Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: maus92 on August 05, 2010, 06:42:04 PM
-
Say for instance I am barreling in on an opponent, and overtaking from slightly above and behind. Say said opponent decides to create an overshoot by chopping throttle and dirtying up. I try to pull up and to the side, but my velocity vector plants my underbelly squarely into his plane. Who gets the kill, and who is charged with the collision? It seems to me that both parties are equally to blame - me for not detecting a change in speed, and him for creating a condition where a collision is likely to occur. We both should die. Where's my Nomex....?
(I should also add that I am perspectively challenged in this game.)
(Could the range counter be modified to show distance in 10 under 400?)
-
and who is charged with the collision?
If there's a collision on your screen, you take damage. If there's a collision on your enemies screen, he takes damage. Game doesn't care whos "fault" it was. What you see is what YOU get, and that works this way for everyone involved.
Read THIS first: http://trainers.hitechcreations.com/lag/lag.htm
Then do a forum search for "collisions", and learn why the things are the way they are.
-
Calling Tec, we need the chart!
-
Yea man, thanks for the tip. I understand about lag and how it affects my viewpoint vs. another's, but that's not really what I'm getting at. The issue is can somebody cause a collision by their tactic, and "get away" with it? Due to lag, it seems so. But is there are way to mitigate it? Like comparing the velocity and throttle position history of objects? Can throttle position even be measured?
BTW, searching on "collisions" brings back 4 pages of hits around 2000 - 2001 timeframe.
-
But is there are way to mitigate it? Like comparing the velocity and throttle position history of objects?
No.
BTW, searching on collision brings back 4 pages of hits around 2000 - 2001 timeframe.
Always use "advanced search", the basic search is somewhat glitched.
When searching or "collision" just in the topic, you will get several pages of results.
Oh, and regardless what some people claim, trying to force a collision that will hurt your enemy but not yourself is not a very efficient one ;)
-
Well i suggest that in the real world when 2 aircraft collide they both either explode or both start falling from the sky like stone's. Except in a few rare incident's where one or both have managed to get back to base. And neither get a kill from any collision.
I mean is it fair to the point that 2 aircraft collide in the air and one go's down and the other can carry on as if nothing had happened. No it isn't as in the real world when 2 aircraft collide it is 90.9 % likely they both are destroyed instantly or both pilot's have just enough time to escape. Or in a few in fact more than a few time's in WW2 both planes would go down but the poor pilots couldn't escape as their canopy's had jammed due to the collision's.
But i believe that If Ace's want's to stay true to real life as close as possible they should look into the fact that if a collision is registered then both aircraft either blow up or become unflyable. As i say it would be more realistic in that sense.
Thankyou BulletVI
-
And sometimes, much like in life, no matter what you do poo poo just happens. Fortunately in game we have the option of laughing and getting an instant do over or getting all twisted and bunged up over it. I choose the laughing at myself route. Better for the attitude, morale, and overall enjoyment of the game. Of course that's just me. :)
-
Well i suggest that in the real world when 2 aircraft collide they both either explode or both start falling from the sky like stone's. Except in a few rare incident's where one or both have managed to get back to base. And neither get a kill from any collision.
I mean is it fair to the point that 2 aircraft collide in the air and one go's down and the other can carry on as if nothing had happened. No it isn't as in the real world when 2 aircraft collide it is 90.9 % likely they both are destroyed instantly or both pilot's have just enough time to escape. Or in a few in fact more than a few time's in WW2 both planes would go down but the poor pilots couldn't escape as their canopy's had jammed due to the collision's.
But i believe that If Ace's want's to stay true to real life as close as possible they should look into the fact that if a collision is registered then both aircraft either blow up or become unflyable. As i say it would be more realistic in that sense.
Thankyou BulletVI
And we are 100 % true to life if you both collide you both take damage. Just as in the real world if two objects occupy the same space at the same time the collide. What you are missing is that in AH both planes occupy the same space at different times, and you collide with the plane on your screen that was 100's of MS ago, hence only 1 person takes damage.
HiTech
-
Get the Pics out again Lusche.
-
And we are 100 % true to life if you both collide you both take damage. Just as in the real world if two objects occupy the same space at the same time the collide. What you are missing is that in AH both planes occupy the same space at different times, and you collide with the plane on your screen that was 100's of MS ago, hence only 1 person takes damage.
HiTech
Ah yes hitech that has happened but the other night i had a full head-on collision with another player i cant remember who it was but i went down and he didn't. In fact a fellow player on vox told me that he didn't have a single piece of damage to his plane. Now from a full head-on Collision we both should have blown up instantly shouldn't we as that would have been the correct course of action.
Now i realise that if im in the UK and he was in the US for example there is a difference of up to 5 seconds on either players screen. And i know this as i watched a film that me and a fellow Squadie filmed of a simple take-off from the north west runway at the exact same time well almost probably there was a tenth of a second difference. Then i watched them side by side in adobe premier elements 8 then in the same software i watched them on-top of each other and there was a clear time difference.
Now i have a theory on that if its the same for a lot of players then if we do collide that the program will have picked up the collision and by the time its happened one player is now well away from the other thus since there is no immediate aircraft in close range to him/her that they don't get damaged registered or not enough damage registered. Also i believe that it has a lot to do with the player's ping level's as i have also been in with a ping of around 700 + and had a collision and flew on with no damage. its a bit confusing to a no-brainer like me :lol :salute
-
Ah yes hitech that has happened but the other night i had a full head-on collision with another player i cant remember who it was but i went down and he didn't. In fact a fellow player on vox told me that he didn't have a single piece of damage to his plane. Now from a full head-on Collision we both should have blown up instantly shouldn't we as that would have been the correct course of action.
Now i realise that if im in the UK and he was in the US for example there is a difference of up to 5 seconds on either players screen. And i know this as i watched a film that me and a fellow Squadie filmed of a simple take-off from the north west runway at the exact same time well almost probably there was a tenth of a second difference. Then i watched them side by side in adobe premier elements 8 then in the same software i watched them on-top of each other and there was a clear time difference.
Now i have a theory on that if its the same for a lot of players then if we do collide that the program will have picked up the collision and by the time its happened one player is now well away from the other thus since there is no immediate aircraft in close range to him/her that they don't get damaged registered or not enough damage registered. Also i believe that it has a lot to do with the player's ping level's as i have also been in with a ping of around 700 + and had a collision and flew on with no damage. its a bit confusing to a no-brainer like me :lol :salute
Your not getting it. YOU "had a full head-on collision with another player". He didn't. Otherwise, he would have taken damage too.
And we are 100 % true to life if you both collide you both take damage. Just as in the real world if two objects occupy the same space at the same time the collide. What you are missing is that in AH both planes occupy the same space at different times, and you collide with the plane on your screen that was 100's of MS ago, hence only 1 person takes damage.
HiTech
I would also be willing to bet that 90+% of damage taken in nose to nose "collisions" are more the result of getting HO'd.
Get the Pics out again Lusche.
Can anyone make an animated .gif from a .wmv? I have the film that Lusche posted a while back with both pilot's perspectives superimposed on one another. It would be a simple visual that would open alot of eyes I think.
wrongway
-
Get the Pics out again Lusche.
While my own pics are very informative and nicely illustrating the collision modeling in AH, TEC's illustration is simply the best there is:
(http://img580.imageshack.us/img580/3316/collision1.png)
-
I just wanted to point out that the glitch in the BBS search is not just with basic search - the advanced search is not working properly either. I think we should lighten up on deriding people for not searching, particularly new people.
-
While my
Bollocks..
-
Bollocks..
?
-
lol, Tec's chart is great! :aok
-
I don't LIKE cookies.. can I have a Hooters cheeseburger instead?
