Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Wishlist => Topic started by: Killer91 on May 29, 2010, 10:24:39 PM
-
I think that when two planes collide and only one registers a collision both planes should still receive damage.
Its only fair since that if two planes to collide they should both receive damage from the collision.
IMHO you shouldn't be able to collide with out both planes receiving some sort of damage.
I've been on both sides of it. I've collided and gone down without a wing while the other plane flies away
with no damage at all. I've also collided and watch the other guy go down while i went on with out damage.
So my wish is that if you collide but the other guy doesn't register a collision that he still comes away damaged
since the planes obviously had to make contact for a collision to register.
-
(borrowed from Bronk)
Here are pics to demonstrate.
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)
For more info .... http://trainers.hitechcreations.com/lag/lag.htm
What you are asking for killer is a terrible idea.
You would be flying NEAR opponents, not EVEN close to them, and take damage from a collision you never saw happen.
Somehow that is a better idea?
You obviously didn't think this through.
Bottom line is don't hit them and collisions are a non issue.
-
Actually your idea is very unfair, real-life doesn't have latency, the Internet does I'm afraid and AH's current setup with collisions probably the fairest way to go about it.
-
I think that when two planes collide and only one registers a collision both planes should still receive damage.
Its only fair since that if two planes to collide they should both receive damage from the collision.
IMHO you shouldn't be able to collide with out both planes receiving some sort of damage.
I've been on both sides of it. I've collided and gone down without a wing while the other plane flies away
with no damage at all. I've also collided and watch the other guy go down while i went on with out damage.
So my wish is that if you collide but the other guy doesn't register a collision that he still comes away damaged
since the planes obviously had to make contact for a collision to register.
So what you want is to go down if someone else collides with your plane but on your end you don't collide?
wrongway
-
.
-
If a collision happens then yes both planes should receive damage. I've seen those pics before but its still not right for one to be damaged and the other one not.
A collision is a collision and can only happen when two planes makes contact. Therefore yes i still believe both should be damaged.
-
If a collision happens then yes both planes should receive damage. I've seen those pics before but its still not right for one to be damaged and the other one not.
A collision is a collision and can only happen when two planes makes contact. Therefore yes i still believe both should be damaged.
You are still not grasping what you really see on those pictures.
But let me question it this way:
You are flying the plane in front. The first picture, and ONLY the first one, shows what is happening on YOUR screen. Do you think you should get damage.
Or another example
(http://img222.imageshack.us/img222/8728/ramotherfexg7.jpg)
You are the jug on the right. You see the P-51 behind you, never getting closer than this. See the small white message? "Lusche (the other player in that Pony) has collided with you.
Shoud YOU (The P-47) take damage?
-
If a collision happens then yes both planes should receive damage. I've seen those pics before but its still not right for one to be damaged and the other one not.
A collision is a collision and can only happen when two planes makes contact. Therefore yes i still believe both should be damaged.
If your assumption held in the game then you would almost never have a collision. If you want to have collisions then you go right ahead and collide but I dont want your damage thanks.
-
A collision is a collision and can only happen when two planes makes contact.
That is exactly what is going on right now and what we currently have in AcesHigh.
What you fail to grasp is that in a 1 on 1 fight there are not 2 planes, there are 4.
The two on your Front End and the two on your opponents.
Think of the pictures I all ready posted as examples representing both players Front Ends.
Go duel someone.
Both film it.
Have them send you the film.
Watch both films and you will see that the fight looks different even thought it is the same fight.
Click the link I posted to the Trainers website and read the whole article. Heck, re-read it until it sinks in.
-
I read it. But what about head on collisions? Like ones where one plane gets sent straight to the tower and the other flies away undamaged. That shouldn't be able to happen.
I hate being on the side that receives no damage just as bad as receiving damage. There's just no way a plane should be able to collide with another plane and not be damaged.
-
I read it. But what about head on collisions? Like ones where one plane gets sent straight to the tower and the other flies away undamaged. That shouldn't be able to happen.
I hate being on the side that receives no damage just as bad as receiving damage. There's just no way a plane should be able to collide with another plane and not be damaged.
You understand that what you see can be completely different than what the other guy sees. Let's say you quickly duck below a HO and clearly don't make contact, all of the sudden you're falling to the ground, that's fair?
-
You understand that what you see can be completely different than what the other guy sees. Let's say you quickly duck below a HO and clearly don't make contact, all of the sudden you're falling to the ground, that's fair?
And its fair now for me to watch the other guy get sent to the tower while i continue on my way undamaged or vice versa?
-
I read it.
Obviously not because you then type...
But what about head on collisions? Like ones where one plane gets sent straight to the tower and the other flies away undamaged. That shouldn't be able to happen.
