.
2. Dead aft with excessive speed. He collides and momentum carries the wreckage into you. Should have watched your 6 closer.
-
Skuzzy, here's your million dollar idea, (you've probably thought of this before and it can't be done) what if you control the packet at the server level, that is regardless how fast or slow the connection is to the server the server software as it were controlled what happens in the game, you see what the server see's. Or is that what the famous or infamous "smoothing" software was alledged to do. If this could be accomplished wouldn't it eliminate this problem?
-
Skuzzy, here's your million dollar idea, (you've probably thought of this before and it can't be done) what if you control the packet at the server level, that is regardless how fast or slow the connection is to the server the server software as it were controlled what happens in the game, you see what the server see's. Or is that what the famous or infamous "smoothing" software was alledged to do. If this could be accomplished wouldn't it eliminate this problem?
I could be wrong (and if past history is any indication, I probably am), but the effect of what you are asking for is 700+ people all trying to dial into one server, and that server is the only computer responsible for running the game. Imagine how incredibly S S S L L L O O O O O W W W that would make everything (unless HTC owns a CRAY). In a game where the object is to fly an aircraft at 300 mph, I would say this would be an impossible situation.
Back years ago when I played BF1942, I avoided any server running a game with 64 open slots because the lag was simply too much. Can't imagine 700.
-
Skuzzy, here's your million dollar idea, (you've probably thought of this before and it can't be done) what if you control the packet at the server level, that is regardless how fast or slow the connection is to the server the server software as it were controlled what happens in the game, you see what the server see's. Or is that what the famous or infamous "smoothing" software was alledged to do. If this could be accomplished wouldn't it eliminate this problem?
I can't find it now, but a few months back there was a huge thread about the collision model (as there always is every couple of months). I think it was HiTech or Pyro who said something like that would require you to be thinking in seconds per frame as opposed to frames per second. And then there was a little witty quip at the end like 'Yes, but then we wouldn't have all of these collision threads' or something.
-
leave em as they are. You collided... oh well :)
-
Here is the fix....
Remove the white text.
-
LOL thats why I'm no game provider, sorry it was just a wild haired idea.
I will say one thing, I've never flown away from a collision. Not even when rammed from behind and I get the message So and So has collided with you. just saying
-
(http://www.bjacked.net/LuvToHunt/forums/phpBB2/modules/gallery/albums/album01/Beat_Dead_Horse.jpg)
-
Here is the fix....
Remove the white text.
I personally don't think that will solve anything, because then everyone will assume all collisions affect both planes anyway. So you will still get the "why did I go down in flames and he fly away scott free?" whines.
At least with the current system, most people with half a brain can get it if they choose to.
-
I personally don't think that will solve anything, because then everyone will assume all collisions affect both planes anyway. So you will still get the "why did I go down in flames and he fly away scott free?" whines.
At least with the current system, most people with half a brain can get it if they choose to.
what kind of statement was that? "with 1/2 a brain" I am assuming you consider yourself on the side with the whole brain. Seems to me the guys defending the current collision set up are the ones that survive the collision more than they die. If 2 cars crash into one another they both are damaged. Come on... it doesn't take a 1/4 brain to realize that the current situation is realistic.
Years ago we had a small plane collided with a jet liner, both went down. Now in the AH world since the Piper crashed into the jet liner the Piper would survive.
-
what kind of statement was that? "with 1/2 a brain" I am assuming you consider yourself on the side with the whole brain. Seems to me the guys defending the current collision set up are the ones that survive the collision more than they die. If 2 cars crash into one another they both are damaged. Come on... it doesn't take a 1/4 brain to realize that the current situation is realistic.
Years ago we had a small plane collided with a jet liner, both went down. Now in the AH world since the Piper crashed into the jet liner the Piper would survive.
People with "half a brain" realize that the current collision model is the only fair and workable solution given the nature of the internet.
And this is coming from one who almost always goes down from a collision. If I collided it's my fault since it was a collison on my computer screen, regardless of what the other guy saw. I often send appologies if I run into someone.