-
Its always cute when the noobs bring this up as if its an original topic of discussion. :angel:
-
Hey maus sorry to go off-topic, but what part of Annapolis do you live? I grew up in Eastport Terrace. Ever heard of the Eastport Pharoas? Probably not around anymore, long time ago. Anyway, spent many a day around the City dock and the Academy. I went to Tyler Heights Elementary and Annapolis jr. Left that area in 1975. I know nobody cares, but just wondering.
<S> Oz
-
I don't LIKE cookies.. can I have a Hooters cheeseburger instead?
Somehow, Hooters just doesn't make me think of cheeseburgers. Where the heck is Spikes with a post when you need him?
....
It would be a simple visual that would open alot of eyes I think.
wrongway
<S>
Back in Warbirds days, Phenix (I believe it was, apologies if it was someone else) put together a great series of screenshots that explained it so even a six year old could point out why it was set up the way it was. Didn't help. You can drag the mule to water but it won't make him quit braying.
<S>
-
Sticky Tec's chart! It took me three tries but I finally got a cookie... :rofl
-
Ah yes hitech that has happened but the other night i had a full head-on collision with another player i cant remember who it was but i went down and he didn't. In fact a fellow player on vox told me that he didn't have a single piece of damage to his plane. Now from a full head-on Collision we both should have blown up instantly shouldn't we as that would have been the correct course of action.
Read HiTech's post 10 times, slowly ... then think about what you wrote.
-
(http://i241.photobucket.com/albums/ff252/DropkickYankees/Aces%20High/OhCrap.jpg)
Hold on to ya butts.
-
Hey maus sorry to go off-topic, but what part of Annapolis do you live? I grew up in Eastport Terrace. Ever heard of the Eastport Pharoas? Probably not around anymore, long time ago. Anyway, spent many a day around the City dock and the Academy. I went to Tyler Heights Elementary and Annapolis jr. Left that area in 1975. I know nobody cares, but just wondering.
<S> Oz
I used to live on Back Creek, but I've moved to an area off Bestgate Rd. It's a great town - lots of things to do if you like the water or drinking. I'm not sure what I like better...
-
I remember Bestgate Rd. Out in West Annapolis if I remember correctly.
<S> Oz
-
Well i suggest that in the real world when 2 aircraft collide they both either explode or both start falling from the sky like stone's. Except in a few rare incident's where one or both have managed to get back to base. And neither get a kill from any collision.
I mean is it fair to the point that 2 aircraft collide in the air and one go's down and the other can carry on as if nothing had happened. No it isn't as in the real world when 2 aircraft collide it is 90.9 % likely they both are destroyed instantly or both pilot's have just enough time to escape. Or in a few in fact more than a few time's in WW2 both planes would go down but the poor pilots couldn't escape as their canopy's had jammed due to the collision's.
But i believe that If Ace's want's to stay true to real life as close as possible they should look into the fact that if a collision is registered then both aircraft either blow up or become unflyable. As i say it would be more realistic in that sense.
Thankyou BulletVI
Agreed +1 :salute
-
Agreed +1 :salute
Ok. Simple question. You are the P-47. You think you should take damage from THIS collision:
(http://img222.imageshack.us/img222/8728/ramotherfexg7.jpg)
-
I remember Bestgate Rd. Out in West Annapolis if I remember correctly.
<S> Oz
Yea Bestgate's new alignment runs from Rowe Blvd @ Rt.50 to General's Hwy (Rt.450). I live closer to Rt. 50.
-
Ok. Simple question. You are the P-47. You think you should take damage from THIS collision:
(http://img222.imageshack.us/img222/8728/ramotherfexg7.jpg)
I think that if 2 aircraft collide they both go down remember due to certain factors if 2 aircraft hit each other in any way it is almost the same result as if it flew into a flock of birds ( terminal damage ) or as if it hit a brick wall or the ground ( TOTAL DESTRUCTION ) :)
-
I think that if 2 aircraft collide they both go down remember due to certain factors if 2 aircraft hit each other in any way it is almost the same result as if it flew into a flock of birds ( terminal damage ) or as if it hit a brick wall or the ground ( TOTAL DESTRUCTION ) :)
They do if they occupy the same space in time. Read HiTech's reply to you.
The above picture is a collision (read the text in the chat window).
YOU are the P47. Do you think you deserve to go down?
-
I think that if 2 aircraft collide they both go down remember due to certain factors if 2 aircraft hit each other in any way it is almost the same result as if it flew into a flock of birds ( terminal damage ) or as if it hit a brick wall or the ground ( TOTAL DESTRUCTION ) :)
Bullet don't skirt the following question. If you do , you are truly showing how you have no desire to understand the issue at hand.
What do you propose to do if 2 airplanes don't collide, but 1 plane collides and 1 does not. Do not try stray from this 1 simple question.
HiTech
-
Bullet don't skirt the following question. If you do , you are truly showing how you have no desire to understand the issue at hand.
What do you propose to do if 2 airplanes don't collide, but 1 plane collides and 1 does not. Do not try stray from this 1 simple question.
HiTech
Well is it not true that if 2 aircraft don't collide but 1 doe's through lack of misjudgement or if one wants to collide. they both get damage no matter what the circumstance's.
Now i understand that in on-line gaming certain things are taken into account. but a collision is a collision no matter what the circumstances are HiTech. My point is that if 2 aircraft hit each other 1 will suffer terminal or both suffer terminal damage or 1 will at least beable to limp home. not 1 blows up and the other Carrys on as if nothing has happened.
Ask a pilot what can happen if 2 aircraft collide and he will tell you that 90% of the time the damage is terminal bud and not 1 aircraft blows up and the other can fly on as if nothing has happened.
That's my point hitech when 2 aircraft collide you have 2 object's in motion and when they hit each other its like them hitting a brick wall.
For example you have 2 Spits on a head to head collision OK. now remember they are both moving at speed OK. OK so the first point of impact is the propeller spinner's right. now these are the first damage they shall receive right. but remember that although the spinner's are now not moving forward the rest of the aircraft is as it hasn't yet reached deceleration yet as it is still moving forward at say 200 knots. So you get a crumple effect to both aircraft.
Yes there are certain collision scenarios that dictate 1 aircraft can fly off into the sunset with minor damage. but i am talking of straight head on collions bud where if it happen's by rights both plane's are destroyed.
Heck i will even phone you and get my Father who was an airframe's engineer in the RAF as well for 20 years and he will say the same as me almost to a tee bud :)
A collision is a collision and collisions mean damage to both aircraft it is Simple hell you should even have friendly collisions on and none of this if you shoot them you go down its freindly fire bud. Altho this should only come into effect once both aircraft have taken off and are over 1k away from each other :salute
( By the way have i said that this is the best combat Sim i have found to date ???)
:salute :salute
Please watch this film Hitech its a dog fight between me and EAce and at the end we both collide but he goes down and i stay in the air with a damaged engine where as the way we collided we both should have went down :)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r22846hXSHw
-
Where's Eace's film video? Having just your view is worthless in this discussion.
Here's the part you don't understand. His view of what happened is different than yours. You need to look at both films to see what happened!
I'm not talking about the view from his cockpit in your film. HIS film from HIS cockpit. Because what HE sees and what YOU see are two different things in this virtual world we play in.
-
Where's Eace's film video? Having just your view is worthless in this discussion.
Here's the part you don't understand. His view of what happened is different than yours. You need to look at both films to see what happened!
I'm not talking about the view from his cockpit in your film. HIS film from HIS cockpit. Because what HE sees and what YOU see are two different things in this virtual world we play in.
Here's the video.
http://www.mediafire.com/?x6whmqi9yxeh0mk (http://www.mediafire.com/?x6whmqi9yxeh0mk)
This is films of the same flight from the perspective of each pilot superimposed over each other.