Read it again.
Keep at it until it sinks in.
I hasn't yet.
I might add that if you would stop trying to HO people you would be amazed at how much of a non-issue collisions become.
-
And its fair now for me to watch the other guy get sent to the tower while i continue on my way undamaged or vice versa?
Did you hit them?
Are you trying to say that you want want to take damage even though you never came in contact w/ your opponents plane?
So you MISS the guy, yet you still feel you should take damage anyway.
I know if I don't hit someone I for sure do not want to take damage.
Also, answer Snailmans question he posted.
Seriously, go look at the single pic and what he asked you.
Please post your reply.
-
If your so intent on takeing damage even though a plane never actually hit you, when you see the collision message of someone else colliding with you continue to mash the "Enter" key until your in the tower as well.
-
Killer, If you see the collision, you will take damage. It's that simple, and perfectly fair.
-
Killer, If you see the collision, you will take damage. It's that simple, and perfectly fair.
Not so. I have collided with people before unscathed, but they fall to the ground missing pieces.
-
somebody explain this to me:
why should we treat collisions any different than kills? Why should a plane that is not even looking in my direction kill me, but treat it different when a collision occurs. It is the same thing, but it gets treated different and it shouldnt.
semp
-
somebody explain this to me:
why should we treat collisions any different than kills? Why should a plane that is not even looking in my direction kill me, but treat it different when a collision occurs. It is the same thing, but it gets treated different and it shouldnt.
semp
Because if it were treated the same it opens the game up to massive exploits.
-
Hey, there is or not a collision model?
If yes, then I wish it off! :furious
What i mean as collision model?
We have a collision ck problem due to net latencies ... ok
But when We got a collision, the effect seems following some rules.
And I don't like these rules.
Example.
If in a ho type collision I have a bit of altitude more, then I 'win' the collision !
And The opposite works too !
Do I dream? Or Does someonelse noted this?
Another thing.
A collision kill have not to figure ! (also if one or both player go down)
:salute
-
Guncrasher, the fact is that collisions are not at all like kills.
If you shoot at someone, on your FE you see the hit sprites, you see the parts falling off.
The game sends that person a packet saying in effect "you've just be shot at, you where hit here, here, and here, causing X damage, die. And that plane blows up.
If you collide with someone, what you see and what they see can be totally different.
If you don't believe me, next time your climbing out with friends or squadmates.
Ask him how far away he see's you at.
At the same time look to see how far away he is according to your end.
The 2 numbers will not match.
Even though the 2 of you are attempting to fly in formation.
As you keep checking the distances between the 2 of you will vary.
This is why collisions MUST be modeled the way they are now. Period.
Anything else either leads to total anarchy, or leads to planes blowing up that clearly missed.
Forget about "it takes 2" planes, or outmoded idea's that both should take damage.
If both "see" the collision both DO take damage.
Lulu, your just plain wrong sir, and not that bright on the face of things.
HT is not going to turn collisions off just because you don't understand them.
The "rules" your complaining about are the same for everyone. So it is a level playing field.
If you fly to miss, you will miss.
-
Would it be possible to have an automated system that determines whose "fault" it was?
Ex: Plane one begins a BnZ, leads plane two too much and collides with them, plane two really couldn't be at blame because it was the offensive move of plane one.
Ex: Plane one has levelled out and is gaining on plane two. Plane two begins a roll-type maneuver to try and get an overshoot. Plane one doesn't slow down and tries to aim directly at the rolling aircraft, he collides.
Both of these I have either seen or experienced personally. 99% of the time, the inexperienced offensive pilot is to blame, and often times, no bullets are heard, whether it be occurring to me or a squaddie or someone else. And most of the time, when no bullets are heard, the plane will lose a wing, best-case scenario. Or maybe just shorten it and say the offensive player is to blame (most always is), and in a hoing situation, both aircraft are to blame.
Btw, happy Memorial Day weekend, stay safe :cheers:
-
Would it be possible to have an automated system that determines whose "fault" it was?
Unfortunately, no.
Also, answer Snailmans question he posted.
Seriously, go look at the single pic and what he asked you.
Please post your reply.
Almost no one campaigning for "both must take damage" ever does.
I wonder why... ;)
-
Example.
If in a ho type collision I have a bit of altitude more, then I 'win' the collision !
And The opposite works too !
Do I dream? Or Does someonelse noted this?
Another thing.
A collision kill have not to figure ! (also if one or both player go down)
:salute
In a "HO type collision" everyone is shooting. Part of the collision that makes someone go "boom" is a collision with bullets.
wrongway
-
What I don't understand that We have net latencies?
I said I agree with this.