-
why can't both planes go down instead of just one? Would it be that hard to program it into the game?
-
why can't both planes go down instead of just one? Would it be that hard to program it into the game?
Last try:
This is a typical collision. P51 is intentionally "ramming" a P47. Le'ts say I am the Pony pilot and you are flying the Jug.
Now this is exact the moment of collision.
This is what I see:
(http://img222.imageshack.us/img222/1364/rammyfegg1.jpg)
I run into you and take damage
This is what YOU see:
(http://img222.imageshack.us/img222/8728/ramotherfexg7.jpg)
You see me flying past you maybe 50ft away. Nothing happens to you.
Now tell me that you would find it "realistic" when you would take damage from this collision. Look closeley at the second pic: I never touched you on your screen. When you now say "Both should go down" - You would actually take damage without ever a collision happening on your screen.
You really wouldn't mind to die from this?
"Both go down" does mean nothing less as people dying from collision they NEVER did see. And it means dodging rams is nearly impossible.
You can't simply transfer "real life" results to Aces High because the internet doesn't work like real life. Real life has no latency. Until now each of your arguments is simply ignoring that very basic and unchangeable fact.
-
Last try:
This is a typical collision. P51 is intentionally "ramming" a P47. Le'ts say I am the Pony pilot and you are flying the Jug.
Now this is exact the moment of collision.
This is what I see:
(http://img222.imageshack.us/img222/1364/rammyfegg1.jpg)
I run into you and take damage
This is what YOU see:
(http://img222.imageshack.us/img222/8728/ramotherfexg7.jpg)
You see me flying past you maybe 50ft away. Nothing happens to you.
Now tell me that you would find it "realistic" when you would take damage from this collision. Look closeley at the second pic: I never touched you on your screen. When you now say "Both should go down" - You would actually take damage without ever a collision happening on your screen.
You really wouldn't mind to die from this?
"Both go down" does mean nothing less as people dying from collision they NEVER did see. And it means dodging rams is nearly impossible.
You can't simply transfer "real life" results to Aces High because the internet doesn't work like real life. Real life has no latency. Until now each of your arguments is simply ignoring that very basic and unchangeable fact.
Ok I see what your saying, the game has a hard time seeing the colision in 3D, thanks for the insight <S>
-
why can't both planes go down instead of just one? Would it be that hard to program it into the game?
BP....it's simple really.....because HT doesn't want it that way. He has stated more than once that to do so would make ramming a "tactic" and he won't do that.
This is why the onus is on the player to make sure that he doesn't collide. The reality of the situation is that it isn't difficult to avoid collisions and that is the point of the collision model.
-
Ok I see what your saying, the game has a hard time seeing the colision in 3D,
No, it doesn't and that's not what I'm saying. Because it reads again as if the program has any problem or fault.
The problem is latency. The fact that both you and me see things different (as the two pics clearly show) os just a result of the internet. Latency. Signals need time to travel from your computer to mine. When my computer gets the message from yours "I'm at position XYZ", time has already passed and we both have moved on in the mean time. Hence the difference between our two Front Ends as shown above
-
I propose insta-bans for people who keep bringing this up.
Or in-game text muting for an hour for pissing and moaning about collisions.
:lol
Make a sticky with Lusche's pictures and be done with it....please....for the love of cod.... please.
:aok
-
If HTC fixed the collisions to where both were at fault, then that would cause alot more problems.
-
Ok I see what your saying, the game has a hard time seeing the colision in 3D, thanks for the insight <S>
As stated previously (Ad Nauseum), the "game" doesn't "see" anything. It is what your computer "sees" and what your opponent's computer sees.
Lusche's screenshots are from 2 films of the same flight. On the P-51's computer, there is a collision. On the P-47's computer, the P-51 is 120 feet behind him. Therefore, the P-51 takes damage and the P-47 does not because, on the P-47's computer, nothing collided with him. It is latency and delay due to the time it takes for your information and his information to travel back and forth.