The P-51 Collides. The P-47 does not. (See screen shot in Lusche's post from P-47's view)
Should the P-47 go down or take damage too? From his perspective the P-51 was nowhere near him. Bit, according to the "both should die" gang, the Jug should mysteriously take damage from the P-51 100 yards behind him.
I still have the feeling someone isn't going to get a cookie.
wrongway
-
What do you propose to do if 2 airplanes don't collide, but 1 plane collides and 1 does not. Do not try stray from this 1 simple question.
HiTech
HiTech , could you not send a message to the other plane involved in the collision so collision happen to both parties ?
Both should really should take the punishment for the fact they collided.
-
HiTech , could you not send a message to the other plane involved in the collision so collision happen to both parties ?
Both should really should take the punishment for the fact they collided.
Did you watch the above example?
Did you read what Hitech wrote?
Or. do you want both planes to be damaged if only one collides?
Someone flys past you. You get a Someone has collided with you message. To you. it looks like he is 100 yards to your right. But, suddenly, you go spinning out of control because you've lost your wing due to his collision.
Is this what you want?
No cookie for you.
wrongway
-
Bullet you are saying that you wish to die every time you collide with an airplane?
HiTech
-
Bullet you are saying that you wish to die every time you collide with an airplane?
HiTech
I think he wants to die every time someone collides with him, whether he collides as well or not.
:headscratch:
wrongway
-
Please watch this film Hitech its a dog fight between me and EAce and at the end we both collide but he goes down and i stay in the air with a damaged engine where as the way we collided we both should have went down :)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r22846hXSHw
Not the way I saw it ... which was very hard to see.
His wing tip hit your engine causing a catastrophic failure on his wing, which then ripped off, and your engine was damaged from the collision.
-
Bullet you are saying that you wish to die every time you collide with an airplane?
HiTech
Sounds like it to me ... even tho part of the collision may not be catastrophic to one plane, both planes should fall apart like legos.
-
Bullet you are saying that you wish to die every time you collide with an airplane?
HiTech
No, sir. I don't think that is what he is saying. I have interpreted the comments to mean .... "I have a learning disability; and no matter how much you explain it (with or without pictures) I will still refuse to understand or accept the answer."
-
Heck i will even phone you and get my Father who was an airframe's engineer in the RAF as well for 20 years and he will say the same as me almost to a tee bud :)
:rofl
Look out Hitech..... He is going to tell his daddy on you!! :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl
-
Can anyone make an animated .gif from a .wmv? I have the film that Lusche posted a while back with both pilot's perspectives superimposed on one another. It would be a simple visual that would open alot of eyes I think.
Took me a bit to find the tools, but:
(http://www.gstelmack.com/Collision.gif)
-
Bullet you are saying that you wish to die every time you collide with an airplane?
HiTech
Yeah its expected or at least both plane's go down but you have a chance to bail out depending if it is just a wing collision you have the chance to bail unless you below 1000 feet. but i do believe that if you have two aircraft that goo head to head and collide and both go down or blow up. It will cut down the number of head on firing that a lot of player's use as they know that there is now a chance they will die as well.
I Mean pilot's in WW2 rarely went head on in a dogfight as it was the quickest way to the Pearly Gate's :) It was only done on pure desperation like when 1 pilot was in a dogfight and out numbered. Now against bomber's its a sound tactic as you have a target that is big and easily avoidable.
I just think it's a fairer out come HiTech :salute
-
:rofl
Look out Hitech..... He is going to tell his daddy on you!! :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl
Nope but with his brain and knowledge of airframes its a case if he doesn't know it it ain't worth knowing about :)
He knows far more than me bud cripe's he was working on meteor's to start with :)
-
Did you look at the picture in Monks post?
The issue here is due to the internet there is lag. What you see on your screen can be more than a second ahead or behind what the guy on the other end sees. Thats what Hitech means about not occupying the same SPACE at the same TIME. In the picture Monk posted is the TWO films of the TWO planes taken at the SAME TIME. From one players point of view (The P47's) the 51 comes in and lazily slows to a spot 100 yards behind him and then starts smoking and dives away. From the others point of view (The P51's) the 51 tries to slow for a shot right off the P47s tail but mis-judges it and hits the tail of the P47, starts smoking and dives away.
This is what lag does in on-line gaming. It creates odd happenings like this. So in this senario only one guy would get the "you have collided" message, and that would be the only guy to take damage, seeing as the P47 never saw the guy get close enough to hit him he would fly away with out damage.
If on the other hand if both guys SEE a hit on both of their computers (both receive the "you have collided"message as well as the "xxx has collided with you" message) then BOTH WILL receive damage.
-
but i do believe that if you have two aircraft that goo head to head and collide and both go down or blow up.
You just don't get it ... if your front end sees a direct head on collision and your opponent's front end sees a direct head on collision, you will both die a horrible death according to the collision code.
-
What your not accepting bullethead is that AH is not the real world.
Because of differences in lag, what you see is not what he sees.
For a quick real time illistration, next time your flying fairly close to someone, inside 1k.
Ask him how far away you are from him, and at the exact same moment look at how far away you are on Your end.
You'll find that the 2 numbers are almost never the same.
And you'll also find that they vary from day to day.
Example
Day 1, Ghosth looks at Teeerex flying 350 off his right wing, "Hey Teee, how far away am I on your end?"
Teee comes back, Ghost-mon I have you at 475 bro, ya-ya"
Day 2 same scenario, Tee's at 350 off my wing.
Brother Teee, how far away am I today?
Brother Ghosth I am 725 out and closing, lets go get em.
Take that into a collision situation and one pilot doesn't evade in time, so he "see's" the collision, his Aces High Front end detects that 2 aircraft occupied the same space, does damage to your aircraft accordingly. The other guy on his Front end saw a close pass, but avoided the collision. So no damage.
What your asking for is for the guy that avoided the collision, who did not run into the other aircraft, to take the damage as if he had.
Because we are limited to an internet that is not Faster than Light, (FTL) we will always have to deal with a certain amount of lag. What we see is never going to exactly match what the other guy sees.
Read the article on Lag on the trainers side, and keep reading it until you understand why the collision model is the way it has to be.
-
Nope but with his brain and knowledge of airframes its a case if he doesn't know it it ain't worth knowing about :)
He knows far more than me bud cripe's he was working on meteor's to start with :)
I have no doubt that he is both skilled and knowledgeable in such matters -- As is HiTech (and crew). They have the game coded to inflict damage (often catastrophic) to both planes, parts, and airframes in a collision. while they may or may not be Structural Engineers, the game is coded with enough realism to reflect reasonable damage in such collisions -- sometimes that means a plane limps home, sometimes it falls from the sky.
What you are failing to grasp here is the space-time continuum. In the real world we all occupy ONE space-time continuum. Therefore, if you are driving on the highway and see yourself crash, I assure you, so did the person or object you hit. AH is not one single Space-time continuum. It is in fact, hundreds of space-time continuums. Each player's computer is his/her own space-time. Each player plays his own game as if it were AI. The data from each computer is then sent to the server, processed, and sent back to the respective computers. Then your computer interprets and processes that data and attempts to decide where and when each plane/object is relative to YOUR space-time (at the same time his computer is trying to put your position on his computer relative to HIS space-time).
So, having that in mind, if YOUR computer recognizes the data that you have struck an object in YOUR space-time, the programming of AH (on your 'puter) has to interpret the damage and inflict appropriate injury. HIS computer may or may not plot his position relative to yours in HIS space-time. If it DID, then he also would get a damage message and AH programming on his 'puter would interpret the severity of the collision and inflict appropriate injury. If it DID NOT recognize a collision in HIS space-time then he flies off while you stumble to the ground.