But only latencies or there is some model or rules too?
If latencies only then ... amen! (<--- perhaps some buffer could solve the problem but too expensive solutions)
But if these rules exist then I'm right when
I said that than somebody tries to collide
to get kill by collisions.
And I would be able to read these rules ... if they exist.
So that i can use them too.
Not every player fire on HO. :old:
:salute
-
Yayyy collision whines..... they feed me. :devil
What you see is what you get. Change your habits and watch them fade away. If your problem is mostly with head on collisions. Do not accept head on merges... simple really.
Many thanks to lute and lusche for picking up my slack... drank a bit too much last night. ;) :aok
-
What I don't understand that We have net latencies?
I said I agree with this.
But only latencies or there is some model or rules too?
If latencies only then ... amen! (<--- perhaps some buffer could solve the problem but too expensive solutions)
But if these rules exist then I'm right when
I said that than somebody tries to collide
to get kill by collisions.
And I would be able to read these rules ... if they exist.
So that i can use them too.
Not every player fire on HO. :old:
:salute
I'm guessing english isnt your first language :) not quite sure what you're asking, but the model/rules are explained fully here:
http://trainers.hitechcreations.com/lag/lag.htm (http://trainers.hitechcreations.com/lag/lag.htm)
-
TY for the link.
If I remember well, in HO with no fire from both planes and collision, I never
died if my plane has alt advantage.
Why? :O
Always lucky?
I don't remember well?
Latencies apart there is something else?
Latencies only?
:salute
-
that does seem to be the case. I've always put it down to where the collision occurs - if you pull up at the last second your impact point is the bottom of the fuselage which is pretty strong, their impact points are prop/engine/pilot/tail all of which are weaker or fatal.
-
Not so. I have collided with people before unscathed, but they fall to the ground missing pieces.
So on your end you barely nicked them, and on their end they flew through your cockpit. What you see is what you get.
-
So on your end you barely nicked them, and on their end they flew through your cockpit. What you see is what you get.
What he said. Some just can't grasp the concept that we all fly to our own little slice of AH reality.
-
TY for the link.
If I remember well, in HO with no fire from both planes and collision, I never
died if my plane has alt advantage.
Why? :O
Always lucky?
I don't remember well?
Latencies apart there is something else?
:salute
There are no "rules" which say plane on top will always win.
It is always done on a case by case basis, which part of which plane came in contact with what.
So if your winning by being above, it may be as simple as parts of the bottom of your plane are impacting the cockpit of the other plane, decapitating the pilot.
Only you can cause or prevent collision by how close you fly.
Also "losing" is most often going to involve guns damage along with collision damage in a nose to nose situation.
-
There are no "rules" which say plane on top will always win.
It is always done on a case by case basis, which part of which plane came in contact with what.
So if your winning by being above, it may be as simple as parts of the bottom of your plane are impacting the cockpit of the other plane, decapitating the pilot.
Only you can cause or prevent collision by how close you fly.
Also "losing" is most often going to involve guns damage along with collision damage in a nose to nose situation.
The only sure rule of collision is that If i am involved I am the one who dies.
Because if it were treated the same it opens the game up to massive exploits.
how can it be exploited, please do explain.
semp
-
Wow: It's been a while for this one.
HiTech
-
how can it be exploited, please do explain.
Very easy...
In the current model, if you evade the enemy "ram" attempt on your screen, you are fine. What you see is what you get.
Now with "both take damage" you can clearly evade the enemy trying to ram you...and you still will get collision damage.
Suddenly it will get really easy to ram, and often almost impossible to evade one.
The only sure rule of collision is that If i am involved I am the one who dies.
That's most likely you perception, because you often simply won't notice a collision that did only happen on your enemy's screen (and thus only him taking damage)
It still the simple question I asked earlier... should the P-47 in the picture I provided take damage from that "collision"?
-
The only sure rule of collision is that If i am involved I am the one who dies.
You just posted a screen shot in the o'club that proves otherwise a couple days ago.
-
The bottom line is, as it is currently done...
If you hit your opponent you take damage.
If you do not hit your opponent you will not take damage.
Why would you want anything other than that?
-
The only sure rule of collision is that If i am involved I am the one who dies.
Who's fault is it that you collide all the time?
-
You just posted a screen shot in the o'club that proves otherwise a couple days ago.
naw i died first in that one, and i was the one who tried to evade while avoiding somebody else.
Very easy...
In the current model, if you evade the enemy "ram" attempt on your screen, you are fine. What you see is what you get.
Now with "both take damage" you can clearly evade the enemy trying to ram you...and you still will get collision damage.
Suddenly it will get really easy to ram, and often almost impossible to evade one.