Lose UDP and not get booted and -everybody- disappeared from your front end but you are still tooling along just fine on theirs. Ask me how I know.
Even in the case where there isa collision "seen" by both computers, it doesn't necessarily mean catastrophic damage to both planes. You may hit him with your propeller (oil damage). He may hit you with his wing and lose said wing.
I suppose it is unrealistic, in real life, if two cars get in a collision (as seen on both front ends ;)) and one is totalled and the other is able to drive home. It is unrealistic that a bird collides with a plane (again, on both front ends) and the plane continues to fly (most of the time) and the bird does not.
The collision model as it is is simple and fair. I believe a lot of "deaths by collisions" are actually death by getting shot in the face, or getting a wing blown off, but not going "poof" until after you have collided with the other plane. Or, you just hit the ground before they did.
wrongway
-
A P-51D is slightly over 32ft long. The P-51D passed about 120ft behind the P-47 on the P-47's system, not 50ft.
-
I accidentally collided with a zeke in a B-26 in the ava, it was mutual though because both our names popped up in white lettering. Anyway, the zeke flew off and I lost vital flying parts :eek:
-
exactly my point, It seems as though there are a few that have mastered how to do it without any repercussions on the offender part, when I get the message that player A has collided yet I am the one in the tower is ludicrous.
EDIT:
Bronk, using your example, they both should have been towered. But I would bet that only one did.
Which view was decided by the computer that "collided" with the other?
THAT is the point. if YOUR computer sees it, you take damage. pretty simple.
now, here's the thing with collisions.
there was a set of ju88's attacking our cv. they were on the deck.....less then 100ft alt. i was flying so low, i was kicking up wakes. first pass, i took the left drone. second pass, i went for the lead. i pulled off target at less then 100 yards. on my screen we missed, albiet barley. i got a white message saying "XXX has collided with you". i took no damage from this. to me we missed. so why should i take damage just because he saw it?
-
Remember due to latency your opponents aircraft is not where you see him. On his front end he is so many milliseconds ahead of where you see him.
lol. how many threads have you had to explain this in now?
:aok :rofl :D
i hafta admire your patience. :aok
-
No offense bro, but....... It's a bad example. Nose to tail? What does your nose to nose look like?
Pictures not enough for you? :rofl :rofl
<SALUTE>
-
No offense bro, but....... It's a bad example. Nose to tail? What does your nose to nose look like?
Exactly the same, except the planes are facing the opposite directions and thus closing speeds are higher.
-
I'm in a meeting and just burst out laughing reading this..... :rock
Exactly the same, except the planes are facing the opposite directions and thus closing speeds are higher.
-
Please make Collisions more realistic, BOTH aircraft no matter who is at fault either by a Hoing, colliding, kamikaze, should share the respective damage and die in disgust equally...... There are just too many Gamey collisions where only one will be damaged the other will be unscathed.
The Art Of KAMIKAZE!!!!!!!!!! :aok
-
there was a set of ju88's attacking our cv. they were on the deck.....less then 100ft alt. i was flying so low, i was kicking up wakes. first pass, i took the left drone. second pass, i went for the lead. i pulled off target at less then 100 yards. on my screen we missed, albiet barley. i got a white message saying "XXX has collided with you". i took no damage from this. to me we missed. so why should i take damage just because he saw it?
This is the exact potential noted of someone being able to take advantage of our current collision model since Latency is not a constant and exact difference to each player, Latency differences can be variable from one extreme to another.
As stated previously (Ad Nauseum), the "game" doesn't "see" anything. It is what your computer "sees" and what your opponent's computer sees. Latency.
The problem is latency. The fact that both you and me see things different (as the two pics clearly show) os just a result of the internet. Latency. Signals need time to travel from your computer to mine. When my computer gets the message from yours "I'm at position XYZ", time has already passed and we both have moved on in the mean time. Hence the difference between our two Front Ends as shown above
As explained it isnt perfect, but it can, and is being gamed to anothers advantage as also stated.