So, in response to your point, I am sure your father is highly intelligent and I mean no disrespect. But his knowledge is NOT relevant to the collision model. His knowledge is VERY relevant to 'real life' collisions. AH is NOT real life. At this point, I think Einstein's theories in space-time is more appropriately applied.
<SALUTE>
-
OK so a few of you think i don't understand the lag issue well i do as in an earlier post you shall see that i commented on the fact that me and a fellow squaddie tested this out and the result was around a 5 second difference on our screen's. But what I'm saying is that lag has a tendencies that if 2 player's collide some times one can fly off as if nothing has happened or he has gone down and i have only engine damage say. now if it was a head on collision we should be both dead no matter what lag dictates. But in the case of a few collisions that has happened to me in the past if a wing has hit my engine. shouldn't i also have prop damage to ???? you know like one blade gets chopped of in the collision forcing me to bail out !"!!!!!!!! Then there is the impact it self which can most likely jam the canopy thus it cant open so you are left with having to sit there and go down with your ship. :)
-
OK so a few of you think i don't understand the lag issue well i do .... now if it was a head on collision we should be both dead no matter what lag dictates.
Once again, you are failing to grasp..... How do YOU know HIS computer 'saw' a head-on collision? His space-time is different than yours. While you 'saw' a head-on smash up, he may very have 'seen' a pull up at the last second and clipped your canopy with his gear, or he may have 'seen' no collision at all. Unless you have both films and the ability to synchronize both times, you cannot know where he actually was relative to your computer's interpretation.
-
Yes but i am all so calling for a wider range of damage to happen after a collision.
Let me give an example here.
Ok you go head to head with your opponent right. Now you both shoot at say 300 yards you both do no real damage from that so 1 dive's and the other pulls up ok. Now here is the clincher right Now in doing this you now have a collided message come up saying you or such an such has collided right. But you both have no real damage from it right you bath can carry on ok But maybe you both shouldn't be able to as the parts or your plane that collided are your prop's. Now if they collided what happens to them ( Remember a spinning prop at idle speed can make mince meat of a human being )
Your props should now have fatal damage ie they are in bits now.
That is what i want to see as then really if both planes do collide the one part that shall always get damaged would be the propeller. Even for a head on collision who care's if i blow up but the other player can fly off with a damaged engine but no prop damage. i mean come on if my wing hit his spinner cone first the prop would make Swiss cheese of my wing tip and his prop would also have grave damage to it thus rendering his plane an overgrown glider :)
So that's me way of thinking :)
Im sorry if i have up set anyone but this is my felling on the matter and that is what the forums are allso for the expresion of your concern's and thoughts on certain matters.
:salute And have a good day to you all :salute
-
Yes but i am all so calling for a wider range of damage to happen after a collision.
So that's me way of thinking :)
Okay... I will concede the point that props could/should take damage when the prop is involved in a collision. I don't think that I have ever noticed that the prop is damageable on the "CTRL-D" function. To that extent, I grant that you that point.
However you will still be in the same boat.... your computer and his/hers would still have to interpret data in the same way in different space-times. You still have no way of knowing what part of the other players plane actually impacted with yours. Merely adding the prop as a damageable part does not resolve the debate.
However, if all you wanted was a damageable prop, you should simply ask HiTech for a damageable prop. Then the rest of this discussion would not have been necessary.
-
if both planes do collide the one part that shall always get damaged would be the propeller.
Even if we were talking real life here, you can't think of any type of head-on collision where the prop wasn't involved?
-
OK I get it now. Instead of this being a collision issue discussion, it is really now a discussion on a "wish list" item of adding more graphical details as well as enlarging the "damage list".
Right?
-
I was in a collision with a F4U while flying in a Spit8. He dove down on me, and his wing chopped my wing off at the root, and his wing was taken off at about mid wing. I had to bail, and he flew off. In this scenario, I thought that was was a fair outcome: both planes suffered even though the other guy clearly ran into me.
My issue with collisions is not with the technical aspects of how they work, it's the fairness of the outcome. Is it fair if only one plane detects the collision, it is damaged and the other plane gets a pass? Conversely, is it fair for your plane to be damaged for no apparent reason from your viewpoint, although it actually collided with another from that planes perspective? Is there any reasonable way to solve this inequity, or does everybody think that the way it works now needs no improvement?
-
Is it fair if only one plane detects the collision, it is damaged and the other plane gets a pass? Conversely, is it fair for your plane to be damaged for no apparent reason from your viewpoint, although it actually collided with another from that planes perspective? Is there any reasonable way to solve this inequity, or does everybody think that the way it works now needs no improvement?
The thing that does need improvement is the speed / latency of the internet.
Because THAT is the thing that causes all the discrepancies. The collision model we do have now is the best possible solution for the "two realities" dilemma. It's the fairest approach: what you see is what you get. In some way it's a compromise, but the best there is.
There are in fact only 3 basic ways the game could handle collisions: "What you see is what you get" (what we have now), "both take damage", or shutting collisions off completely. Unfortunately, both latter versions create MUCH more problems for gameplay than they are solving.
-
or does everybody think that the way it works now needs no improvement?
Until the internet gets much, much, MUCH faster you will lag in this game.
If you have both pilots film a 1 on 1 fight you will notice, upon watching both, they look slightly different.
Both parties don't "see" the same fight because of the time it takes to go from their computer, to the server, and back again.
It can be subtle, or huge depending on both players connection.
Because of this what you saw as a collision the other player could have seen as a near (or far) miss.
One player collided on their Front End and the other managed to avoid the collision on their Front End.
The way it is now is the best it could be given the internet connections.
The guy who collides takes damage, and the guy who avoids the collision does not take damage. (they didn't collide)
I don't see how anybody has an issues with how it is currently.
Don't hit them.
It's that easy.
-
Okay... I will concede the point that props could/should take damage when the prop is involved in a collision. I don't think that I have ever noticed that the prop is damageable on the "CTRL-D" function. To that extent, I grant that you that point.
However you will still be in the same boat.... your computer and his/hers would still have to interpret data in the same way in different space-times. You still have no way of knowing what part of the other players plane actually impacted with yours. Merely adding the prop as a damageable part does not resolve the debate.
However, if all you wanted was a damageable prop, you should simply ask HiTech for a damageable prop. Then the rest of this discussion would not have been necessary.
Yes i do know of and understand the time and space relevance you are talking about but really if its a game who cre's that when you coolide you both blow up. Because its a game we can start again not like in real life :)
-
Yes i do know of and understand the time and space relevance you are talking about but really if its a game who cre's that when you coolide you both blow up. Because its a game we can start again not like in real life :)
What you are not understanding is both didn't collide.
You are asking to give both planes damage when only one collided and one missed.
You would have planes flying 500' away from you knocking you from the skies because THEY 'saw' a collision.
-
I was in a collision with a F4U while flying in a Spit8. He dove down on me, and his wing chopped my wing off at the root, and his wing was taken off at about mid wing. I had to bail, and he flew off. In this scenario, I thought that was was a fair outcome: both planes suffered even though the other guy clearly ran into me.
My issue with collisions is not with the technical aspects of how they work, it's the fairness of the outcome. Is it fair if only one plane detects the collision, it is damaged and the other plane gets a pass? Conversely, is it fair for your plane to be damaged for no apparent reason from your viewpoint, although it actually collided with another from that planes perspective? Is there any reasonable way to solve this inequity, or does everybody think that the way it works now needs no improvement?
Please help me understand HOW there is an inequity?