That's most likely you perception, because you often simply won't notice a collision that did only happen on your enemy's screen (and thus only him taking damage)
It still the simple question I asked earlier... should the P-47 in the picture I provided take damage from that "collision"?
then why do i get killed when i evade somebody and still die. this is where it doesnt make sense, to see somebody pass by or see that i am not even close to his guns and still die.
sorry, but you ever been killed by a fiter's tail gunner? I have been many times. It is the same thing but you want different rules and I dont think it should be.
-I live if I evade an airplane but he dies, because his puter said he crashed.
-I died when I know he had no gun solution on me, but his computer says it did.
both are treated different but they are really the same thing.
semp
-
then why do i get killed when i evade somebody and still die. this is where it doesnt make sense, to see somebody pass by or see that i am not even close to his guns and still die.
If you evade his plane, there is no collision on your screen. No collision on your screen = no damage to you, regardless if there was a collision on your enemy's screen. (XY has collided with you)
If you take damage, you simply have been shot. And again: You can't see what's happenign on HIS screen, so you can't say he never had a gun solution.
You really have to accept that there a 2 "realities". And the way the game is handling them regarding gun hits & collisions is the only way possible. They are NOT the same thing.
You should thoroughly think of all the consequences happening if you would change anything.
-
The only sure rule of collision is that If i am involved I am the one who dies.
That will continue until you change your evil HO-ing ways. :neener:
-
That will continue until you change your evil HO-ing ways. :neener:
lol i actually made that comment as a joke. :devil.
semp
-
+1000000000000000
DOOOOOO ITTTTTT HTC!!!!
last time I was in a car crash I believe both parties had a large bill to pay
-
The system is fine the way it is, sure sometimes there are questionable outcomes but in the end it's fair. As a buff pilot I would hate to think of the fact that both parties take damage even though a collision didn't happen on my screen. Do you honestly realize how many times pilots kill themselves by screwing up their dive and colliding with my tail on their screens? I can't count the times I've seen a fighter come screaming in and pass just under may tail only to have the collision message pop up a second later with them falling to earth missing (insert random part here).
It would really infuriate me if a poor attack led to me losing a plane because we "both have to take damage" even though the other guy never touched me on my screen. Not only that but I could see some major exploitation being used with this.
-
then why do i get killed when i evade somebody and still die. this is where it doesnt make sense, to see somebody pass by or see that i am not even close to his guns and still die.
sorry, but you ever been killed by a fiter's tail gunner? I have been many times. It is the same thing but you want different rules and I dont think it should be.
this is also explained fully on the trainers lag page. you did read all of it right?
-
+1000000000000000
DOOOOOO ITTTTTT HTC!!!!
last time I was in a car crash I believe both parties had a large bill to pay
So, a HO in a car and he evades and you hit a telephone pole.... Who pays?
wrongway
-
+1000000000000000
DOOOOOO ITTTTTT HTC!!!!
last time I was in a car crash I believe both parties had a large bill to pay
I'm asking you too:
(http://img222.imageshack.us/img222/8728/ramotherfexg7.jpg)
You are the P-47. Should you die from this collision?
-
I'm asking you too:
(http://img222.imageshack.us/img222/8728/ramotherfexg7.jpg)
You are the P-47. Should you die from this collision?
But ...but... he cant ram planes any other way. ;)
-
I think that when two planes collide and only one registers a collision both planes should still receive damage.
Its only fair since that if two planes to collide they should both receive damage from the collision.
IMHO you shouldn't be able to collide with out both planes receiving some sort of damage.
I've been on both sides of it. I've collided and gone down without a wing while the other plane flies away
with no damage at all. I've also collided and watch the other guy go down while i went on with out damage.
So my wish is that if you collide but the other guy doesn't register a collision that he still comes away damaged
since the planes obviously had to make contact for a collision to register.
Yeah, that's stupid the way it's set up. I go down and the other person doesn't even though we went RIGHT THROUGH EACH OTHER! I blow up or get something knocked off and he's flying perfectly normal like nothing happened to him. :huh
-
*sigh*
-
Yeah, that's stupid the way it's set up. I go down and the other person doesn't even though we went RIGHT THROUGH EACH OTHER! I blow up or get something knocked off and he's flying perfectly normal like nothing happened to him. :huh
Read.
-
Yeah, that's stupid the way it's set up. I go down and the other person doesn't even though we went RIGHT THROUGH EACH OTHER! I blow up or get something knocked off and he's flying perfectly normal like nothing happened to him. :huh
Psst read it again... with a dictionary if needed.http://trainers.hitechcreations.com/lag/lag.htm
-
Yeah, that's stupid the way it's set up. I go down and the other person doesn't even though we went RIGHT THROUGH EACH OTHER! I blow up or get something knocked off and he's flying perfectly normal like nothing happened to him. :huh
*facepalms* Ok...one more time....slowly...