-
No it can't.
-
As stated previously (Ad Nauseum), the "game" doesn't "see" anything. It is what your computer "sees" and what your opponent's computer sees. Latency.
Had you bothered to read what he typed, you would have noted that he didn't say anything about the "game" seeing things...he said his and the other guy's computers.
-
As explained it isnt perfect, but it can, and is being gamed to anothers advantage as also stated.
It can't because there is no way to know what someone else sees on their screen.
Basically if your trying to make someone collide with you, all your doing is making it easier for them to shoot you down, or risking a collision on your end, EVEN IN A HEAD ON.
-
Yup "stuck on stupid". :rofl
-
It is what it is, what is it with all the denial..... :noid
Walks like a duck, quacks like a duck,,,,,,, got to be a duck.... :rofl
-
Reposted for the "stuck on stupid" crowd.
Sorry, but there is no way in hell you are going to be happy, if you successfully avoid a collision, by 50 feet and then blow up because the other guy decides not to avoid the collision and takes you out.
What you want is to give the other player control over what happens to your plane. Right now, you have control over whether or not your plane collides.
As much as you are complaining about the current collision system, I can only imagine the tirades if we gave control of your plane being blown up to the other player. That is essentially what you are asking for.
Unless you are asking for every computer in the world, connected to the game, to have the exact representation of the game at the exact instant in time. That would be cool! Now,...tell us how to violate the speed of light and we will be all over it, while you are receiving your Noble in physics.
I am not trying to be a smart-aleck or disrespectful, but I cannot figure out what the heck it is you want. First, you complain about players "ramming" you and them not dieing, then you want to give those same players the ability to destroy your plane by "ramming" you so you will die even when you avoid the collision. Quite the conundrum.
-
:rofl
-
Had you bothered to read what he typed, you would have noted that he didn't say anything about the "game" seeing things...he said his and the other guy's computers.
The quote I qouted:
Ok I see what your saying, the game has a hard time seeing the colision in 3D, thanks for the insight <S>
What did I miss?
wrongway
(picking nits)
-
2D or 3D makes no difference. The issue is time.
-
2D or 3D makes no difference. The issue is time.
More or less lag...
With lag, everyone has a slight bit of it (packet travel time), you're plane is like being pulled on a rope, the more lag you have, the longer the rope. You see yourself ahead of where other people see you (your packets are already at your computer, so it "loads" them) where your packets for other people to see them have to go through the main server, then "off into other peoples comp." where it can be "loaded" and processed then displayed. So, how about a quick diagram...
- = rope segment.
-------------|
| ^You see yourself here.
^Other people see you here.
So, the issue is lag, then not only that, but you have 2 peoples lag to display, which is where the issue of the 'one sided collision' comes into play.
Hope I helped clear this up a bit.
-
Ok I see what your saying, the game has a hard time seeing the colision in 3D, thanks for the insight <S>
That's not correct BP ... the "game" (running on my and your box) sees everything in X,Y,Z coordinates (3D) ... Z being the 3rd dimension (vertical).
The "game" sees everything just fine ... now the players ? ... that's a horse of a different color.
-
The quote I qouted:
What did I miss?
wrongway
(picking nits)
Put the damned nits back where you got them from!!! Then you can note that I quoted someone else that said something else and had nothing to do with what BP said. :)
-
2D or 3D makes no difference. The issue is time.
Time, is not absoloot. Therefore, the issue is "relatifity".
Ven you haf two planes A und B flying in the vicinity of each other, the posizion of the opponent plane which each pilots may perzeive, ist different to one another according to the speed of data transmission.
Many tend to think that the firtual skies of AH is a single, given "space" vich is absoloot, but in reality, it ist nothing but a medium which relays data from both the komputers behind plane A und plane B, und then which posizion is displayed in a relatif manner to each other according to the speed of the conneczion.