You have to understand that you are playing the game on your computer with your AH software. I am playing it on my computer with my AH software. In truth we are not actually playing each other. You are playing against another cartoon plane and I am playing against another cartoon plane each on our respective computers. What is, in fact, happening is that the data my computer sends to the server influences where objects on your computer are. Conversely, your data influences where my computer puts the cartoon plane against which I am playing. If you crash into that plane (on your end) damage is inflicted. At the same time, I may not have collided at all, so I continue flying as if nothing happened.... why???? because on my computer NOTHING happened. I am still playing my game and you are still playing yours. We were never actually in combat with each other. We merely influence what the AI planes in the other person's computer is doing. THAT is why each person receives the damage that their own computer is interpreting. The game you are playing is NOT the same as the game I am playing (spatially speaking).
-
but really if its a game who cre's that when you coolide you both blow up. Because its a game we can start again not like in real life :)
So you would not care if your P-47 would blow up from this collision? (It's the actual moment the collision happens)
(http://img222.imageshack.us/img222/8728/ramotherfexg7.jpg)
-
Actually before I flew AH, I flew another WW2-sim online called European Air War, 8 player max. The net-coding was horrible with massive lag, but still it used the alternative to the collision system of AH. You could fly towards an enemy, dive well under him and still lose a wing from a collision. Fair? well, both took damage and since it was what I was used to I actully advocated for this solution back in the time I first started AH. (Knowing fully the dilemma caused by the lag).
To be honest I don't think it would change much which of the two solutions you use. Most would adapt if AH went the EAW way (not gonna happen), and there would just be regular threads on the BBS about "How come I died in a collision that didn't happen?" instead of the "How come my opponent didn't die in the collsion that killed me?"-kind
-
Double post
-
Back to Maus original point.... Fault is a civil concern related to who pays for damage in a collision. It is irrelevant (even in Real Life) as to how much damage or to whom it is inflicted. AH is not the insurance company they don't care about fault. A real life example of this .... a pedestrian at a crosswalk sees a car coming down the street. The pedestrian knows he has the right of way and steps into the road knowing the car is required to stop. The car driver is texting his new GF and fails to stop for the crosswalk pedestrian. The car impacts the pedestrian leaving only his shoes marking the point of collision. The pedestrian is NOT at fault in this collision. But the question is.... is the pedestrian any less dead? :rofl
In AH the damage inflicted to you (or even if a collision occurred) depends on what your computer 'saw' relative to your AH software programming. The damage inflicted to me is relative to what my computer 'saw' relative to my AH software programming. Nothing more, nothing less. Fault or intent plays no part in the damage.
-
Server issues... double post. Sorry
-
Please help me understand HOW there is an inequity?
You have to understand that you are playing the game on your computer with your AH software. I am playing it on my computer with my AH software. In truth we are not actually playing each other. You are playing against another cartoon plane and I am playing against another cartoon plane each on our respective computers. What is, in fact, happening is that the data my computer sends to the server influences where objects on your computer are. Conversely, your data influences where my computer puts the cartoon plane against which I am playing. If you crash into that plane (on your end) damage is inflicted. At the same time, I may not have collided at all, so I continue flying as if nothing happened.... why???? because on my computer NOTHING happened. I am still playing my game and you are still playing yours. We were never actually in combat with each other. We merely influence what the AI planes in the other person's computer is doing. THAT is why each person receives the damage that their own computer is interpreting. The game you are playing is NOT the same as the game I am playing (spatially speaking).
Take the clipboard map have you ever wondered why you see a red dot at the edge of the square and you blink and it is now almost in the centre of the square. The dot never moves in small leaps it's allways big leaps that's due to time difference as it takes alonger time for us in Europe to receive the data from the Server than it does from when playing in the US.
I believe now that is what and why some people are saying about the collisions. I may be wrong and i may be right :)
-
I just wonder why they rarely answer that simple question... ;)
-
Sigh
http://trainers.hitechcreations.com/lag/lag.htm (http://trainers.hitechcreations.com/lag/lag.htm)
Collisions - While you may not be able to prevent someone from flying through you and causing a collision on your front-end, remember that he may not have seen a collision on his front-end and, as far as he is concerned, a collision did not occur. While it may be frustrating to watch the other guy fly away while you tumble to the ground with damage from a collision, it beats the alternative of you tumbling to the ground when you know for a fact that you were not part of a collision.
No one has ever submitted film where someone intentionally ran into another plane and were able to fly off without taking damage, while the other guy dies.
So until that day happens there is no "ram" and if you want to call someone a "ace pilot" you'd best look in the mirror.
Also remember only you can cause, or prevent a collision.
-
Question: When Lusche explains how collisions work for the billionth time, shouldn't he get a free car or something?
So you would not care if your P-47 would blow up from this collision? (It's the actual moment the collision happens)
(http://img222.imageshack.us/img222/8728/ramotherfexg7.jpg)
-
Please help me understand HOW there is an inequity?
I suppose that it comes down to reasonable people can reasonably disagree. The inequity is technical, logical and emotional. We can all agree that the state of the internet can cause each player to have a slightly different view of the situation, a technical inequity. If you collide with another plane, you would expect that the other plane would be damaged, at least to some extent (and maybe it was) - this is the logical inequity. But may times the game records damage/death to only one party when it is obvious from the dead person's point of view that the other aircraft should have suffered some consequence. That is the emotional aspect of the inequity.
-
I suppose that it comes down to reasonable people can reasonably disagree. The inequity is technical, logical and emotional. We can all agree that the state of the internet can cause each player to have a slightly different view of the situation, a technical inequity. If you collide with another plane, you would expect that the other plane would be damaged, at least to some extent (and maybe it was) - this is the logical inequity. But may times the game records damage/death to only one party when it is obvious from the dead person's point of view that the other aircraft should have suffered some consequence. That is the emotional aspect of the inequity.
Hence this topic can turn into an emotional roller coaster ride like it has done ( but was it a fun roller coaster ride :headscratch: :headscratch: )
-
Take the clipboard map have you ever wondered why you see a red dot at the edge of the square and you blink and it is now almost in the centre of the square. The dot never moves in small leaps it's allways big leaps that's due to time difference as it takes alonger time for us in Europe to receive the data from the Server than it does from when playing in the US.
That has absolutely nothing to do with lag. It's a matter of refresh rate of the dot-radar. This is set to a few seconds in MA, while in some scenario-events you sometime see it at several minutes. Also two planes sitting 10 yards from each other would not give out two dots on the map, no matter how long you waited or zoomed in the map, simply because of the resolution they are updated with.
I believe now that is what and why some people are saying about the collisions. I may be wrong and i may be right :)
You are only wrong.
-
That has absolutely nothing to do with lag. It's a matter of refresh rate of the dot-radar. This is set to a few seconds in MA, while in some scenario-events you sometime see it at several minutes. Also two planes sitting 10 yards from each other would not give out two dots on the map, no matter how long you waited or zoomed in the map, simply because of the resolution they are updated with.
You are only wrong.
Ok cool i only heard that when i first started the game a bit back :)
-
Take the clipboard map have you ever wondered why you see a red dot at the edge of the square and you blink and it is now almost in the centre of the square. The dot never moves in small leaps it's allways big leaps that's due to time difference as it takes alonger time for us in Europe to receive the data from the Server than it does from when playing in the US.
I believe now that is what and why some people are saying about the collisions. I may be wrong and i may be right :)
I could very well be mistaken on the following point, but if I am correct in my understanding, the speed at which the data travels is near the speed of light (186K mph). Given the distance between Texas and Europe (or anywhere in the world) the overall time difference is so small as to be a non-factor. The lag effect relates more the the communicating computers ability to process the information received (i.e how much data it can handle and calculate at once) once it arrives at its destination as well as the ability (i.e. how much data) it can send out to the receiving computer/server.
On this point, I would ask that you NOT take as cast-in-stone. I could be incorrect in my thinking. There may be others who can refute or corroborate the logic. But it is something to think about.