There...is...this...thing.... called....net....lag.
On....your....screen.....you. ...went...through....each.... .other.
Follow Me?
On.....his....screen.....he.. .dodged....you.
You take damage, he doesn't.
-
$10.00 says Thrash never clicks the link, let alone reads it.
-
*sigh*
Read.
Psst read it again...
*facepalms* Ok...one more time....slowly...
$10.00 says Thrash never clicks the link, let alone reads it.
+5 :rofl
-
You can lead a horse to water but you can not make him drink, not if he doesn't want to.
-
Yeah, that's stupid the way it's set up. I go down and the other person doesn't even though we went RIGHT THROUGH EACH OTHER! I blow up or get something knocked off and he's flying perfectly normal like nothing happened to him. :huh
:O even with pictures and everything. :headscratch:
-
So, a HO in a car and he evades and you hit a telephone pole.... Who pays?
wrongway
he pays, he hit the telephone pole
I'm asking you too:
You are the P-47. Should you die from this collision?
Unfortunately yes, it may be unfair but this is how it was in the war and still is the same last time I checked in real life
when a Japanesse kamikaze'd a ship did the ship sail off with no damage and no crew killed?
and also just to clarify, I don't ram people intentionally
-
he pays, he hit the telephone pole
Unfortunately yes, it may be unfair but this is how it was in the war and still is the same last time I checked in real life
when a Japanesse kamikaze'd a ship did the ship sail off with no damage and no crew killed?
This isn't war or real life. It is in fact a game and games are meant to be fair much unlike real life war. So you can either adjust your flying and lower your risk of collision or continue whining about the model... cuz it isn't going to change. :P :lol
Ohh and try and kamikaze into a ship in game... lemme know how that works out for you as well. :lol
-
he pays, he hit the telephone pole
Unfortunately yes, it may be unfair but this is how it was in the war and still is the same last time I checked in real life
when a Japanesse kamikaze'd a ship did the ship sail off with no damage and no crew killed?
and also just to clarify, I don't ram people intentionally
To be clear, your position is that you should die to people who intentionally ram you without you having any way to avoid it. You do understand what you are suggesting, yes?
You are suggesting that it should be a valid tactic to ram somebody as it took them 10 minutes to reach your base and only took you 1 minute to reach them and you can't even dodge their ram attempts.
-
Unfortunately yes, it may be unfair but this is how it was in the war and still is the same last time I checked in real life
when a Japanesse kamikaze'd a ship did the ship sail off with no damage and no crew killed?
I'm not sure if you really looked at the picture.
You are just saying you want to get collision damage even though the enemy plane you just successfully evaded never came closer than 50 feet...
-
Lets approach this from another angle.
Those wanting both parties to take damage let me try and paint you a pictures of what you're asking for and how you'll hate what you want.
One day in the MA you're flying along to go PwN some NeWbzOoRS when a plane, lets say a P51, dives attempting to HO you. Now you have time to react and nose down and dive away, clearly avoiding the HO by a hundred feet or so. On your screen you miss the P51, however, a second after the pass your right wing falls off and you receive the message "ExamplePlayer1337 has collided with you." So there you are, on the way to a death even though you CLEARLY avoided the enemy plane.
I'd be willing to bet a months subscription that those of you who want this changed would be back in here the same week it went live BEGGING for HT to rollback the system to the previous method.
-
I have it, after 15 years of the collision debate I truly have a new collision method. I write an auto collision debate tracker for the bbs. As soon as some one argues the merits of both die, they get their wish. A flag is set for them so that the requester dies as they happily fly by ,waving there hand at an airplane, just as they requested.
I then charge $30 to remove the flag when they request it a few days later.
HiTech
-
I have it, after 15 years of the collision debate I truly have a new collision method. I write an auto collision debate tracker for the bbs. As soon as some one argues the merits of both die, they get their wish. A flag is set for them so that the requester dies as they happily fly by ,waving there hand at an airplane, just as they requested.
I then charge $30 to remove the flag when they request it a few days later.
HiTech
:rofl Brilliant :aok
-
I then charge $30 to remove the flag when they request it a few days later.
HiTech
You will be gettin' filthy rich :D
-
Awesome!
Make it so please!
-
lol HiTech.
:aok
-
hey now I am a bit confused......This is real life damn-it........who said it was a game :furious
-
Wow ... the "cluelessness" is strong with this bunch ... :rolleyes:
-
I have it, after 15 years of the collision debate I truly have a new collision method. I write an auto collision debate tracker for the bbs. As soon as some one argues the merits of both die, they get their wish. A flag is set for them so that the requester dies as they happily fly by ,waving there hand at an airplane, just as they requested.