It ist fortunate that at least, modern internet conneczions are sufficient enough to bring down the disparity in posizional calculations to a matter of milliseconts - but still, as long as data trafels to und fro from different places of the Earth at different speeds, the "spacial reality" of AH is not absoloot. The pilot of plane A may obserf plane B 400 yards behind him, while the pilot of plane B may obserf plane A 300 yards in front of him.
In other words, the spacial relation between both frontends of the two players are different. There are two different realities which are slightly different from one another, but similar enough to put coherently together und describe as a singular instance.
Howefer, in collision instances, a tiny, minute differenz in the two individual of plane A und B realities may decide the difference between collision or no collision. In this case, there may be an extreme differenz in the two separate realities of plane A (vich has been determined to be "collided") und plane B (vich has been determined to be "uncollided").
Now, the issue is this: in such instance where the relative difference is so extreme, should this also be treated as a singular instance? In A's reality, he has collided, so it is everybit fair to say that A should be damaged. However, in B's reality, he has not collided - and yet, must he suffer the consequence of something vich did not happen to him at all?
Thus, comes in the collision system of AH - which, in a rare fashion, decides to split the two, extremely different realities of plane A und B, und treat it separately.
It can not be done othervize, since the current system means that as long as you vatch yourself and do not collide on your own frontend, you vill be safe. Therefore, there is no such thing as an unexplained, unexpected collision. If a collision did happen in vich you are damaged and the opponent ist not, vat happent to the "other plane" is a non-issue. Vat happens to him, is vat happens in his reality, not yours. The only thing vich ist important is vat happent in your reality, and in that separate reality, you haf collided, and thus, you are damaged.
The physical vorld of Aces High is solid in that matter. Every collision has a reason, and therefore, can be estimated or expected. Hitech does not play dice."
- Albert Kweainstein -
-
That's not correct BP ... the "game" (running on my and your box) sees everything in X,Y,Z coordinates (3D) ... Z being the 3rd dimension (vertical).
The "game" sees everything just fine ... now the players ? ... that's a horse of a different color.
understand Slap, thanks <S>
-
Wait a funny post by Kweasa???
:noid
-
Wait a funny post by Kweasa???
Just explaining the Theory of Collisional Relativity, to the laymen of modern day AH physics.
ps) I'd have dragged in the Theory of Uncertainty also, but decided not to, since it only applies when someone has a really, really bad connection problem.
"It is impossible to estimate just where and how a plane will appear. Nothing is certain in the world of Quantum Lag Physics"
- Werner Kweaizenberg -
-
- Just explaining the Theory of Collisional Relativity, to the laymen of modern day AH physics. -
Aye and well done. :lol :aok
-
I loled. You win two internets! :lol
-
Good post Kweassa.
:aok
-
Awesome Post Kweassa! <S>
-
Watching carrier operations can sometimes give a good view of alternate realities. You will see aircraft land where the carrier is not in your reality. i.e. landing in thin air. He sees himself landing on the flight deck.
-
I was hoping he'd stick the pauli exclusion principle in there somewhere, too. Perfect opportunity for it.
-
.
I MAY HAVE a film. suffered a collision last night. only got white message saying XXX has collided with you. i lost a wing, while i saw a black smoke trail comming from him. i never got the kill, so i assume he landed safely.
\
i'll look at film tonight to see if he was tryin to ho me or not, as i don't recall seeing or hearing hits, or gunfire.
if he was shooting, no use posting...if he was though, i'll stir the hornets nest a bit./ :D :devil
-
Some years ago I played a game that had a collision "bubble",if your "bubble" touched the otherguys 'bubble' both went down.The problem with this was that you could "collide" with players that were several hundred yards away,there was noway to tell how close you could get and often you'd move in for a shot and explode for no reason.Well the "no reason" was really "lag" and led to many frustaring evenings trying to fly and not explode.
Is this what you'd like to see in AHII?? I sure dont!! :O
-
.
I MAY HAVE a film. suffered a collision last night. only got white message saying XXX has collided with you. i lost a wing, while i saw a black smoke trail comming from him. i never got the kill, so i assume he landed safely.