-
Sorta NCLawman. In worst case scenario, opposite side of earth, the signal has to travel 20000km at 300km/s. That makes the theoretical minimum lag about 66 ms. I have about half that distance from my home (so 33ms away) and I get a regular ping time around 180. So like you said, the major factor is the data processing at servers, but the physical restriction is in the measurable range.
-
Actually in re-reading my post I realized that I have made a typo... the speed of light is actually 186K per second (not hour). Please excuse the error.
-
unfortunately it's not one strait line from a computer in Europe to the server in Texas. It has to go though 20+ servers and who knows how many connections all of which slow it down some.
-
unfortunately it's not one strait line from a computer in Europe to the server in Texas. It has to go though 20+ servers and who knows how many connections all of which slow it down some.
That is correct. Which reinforces the point that lag is related to computer(s) processing power rather than the speed vs. distance in which the data must travel. If I am in NC and trying to communicate with the server in TX, but for whatever reason I must route through 8 servers to get there, my lag will LIKELY be higher than a person from Europe whose info only bounced on this occasion through 3 servers, correct? (That is not to say that this is a factual case, but rather the determining factor in lag delay is more closely tied to the number of junctions a signal must travel rather than physical distance. Would I be correct in that hypothesis?)
Factor also in the fact that some ISP have given priority to specific types of communications. (IE not all internet traffic is created equal.) I know that there has been some fight and legislation here in the States to regulate or rather de-regulate the internet traffic. That is to say that it is first come first serve rather than prioritizing certain traffic and giving it "a cut in line" so to speak. This also could cause delays resulting in game lag.
-
Took me a bit to find the tools, but:
(http://www.gstelmack.com/Collision.gif)
Excellent job. I'll save this, or the link, and spam it in every collisiom thread.
Thank you very much for your work.
I could very well be mistaken on the following point, but if I am correct in my understanding, the speed at which the data travels is near the speed of light (186K mph). Given the distance between Texas and Europe (or anywhere in the world) the overall time difference is so small as to be a non-factor. The lag effect relates more the the communicating computers ability to process the information received (i.e how much data it can handle and calculate at once) once it arrives at its destination as well as the ability (i.e. how much data) it can send out to the receiving computer/server.
On this point, I would ask that you NOT take as cast-in-stone. I could be incorrect in my thinking. There may be others who can refute or corroborate the logic. But it is something to think about.
Hitech stated at one point that the further away you were, the less frequent position updates are. That is why you will see a distant dot jump along instead of moving linearly.
Just think of the map as being "updated" instead of being "real time". Not so much to do with distance data is travelling at all.
wrongway
-
Hence this topic can turn into an emotional roller coaster ride like it has done ( but was it a fun roller coaster ride :headscratch: :headscratch: )
:rolleyes:
Yeah, it's a real hoot - it never get's old, even though we went through it over and over the first hundred or so times more than a decade ago for many of us (how much over for some of us some of you new guys might not believe if you knew.)
<S>
-
What I find ironic is that two planes can collide but only one reports damage and yet you can keep an airplane in front of you but still shoot you down. I fly the only spitfire that doesn't have a tail gunner :).
Semp
-
What I find ironic is that two planes can collide but only one reports damage and yet you can keep an airplane in front of you but still shoot you down. I fly the only spitfire that doesn't have a tail gunner :).
Semp
What's so tough to figure out?
This isn't real life. Your computer is communicating with another computer in Texas and that data has to flow through many other computers along the way. This may take several seconds. What you see on your screen and what the other guy sees on his screen are two different things due to this time delay.
Whether or not you take damage in a collision depends on what the computer (game server) in Texas saw. There are only three choices.
#1-If the game server sees that you and the other guy occupied the same space at the same time (you have collided, so and so has collided with you) you will both take damage.
#2-If you crash into someone else (you have collided) but the server sees that the other guy wasn't involved (the communication time delay thing... see video image above) you take damage.
#3-If someone crashes into you (so and so has collided with you) and the game server in Texas sees that you weren't involved (the time delay thing again) he takes damage and you fly away.
-
Wrong server doesn't see anything. Server only sees what my puter tells it.
Semp
-
What I find ironic is that two planes can collide but only one reports damage and yet you can keep an airplane in front of you but still shoot you down. I fly the only spitfire that doesn't have a tail gunner :).
Semp
The issue isn't "two planes collide" and that is what seems to confuse and confound everyone.
The only time two planes collide is when you see on your screen SoandSo has collided with you and You have collided.
Otherwise, only one plane collided and takes damage from the collision.
And, as stated above somewhere, collisions are determined by what is seen on each player's front end. Both planes are not necessarily in the same place at the same time as seen on each players screen. Ever been shot by someone after they have passed you on your screen?
I also contend that 90% of damage taken on a nose to nose pass involving a "collision" is due to bullets.
Hello HO.
wrongway
-
If it helps think of your Front End and his FE as being wonder woman's invisible plane. No one can see it, but you can see out of it. Since you can't fight what you can't see, HT coaded it so each of those invisible planes tows the image of your plane behind you.
When your shooting, your in the invisible plane, shooting at the target towed by the other guy.
Its done on your end with your FE. If you manage the lead and the timing correctly you'll hit the other guys towed target. At that point AH sends the other guy a packet of info that says you've been shot in (this location) with (These guns) taking (this much) damage. Your FE calculates the damage, your wing falls off, your pilot is dead you go poof.
So the gunnery side is actually pretty simple, with one minor caveat.
When your in a fight with someone, your not seeing his invisible plane where he sits with the guns.
Your seeing the plane shaped target that he is towing behind him. And the rope length towing is is directly tied to his connection to HTC. So he is actually closer to you than it appears, he may be a lot closer. He may in fact be almost ready to shoot, depending on where you see his towed target, and what maneuvers your both doing.
Now with collisions the same situation apply's, but remember, you can't see, or run into him, in his invisible plane. You can only run into his towed target. But the ropes are not the same length! So you have no way of being able to tell where he is. All you can see is his towed target. This is why you can not "ram". In order to do a true ram you would have to know how long his rope is, then try to fly ahead of his towed target so that he runs into your towed target. But you don't really even know how long your rope is, much less his.
So up to this point no one has ever posted film proving that it is even possible. So there is no "Ram"
So on his FE, he see's you coming, he sees that you are going to run into each other, and he jerks his stick, causing his plane to move and just miss hitting your towed target. So on "His FE" there was no collision. He saw a miss, no collision happened, so he took no damage. Not from a collision, if you were shooting yes he'd take that damage. But he has not run into anything. So he will not take damage from running into something.
On your invisible plane you didn't see it happening quite in time. So you run into the plane shaped target he's towing. Your FE goes "Danger Will Robinson!" Does the math to see which parts intersected with which parts, does the damage to your plane, and sends him the message that on your FE you ran into him.
Remember, you did not run into him, you ran into his towed target. You can't run into him, because he's in Wonder Woman's invisible plane.
The other thing that comes into play, is that just before you run into his towed target, the other guy may be shooting at you as well. So you get all the damage all at once, from both his guns, and your collision.
And you go Poof, and your back in the tower shaking your fist and cursing the other guy.
When you should be looking in the mirror and saying "Grow UP" Cause only you can prevent collisions.
Only you can educate yourself so that you understand what happens and how to avoid it.
If you were in a collision, its Y O U R fault.
Your control of your airplane put you in that situation.
No exceptions, no excuses, no whining.
Fly to miss the other guy, and you will.
-
Can someone give me a ride to the ER? I just facepalmed so hard I broke my nose, and now my eyes are swelling shut.
-
The issue isn't "two planes collide" and that is what seems to confuse and confound everyone.
The only time two planes collide is when you see on your screen SoandSo has collided with you and You have collided.
Otherwise, only one plane collided and takes damage from the collision.