I then charge $30 to remove the flag when they request it a few days later.
HiTech
That would be so awesome !!!
The text buffer would be something like this ...
When you log in ...
HOST: It has been established that you are clueless about the collision model ... your collision flag is set to full "realism" .... muhahahah
Later on in a tight knife fight ...
HOST: Lusche has collided with you in his P-51
HOST: You didn't collide with Lusche in your P-47
HOST: You will be sent to the tower in 5 seconds ...
HOST: 4 ...
HOST: 3 ...
HOST: 2 ...
HOST: 1 ...
HOST: We are changing your in game ID to Toyota ..."You asked for it ... You got it"
-
I have it, after 15 years of the collision debate I truly have a new collision method. I write an auto collision debate tracker for the bbs. As soon as some one argues the merits of both die, they get their wish. A flag is set for them so that the requester dies as they happily fly by ,waving there hand at an airplane, just as they requested.
I then charge $30 to remove the flag when they request it a few days later.
HiTech
That is absolutely brilliant! :rofl
-
I have it, after 15 years of the collision debate I truly have a new collision method. I write an auto collision debate tracker for the bbs. As soon as some one argues the merits of both die, they get their wish. A flag is set for them so that the requester dies as they happily fly by ,waving there hand at an airplane, just as they requested.
I then charge $30 to remove the flag when they request it a few days later.
HiTech
OOOOOO can they have a special icon in game so we know who to fly close to ...... please. :pray :devil
-
I have it, after 15 years of the collision debate I truly have a new collision method. I write an auto collision debate tracker for the bbs. As soon as some one argues the merits of both die, they get their wish. A flag is set for them so that the requester dies as they happily fly by ,waving there hand at an airplane, just as they requested.
I then charge $30 to remove the flag when they request it a few days later.
HiTech
Crushing tiny brains with an intellectual hammer feels good, but it ain't good for business. :D
-
OOOOOO can they have a special icon in game so we know who to fly close to ...... please. :pray :devil
Heheheeee the fun to be had . . . :aok
-
I have it, after 15 years of the collision debate I truly have a new collision method. I write an auto collision debate tracker for the bbs. As soon as some one argues the merits of both die, they get their wish. A flag is set for them so that the requester dies as they happily fly by ,waving there hand at an airplane, just as they requested.
I then charge $30 to remove the flag when they request it a few days later.
HiTech
Perfect, I say let it be so!
-
Someone needs to redirect wilb3r and Draggon to this thread so they can see how the collision model works.
ack-ack
-
So if lag is the problem why does the same thing happen offline? :confused:
-
So if lag is the problem why does the same thing happen offline? :confused:
What? If you fly into a drone offline you break something. What is so hard to understand?
-
What? If you fly into a drone offline you break something. What is so hard to understand?
Yea but, they don't If there's not lag offline shouldn't their wing come off if you hit it with your wing?
-
so ... why dont we have a facepalm smiley? :headscratch:
-
The lag theory to this can't be true. I only live 65 miles from the servers and i have a ping that stays between 30 - 45.
For that matter it rarely gets above the 30's. So I'm not buying that at all. If its lag then I should be the one that flies away from these collision without so much as a scratch.
Not vice versa.
-
Killer it is one of those things that no matter how much info u have u are still gonna lose. I have passed airlanes on one side and the wing on the oppsite side falls out. But I gave up on in.
Semp
-
"For those who understand no explanation is needed, for those who do not understand no explanation is possible."
-
"For those who understand no explanation is needed, for those who do not understand no explanation is possible."
:rofl
-
"For those who understand no explanation is needed, for those who do not understand no explanation is possible."
Oh that is sig material right there.
-
So if lag is the problem why does the same thing happen offline? :confused:
I want to add one thing. The drones offline don't function like normal aircraft in the game. You can shoot a wing off, light them on fire, heck I even turned the B24 into a flying cigar and it still kept circling the airfield. I'm not sure if it's a bug or just the way HTC set it up but collisions vs the offline drones won't work because they don't die correctly. Try it, take a 262 up and blow the wing off the B24, it won't fall to the ground.
-
I want to add one thing. The drones offline don't function like normal aircraft in the game. You can shoot a wing off, light them on fire, heck I even turned the B24 into a flying cigar and it still kept circling the airfield. I'm not sure if it's a bug or just the way HTC set it up but collisions vs the offline drones won't work because they don't die correctly. Try it, take a 262 up and blow the wing off the B24, it won't fall to the ground.