\
i'll look at film tonight to see if he was tryin to ho me or not, as i don't recall seeing or hearing hits, or gunfire.
if he was shooting, no use posting...if he was though, i'll stir the hornets nest a bit./ :D :devil
Just remember the orange system messages, of which "You have collided" is one, do not show up on films (at least they used to not - not sure if this is something they changed). So you will have to watch the film very closely to see if your plane intersects with the other plane to see if you indeed had a collision on your computer.
-
Just remember the orange system messages, of which "You have collided" is one, do not show up on films (at least they used to not - not sure if this is something they changed). So you will have to watch the film very closely to see if your plane intersects with the other plane to see if you indeed had a collision on your computer.
well, that's why i didn't post right away. i didn't get the orange message.
i watched the film last night. it appears as if his verticle stab caught my left wing. so my machine did indeed see a collision. there was zero gunfire. neither one of us fired. i was climbing to the merge, and he was inverted diving on me. i actually thought i was gonna pass under him.
i'm a bit confused, that i never got the orange message, but not overly concerned now, knowing that this just "proved out" the system.
i'm still also confused why i never saw a kill show up, as i have in the past, as he definitly hit the water. it's kinda funny too, as although his verticle stab hit my wing, he lost his wing. his wing, though never contacted my aircraft.
i'm not gonna post the film, also, due to a squaddie lettin loose on squad vox. don't wanna cause any trouble for anyone.
<<S>>
-
well, that's why i didn't post right away. i didn't get the orange message.
i watched the film last night. it appears as if his verticle stab caught my left wing. so my machine did indeed see a collision. there was zero gunfire. neither one of us fired. i was climbing to the merge, and he was inverted diving on me. i actually thought i was gonna pass under him.
i'm a bit confused, that i never got the orange message, but not overly concerned now, knowing that this just "proved out" the system.
i'm still also confused why i never saw a kill show up, as i have in the past, as he definitly hit the water. it's kinda funny too, as although his verticle stab hit my wing, he lost his wing. his wing, though never contacted my aircraft.
i'm not gonna post the film, also, due to a squaddie lettin loose on squad vox. don't wanna cause any trouble for anyone.
<<S>>
You can edit out vox and text. Ohh and if he lost a wing then on his FE his wing hit you. Get it?
-
You can edit out vox and text. Ohh and if he lost a wing then on his FE his wing hit you. Get it?
yea, i think i do......in my "world" his vert stab hit my wing....in his "world" his wing hit me.
how do i edit the vox or text out?
-
Editing the top right side.
(http://i114.photobucket.com/albums/n277/1bronk1/textedit.jpg)
Boxed in red.
-
yea, i think i do......in my "world" his vert stab hit my wing....in his "world" his wing hit me.
:aok
-
I was recently explaining the collision model to a few gents who insisted it was faulty. Their evidence was the fact that if you see your own plane dodging and missing your enemy's bullets, you can still get hit by them and go down. I tried to explain how hard it would be to have to fire at an enemy at where you think he might actually be in order to hit him on his own Front End. They would then circle back to, "Why are collisions with planes any different?" I swore from that day on out, I will never discuss collisions again.
-
I was recently explaining the collision model to a few gents who insisted it was faulty. Their evidence was the fact that if you see your own plane dodging and missing your enemy's bullets, you can still get hit by them and go down. I tried to explain how hard it would be to have to fire at an enemy at where you think he might actually be in order to hit him on his own Front End. They would then circle back to, "Why are collisions with planes any different?" I swore from that day on out, I will never discuss collisions again.
if i could get the other guy to post his film too, that would be a decent way of showing this. as soon as i edit some offensive vox out, i'll post it here.
-
Ohh and if he lost a wing then on his FE his wing hit you. Get it?
Bronk, I have always been with you when it comes to the collision whines but that statement is not always correct. I think the collision detection system is the best possible compromise. However the way damage is assigned is not. This may go more to the games damage model though.