And, as stated above somewhere, collisions are determined by what is seen on each player's front end. Both planes are not necessarily in the same place at the same time as seen on each players screen. Ever been shot by someone after they have passed you on your screen?
I also contend that 90% of damage taken on a nose to nose pass involving a "collision" is due to bullets.
Hello HO.
wrongway
Fixed.
-
I find it incredible that some people can just not grasp this concept. I find it even more incredible that some people here refuse to grasp the concept and continue to want it done the "other way".
-
I find it incredible that some people can just not grasp this concept.
Some things are even more incredible.
A few weeks ago OG (then named Bruno or Pruno) was boasting on 200 about "finally having exposed me as a LIAR" when I tried to explain the concept of lag an the resulting different realities on our screens. :lol
-
I suggest that anyone getting a fatal collision on their screen should stop receiving any position data from the plane they collided with. They should just see an animation of the other plane also plummeting down, or simply black out with a concussion. This would stop the whining, and the real other plane, that did not collide at his end, could keep on flying and playing without being accused of a collision. :)
-
A few weeks ago OG (then named Bruno or Pruno) was boasting on 200 about "finally having exposed me as a LIAR" when I tried to explain the concept of lag an the resulting different realities on our screens. :lol
thats been bugging me for a while, this pruno guy has one of the worst attitudes ive seen in AH and I knew I recognised his particular brand of bile. just couldnt remember his old callsign. OG, of course. particularly enjoyed his unprovoked rant to Lute and Saber a coupla weeks back about how WMs were traitors and should leave knits and never come back. classy. :rolleyes:
-
Bullet you are saying that you wish to die every time you collide with an airplane?
HiTech
I don't think he said that. He said when two objects hit, no matter the reason. both take some degree of damage.
-
I don't think he said that. He said when two objects hit, no matter the reason. both take some degree of damage.
yeah, and that doesn't make any sense in the virtual world, as time and space vary between computers...
So HiTech's question stands...
-
At the end of a day its a game we collide we can start again not like a lot of poor WW2 veterans that collided in the air they can never start again that is why i say if they both collide so be it we blow up or both go down or bail out at the end of the you can start your sortie again unlike some of the brave men who cant :) :salute
-
At the end of a day its a game we collide we can start again not like a lot of poor WW2 veterans that collided in the air they can never start again that is why i say if they both collide so be it we blow up or both go down or bail out at the end of the you can start your sortie again unlike some of the brave men who cant :) :salute
Bullet you have been way off base and trying to eat your cake and and keep it. Because you want something that is physically impossible. And also you change topic at any question and then speak about multiple issues so again I ask.
1. If you see a plane fly by you at 50 yards, do you then wish to die in a collision? Don't say only if they both collide that is not the question. Don't say I want the other guy to die in when we collide that is not the question.
The question really is a yes or no question. Do you wish to die when you see a plane fly by you 50 yards away?
2. If you see your self collide with a plane do you wish to DIE EVERY time it happens. Don't speak about other planes, I'M only ask what you wish would happen to YOU and YOU only.
What happens to anyone else I really am not interested in. I only want to know what happens to you and you alone.
These really are 2 simple yes or no questions.
HiTech
-
Bullet you have been way off base and trying to eat your cake and and keep it. Because you want something that is physically impossible. And also you change topic at any question and then speak about multiple issues so again I ask.
1. If you see a plane fly by you at 50 yards, do you then wish to die in a collision? Don't say only if they both collide that is not the question. Don't say I want the other guy to die in when we collide that is not the question.
The question really is a yes or no question. Do you wish to die when you see a plane fly by you 50 yards away?
2. If you see your self collide with a plane do you wish to DIE EVERY time it happens. Don't speak about other planes, I'M only ask what you wish would happen to YOU and YOU only.
What happens to anyone else I really am not interested in. I only want to know what happens to you and you alone.
These really are 2 simple yes or no questions.
HiTech
How do bullets score strikes. Are they not colliding with the aircraft? When talking about two objects. Being with each others damage spear or bubble wouldn’t both take damage?
-
Bullet you have been way off base and trying to eat your cake and and keep it. Because you want something that is physically impossible. And also you change topic at any question and then speak about multiple issues so again I ask.
1. If you see a plane fly by you at 50 yards, do you then wish to die in a collision? Don't say only if they both collide that is not the question. Don't say I want the other guy to die in when we collide that is not the question.
The question really is a yes or no question. Do you wish to die when you see a plane fly by you 50 yards away?
2. If you see your self collide with a plane do you wish to DIE EVERY time it happens. Don't speak about other planes, I'M only ask what you wish would happen to YOU and YOU only.
What happens to anyone else I really am not interested in. I only want to know what happens to you and you alone.
These really are 2 simple yes or no questions.
HiTech
1 50 yards is not collision its enough of a gap to fly a formation of B17's Through. So Nope No Die
2 if collision does happen then heck why the hell not die straight off its the quickest way back to the hanger and as i said why moan we can start all over again cant we it ain't like you die for real or get electric shocks through yer head phones is it. Every time you die.
But even if i collide and the other player doesn't collide if you say that what's on my screen is different to the other guys screen. Cant the collision detection show him blow up on my screen but he stay alive to fight while i blow up or fall to the ground in tiny bits of aircraft. ??????
P.S sorry if you feel that i aint listening but i am im just not glued to the forum's like some other player's are Bud :salute
Oh and Hitech if you dont want my opinions or arnt willing to let me get a better understanding of the game and its works why dont you ban me from the General Forum's ;) It seems to me that when you try to put your 2 cents in or ask if it can be done you :-
1 either get picked on
2 people don't understand what you are asking or post thus they tend to get all silent abusive with you.
3 Do anything to put you down instead of trying to help other's understand the full picture ( REMEMBER YOU AINT GOING TO BE ON THIS EARTH FOREVER ARE YOU YOU SHOULD BE HELPING THE NEW PLAYERS TO UNDERSTAND NO MATTER HOW FRUSTRATING IT IS. )
4 And you constantly run in to people who think they are all high and mighty just because they sit at a computer desk and punch a few keys and drink coffee all day When they have never even done a days hard graft or got their pretty manicured finger's dirty.
You know i cant wait for the day to come when were going to have to destroy all computer's in the world as they will be taken over the world ( Not to happen in my lifetime :lol )
-
1 50 yards is not collision its enough of a gap to fly a formation of B17's Through. So Nope No Die
2 if collision does happen then heck why the hell not die straight off its the quickest way back to the hanger and as i said why moan we can start all over again cant we it ain't like you die for real or get electric shocks through yer head phones is it. Every time you die.
But even if i collide and the other player doesn't collide if you say that what's on my screen is different to the other guys screen. Cant the collision detection show him blow up on my screen but he stay alive to fight while i blow up or fall to the ground in tiny bits of aircraft. ??????
P.S sorry if you feel that i aint listening but i am im just not glued to the forum's like some other player's are Bud :salute
Oh and Hitech if you dont want my opinions or arnt willing to let me get a better understanding of the game and its works why dont you ban me from the General Forum's ;) It seems to me that when you try to put your 2 cents in or ask if it can be done you :-
1 either get picked on
2 people don't understand what you are asking or post thus they tend to get all silent abusive with you.
3 Do anything to put you down instead of trying to help other's understand the full picture ( REMEMBER YOU AINT GOING TO BE ON THIS EARTH FOREVER ARE YOU YOU SHOULD BE HELPING THE NEW PLAYERS TO UNDERSTAND NO MATTER HOW FRUSTRATING IT IS. )
4 And you constantly run in to people who think they are all high and mighty just because they sit at a computer desk and punch a few keys and drink coffee all day When they have never even done a days hard graft or got their pretty manicured finger's dirty.