Yes, I know that I'm not sure about those offline planes I don't think they have a flight model but, I do believe they have a damage model. I've collided with other people in other online air combat sims and we both blew up but, In AH it's different. :headscratch:
-
so ... why dont we have a facepalm smiley? :headscratch:
(http://www.overlordforums.com/Smileys/default/facepalm.gif) (http://mm-bbs.org/style_emoticons/megamix_light/facepalm.gif) (http://img238.imageshack.us/img238/2885/facepalmua8.gif) (http://dreamtmwa.org/Smileys/default/Facepalm14.gif) (http://forums.feplanet.net/style_emoticons/yellow/facepalm.gif)(http://www.steelmenonline.co.uk/forums/style_emoticons/default/facepalm.gif) (http://i39.tinypic.com/zmhzra.gif) (http://images.napalmriot.com/layout_napalm/icons/emoticons/FacePalm.gif)
(http://www.memoriesofmystical.com/images/tumblr/072609/000c7y4w.gif)
(http://media.onsugar.com/files/ons1/338/3389156/30_2009/fe/b9vfl4b63mto49qpjva6t7tco1_500.jpg)
(http://i33.tinypic.com/2ik9t0j.gif)
Carry on.
wrongway
-
The lag theory to this can't be true. I only live 65 miles from the servers and i have a ping that stays between 30 - 45.
For that matter it rarely gets above the 30's. So I'm not buying that at all. If its lag then I should be the one that flies away from these collision without so much as a scratch.
Not vice versa.
Now this is funny.
"For those who understand no explanation is needed, for those who do not understand no explanation is possible."
And this is too true.
-
Now this is funny.
How so? If I have that fast of connection then its the other guys that gonna being seeing things further behind than me.
But now your gonna say that "you have to add the lags times together to get total lag." If thats true then it completely blows the lag theory out of the water.
Still not buying it.
-
The lag theory to this can't be true. I only live 65 miles from the servers and i have a ping that stays between 30 - 45.
For that matter it rarely gets above the 30's. So I'm not buying that at all. If its lag then I should be the one that flies away from these collision without so much as a scratch.
Not vice versa.
The distance to the server is irrelevant. What matters is the total ping time to the other player. Obviously if the other player is me, in Austin, TX, the ping will be less than if it is, say, Kweassa in South Korea, but there will always be some lag.
-
But now your gonna say that "you have to add the lags times together to get total lag." If thats true then it completely blows the lag theory out of the water.
Still not buying it.
Why not?
Just thin about this: The information about the other players position has to get to you. It has to travel from his computer to you... after all he is not flying on the server, he is flying on his own computer. So all the data about my position, my speed, flight vector has to travel all the way to the server, which relays it to every player around. The data is going from my computer tot he server, and then to you.
And remember: Collisions are NOT happening on the server. They happen on the player computers. The server does not determine who collided or who's "fault" it was.
But you STILL haven't answered my question... ;)
-
Lusche nailed it, when your flying close to someone, your Front end (Aces High) is constantly sending packets to anyone else in the area. The closer you are, the more packets.
Yes those packets go from you to HTC, but then they have to go to the other player.
And the have to come from the other player back to you before you will see the results.
Now I can't prove this, but I "suspect" that at times packets may not always go from player A to HTC to player B.
I "suspect" that sometimes they try to shortcut and go direct. (I could be way off base here)
But it seems that some of the strange issues associated with network lag would be explained if that was the case.
Where player A has 80 ms ping to HTC.
Where player B has 100ms ping.
But the ping from A to B direct is 400ms and dropping packets.
This is my own theory, and it is probably wrong, but its as easy a way to justify why strange stuff happens as anything else.
Fact remains, only you can cause or prevent a collision.
There is no "ram" no one has ever submitted film where they were able to get the other guy to fly into them, causing a collision, without taking damage.
So if you collided, its YOUR fault. As the only person who could have prevented it is you.
-
How so? If I have that fast of connection then its the other guys that gonna being seeing things further behind than me.
But now your gonna say that "you have to add the lags times together to get total lag." If thats true then it completely blows the lag theory out of the water.
Still not buying it.
(http://foo.ca/wp/wp-content/uploads/2008/09/thestupiditburns.jpg)
-
Nice drawing Bronk, you have odd taste though :huh.
:lol
-
http://www.mediafire.com/?mjm2ntjkzwz (http://www.mediafire.com/?mjm2ntjkzwz)
Why didn't his wing break off if there's no lag in offline? :confused:
-
(http://img580.imageshack.us/img580/3316/collision1.png)
-
:rofl :aok
-
Tec that is just awesome! :rofl
-
LMAO Superbly done tec. :aok
-
Haha - excellent Tec!