-
Bronk, I have always been with you when it comes to the collision whines but that statement is not always correct. I think the collision detection system is the best possible compromise. However the way damage is assigned is not. This may go more to the games damage model though.
actually, i think him pointing that out made perfect sense.
in my "cartoon fighter pilot world", as we were merging. i/we misjudged. in my "world" we almost made it. his wing went right over the top of my canopy, and verticle stabs. unfortunatly, his verticle stab clipped my wing just outside the engine nacelle.
in his "cartoon fighter pilot world" we were merging. he/we misjudged, but we didn't almost make it, as his wing traveled directly through my canopy. in r/l it would have decapitated the pile-it.
this is what confused me initially when i first was that he lost a wing. it was his computer that saw HIS wing contact my 38 o deth. thus he lost his wing, and spun in.
had he looked back and seen me still flying(as i was struggling to keep her airborne missing 1/2 of my left wing) he'd have been confused as to why i was still flying. BUT.......my computer saw HIS verticle stab hit MY wing. thus my 38 o deth lost 1/2 of her wing.
this in the reality of internet gaming makes perfect sense. each or our machines assigned the damage to our aircraft that the respective machines saw.
this actually kinda sucks, as i REALLY wanted to whine about it. :rofl but i can't though, knowing what i just found out.
-
Cap I understand the differences in FE but I have had collisions on my end where the damage seemed a bit off. Then last night I took one that really didn't seem right so I went back and checked the film.
I'm in the F4U, what damage would you expect from this?
(http://img123.imageshack.us/img123/4882/collision1eu1.jpg)
-
Cap I understand the differences in FE but I have had collisions on my end where the damage seemed a bit off. Then last night I took one that really didn't seem right so I went back and checked the film.
I'm in the F4U, what damage would you expect from this?
(http://img123.imageshack.us/img123/4882/collision1eu1.jpg)
ouchiwawa.
i'd expect two dead cartoon pile-its, and lots of cartoon metal falling from the cartoon sky.
what'd you guys tsake for damage?
-
The F6F took no damage as he didn't collide and I didn't fire. I lost one gun.
-
The F6F took no damage as he didn't collide and I didn't fire. I lost one gun.
:eek:
I'd send that one to HiTech. That just ain't right. You should have 'sploded.
-
:eek:
I'd send that one to HiTech. That just ain't right. You should have 'sploded.
Agreed
-
Cap I understand the differences in FE but I have had collisions on my end where the damage seemed a bit off. Then last night I took one that really didn't seem right so I went back and checked the film.
I'm in the F4U, what damage would you expect from this?
(http://img123.imageshack.us/img123/4882/collision1eu1.jpg)
Depending on the arena settings, it could be perfectly normal. Then again, it could be two friendlies as well, as the screenshot appears to have been cropped to remove the ICONS.
Be happy to take a look at the film.
-
Depending on the arena settings, it could be perfectly normal. Then again, it could be two friendlies as well, as the screenshot appears to have been cropped to remove the ICONS.
This happened in LWOrange, and I might not be the brightest bulb on the Christmas tree but I do know the difference between friendlies and enemies :P
Be happy to take a look at the film.
It should be in your in-box in the morning.
-
Bump.....
Today a 190A8 come out of a 5k dive to my 51B just off base and runs into me i got the colision message how does this happen?
-
Bump.....
Today a 190A8 come out of a 5k dive to my 51B just off base and runs into me i got the colision message how does this happen?
Imagine your AC is the trailing AC in these pics pulling up from the base. The lead AC is the fw at speed.
What your opponent sees
(http://i114.photobucket.com/albums/n277/1bronk1/Tanglesview.jpg)
He has zipped over and missed you.
What you see.
(http://i114.photobucket.com/albums/n277/1bronk1/myview.jpg)
Your climbing out and It looks like he runs into you.
The front end does not care who is the aggressor and who is defending or from what angle you collide. It just cares if your AC tries to occupy the same space as another.