-
Oh FFS that is the funniest thing I have ever frikkin seen!
:rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl
:salute
-
Very well done Tec! <S> sir
-
Have I missed the pie chart? Or did someone post it already? :aok
-
Have I missed the pie chart? Or did someone post it already? :aok
After TEC's flowchart, no more charts of any kind are necessary :D
-
http://www.mediafire.com/?mjm2ntjkzwz (http://www.mediafire.com/?mjm2ntjkzwz)
Why didn't his wing break off if there's no lag in offline? :confused:
You do understand that the drones are not real planes? That is why they continue to fly AFTER you have shot all the wings off? Also, if a "head shot" on the pilot didn't make planes explode you would never be able to shoot down the drones?
Totally different set-up.
-
Tec that is brilliant.
:aok
-
:rofl :rofl
-
You do understand that the drones are not real planes? That is why they continue to fly AFTER you have shot all the wings off? Also, if a "head shot" on the pilot didn't make planes explode you would never be able to shoot down the drones?
Totally different set-up.
Yea,they obviously don't have a FM but,they have a DM don't they? Because, when you shoot them their wing comes off.
-
Yea,they obviously don't have a FM but,they have a DM don't they? Because, when you shoot them their wing comes off.
A DM that is just giving you some sort of graphical feedback for target practice purposes.
But still, you can't use them to make any point on online collision modeling.
-
LMFAO Tec. That will probably find its way in every collision thread till the end of time nao. Nice work. :aok
-
LOL!
-
Yea,they obviously don't have a FM but,they have a DM don't they? Because, when you shoot them their wing comes off.
But they do not have any type of collision model.
HiTech
-
The lag theory to this can't be true. I only live 65 miles from the servers and i have a ping that stays between 30 - 45.
For that matter it rarely gets above the 30's. So I'm not buying that at all. If its lag then I should be the one that flies away from these collision without so much as a scratch.
Not vice versa.
Killer it is not a theory, I am god the creator, god does not create theories I create laws of the universe. You are playing in my universe, so if I were you I would believe that god is all knowing and all power full when it comes to his universe.
P.S. If you do not believe in god, no problem because after you disappear, all will be null and void to you as in rm -r * from \ as root.
PPS, thinking in 3 time dimensions is so much fun. Question can 2 objects occupy the same space? Of course they can, but they must do there occupations at different times.
HiTech
-
Killer it is not a theory, I am god the creator, god does not create theories I create laws of the universe. You are playing in my universe, so if I were you I would believe that god is all knowing and all power full when it comes to his universe.
P.S. If you do not believe in god, no problem because after you disappear, all will be null and void to you as in rm -r * from \ as root.
PPS, thinking in 3 time dimensions is so much fun. Question can 2 objects occupy the same space? Of course they can, but they must do there occupations at different times.
HiTech
The god of this universe may be all knowing and all powerful, but he still can't spell. :neener:
-
But they do not have any type of collision model.
HiTech
That explains it then. I guess it is lag my bomber and the guy that rammed me actually went down today. I haven't had this kind of collison lag problem in any other game I've played...Maybe the server and everyone in it just wasn't lagging.
-
Brilliant tec. Brillant. May that flowchart forever be with us.
-
That explains it then. I guess it is lag my bomber and the guy that rammed me actually went down today. I haven't had this kind of collison lag problem in any other game I've played...Maybe the server and everyone in it just wasn't lagging.
Maybe those other games don't have a collision code added to them at all.
-
That explains it then. I guess it is lag my bomber and the guy that rammed me actually went down today. I haven't had this kind of collison lag problem in any other game I've played...Maybe the server and everyone in it just wasn't lagging.
Maybe those other games don't have a collision code added to them at all.
+1 to The Fugitive
What other games?
wrongway
-
That explains it then. I guess it is lag my bomber and the guy that rammed me actually went down today. I haven't had this kind of collison lag problem in any other game I've played...Maybe the server and everyone in it just wasn't lagging.
Most other online games I've played are actually played on a server. One guy hosts, all others play in his world. Therefore what one guy sees, everyone sees.
AH is played on your machine, not the server. The AH "server" is only a communication hub, the game does not actually run on it. So what one guy sees is not necessarily what other people are seeing at that point in time.
-
+1 to The Fugitive
What other games?
wrongway
IL2 1946 Most other online games I've played are actually played on a server. One guy hosts, all others play in his world. Therefore what one guy sees, everyone sees.
AH is played on your machine, not the server. The AH "server" is only a communication hub, the game does not actually run on it. So what one guy sees is not necessarily what other people are seeing at that point in time.
That explains it then, thanks just wanted to get that cleared up. :)