You know i cant wait for the day to come when were going to have to destroy all computer's in the world as they will be taken over the world ( Not to happen in my lifetime :lol )
Bullet there have been many people trying to help you understand including me. But you have shown no desire to learn.
HiTech
-
Sorry you feel that way but i let you in on a fact about me. Due to head injuries i received in a car crash around 3 years back i now don't have the ability to take all new info in i also forget some of what i have read before i get the chance to respond in full. Sorry if this is a nuisance to you but i cant help it when a drunk lorry driver crashes into my car. :( Cripe's i had learn how to play a flight sim all over again and how to do other thing's :(
-
Edit: But having read the above post, I apologise for any offense Bullet.
-
now dont get me wrong the team at aces high II have done a great job of creating and modeling aircraft within aces high II. But there is one point i would like to point out to them. that is from some of the later war aircraft i.e the tempest the typhoon the P-51 and a few others. now the flight models are great but i feel that the aces team have forgotten one factor about these aircraft.and that is that a typhoon will only start to outclimb a Spit 8 or zero in a 1000 feet per minute climb but above that it wont in real life due to power to weight ratio's of the aircraft. the tempest is heavier than the spit 8 an zero so thus if it climbs more than 1000 feet per minute it looses speed. this is due to a physics factor that i believe they havent forgoten but have kept the same for every aircraft within the game. And that physics factor is GRAVITY. Basics physics dictates that a 1kg object needs 3 times its weight to counteract gravity. now thats a basic rule that all aircraft designers have lived by. and again physics dictates that the heavier the object the more power it needs to overcome gravity at a more accute angle. so i ask can a tempest out clime a spit 8 or a zero at a climb angle of 75 degrees for more than 30 seconds i dont thinkso and im a trained air frames engineer. i also accept that computers and servers and progams wont give you the exact realism you need in a game but sureley even thats not possible with computer programing.
so i would like your opinion on this please as i believe this to be an opened minded subject free to all opinions <Salute> All
First you state you're a "air frames engineer".
Then your father is one.
Now you have a head injury as an excuse? After I simply tell you like it is that in this very thread many people have been trying to help you understand. Stop arguing and start asking questions.
HiTech
-
Bullet that knife cuts both ways.
If your going to post in a thread then you must suffer the slings and arrows that result from that post.
If your not willing to put up with the slings and arrows then don't say anything.
Also, I didn't see anyone pick on you, or freeze you out.
In fact 3 times in this thread I have tried my absolute level best to educate you.
But you refuse to learn. You refuse to accept what anyone else says is true.
And you refuse to get pinned down on the subject.
When people try to point out where your mistaken you try to change the subject or play the pity card.
Sorry but that doesn't work here.
If you can't take the heat, stay out of the kitchen.
-
First you state you're a "air frames engineer".
Then your father is one.
Now you have a head injury as an excuse? After I simply tell you like it is that in this very thread many people have been trying to help you understand. Stop arguing and start asking questions.
HiTech
I accept what you have said HiTech
And i am just giving you the truth for why you and a few other's think i don't listen.
Hitech I like my father am an airframes engineer only like the little boy who idolised his father i obviously followed in his footstep's. And i am not lying about the Head injury's i received in a Car crash 3 years ago. I still see the Lorry ( Semi truck to American's ) Head light's coming straight for me every night. In fact even a simple head on collision in the game can trigger the memory's of that night. Now i try not to let it hamper me or use it as an excuse as i am not like that i try to pick up and go. But with things like if i read the newspaper by the time i have read the first line of the Story i have forgotten the title. Just like by the first time i have finished my first sentence in a post i have forgotten what the last post said. Even scrolling down the page to look at the previous post by the time i write another sentence its Gone again. My long term memory is somewhat OK but short term is bad. And now i am destined to live the rest of my life with this and believe me it hurt's me as if i meet you all one day i am sure we would all automatically be real good friend's. Heck HiTech i even forget that you built and designed the game. But please do accept that at the moment thing's are bad for me.
All i ask is that if people can bear with me as after a month or more i can remember thing's like this topic and what has been discussed more clearly
Thankyou
Now if anyone fails to believe me i can post my medical file's for all to see.
:salute :salute All and please do have a nice day :)
-
Bullet that knife cuts both ways.
If you can't take the heat, stay out of the kitchen.
A regular OH God whats his face ??? :headscratch: :headscratch: :headscratch: UMMMM
Oh Yeah A regular Gordon Ramsey here :lol
And P.S i never ask nor need pity thats what a mother give's to her 8 year old child. :mad:
-
This will probably be the most tackyest, poor taste thing I ever post, but here goes:
You, BulletVI, survived a head on collision....
wrongway
-
I for one want to thank you Bullet - for making me feel at home!
Been occasionally lurking on the boards, and noticed again and again how it seems like NOTHING has changed in the time I've been away. Although the names have changed, there are still guys shouting "YOU WANTED TO SEE THE FILM - SO HERE IT IS!!!". Still have complaints about hording and base capturers, still occasional rants about the way the game ought to be played.
But I've noticed so very few collision rants. Made me wonder if the message had finally gotten through, if people finally understood why things have to work the way they do.
But Bullet, you've restored my faith in the universal constancy of the AH BBS. At least we know there's SOMETHING in this world of chaos that we can rely on!
-
This will probably be the most tackyest, poor taste thing I ever post, but here goes:
You, BulletVI, survived a head on collision....
wrongway
Yes i did wrongway only because i ducked down between the driver seat and passenger seat and the type of car i was driving as well an 2002 Honda civic My first car and shall now allways buy a Honda Civic as it saved my life :)
-
Iceman24 anyone?
-
Iceman24 anyone?
Depends . . . you mean as example or as shade?
-
Depends . . . you mean as example or as shade?
Example.
-
I for one want to thank you Bullet - for making me feel at home!
Been occasionally lurking on the boards, and noticed again and again how it seems like NOTHING has changed in the time I've been away. Although the names have changed, there are still guys shouting "YOU WANTED TO SEE THE FILM - SO HERE IT IS!!!". Still have complaints about hording and base capturers, still occasional rants about the way the game ought to be played.
But I've noticed so very few collision rants. Made me wonder if the message had finally gotten through, if people finally understood why things have to work the way they do.
But Bullet, you've restored my faith in the universal constancy of the AH BBS. At least we know there's SOMETHING in this world of chaos that we can rely on!
The more things change.... yadda yadda yadda. ;)
-
Example.
OK. I thought I missed a dead perp in here somewhere.
-
OK. I thought I missed a dead perp in here somewhere.
That will be next... I'm sure. :D
-
That will be next... I'm sure. :D
Yup and its me :lol :rofl :rofl
-
I have been reading about collision attacks since I hve been playing. There is a simple solution to end the complaints. If there is a collision both planes go down no one gets the kill. Sounds simple to me
-
alot of ppl need to learn how the collision model works i find it pretty easy to avoid a collision on my part and only make them lose a wing im sure most have figured it out by now :D :bolt:
-
I have been reading about collision attacks since I hve been playing. There is a simple solution to end the complaints. If there is a collision both planes go down no one gets the kill. Sounds simple to me
Simpler solution: Don't crash into the plane flying at you and you won't go down.
I think HTC needs to implement collision stats for each player, so the newbs that whine can see that the vets don't collide that much and maybe there's a reason for that hmmm?
-
Simpler solution: Don't crash into the plane flying at you and you won't go down.
I think HTC needs to implement collision stats for each player, so the newbs that whine can see that the vets don't collide that much and maybe there's a reason for that hmmm?
:aok :aok and a Z snap!!
-
I have been reading about collision attacks since I hve been playing. There is a simple solution to end the complaints. If there is a collision both planes go down no one gets the kill. Sounds simple to me
Then I will ask you the same very basic & simple question:
(http://img222.imageshack.us/img222/8728/ramotherfexg7.jpg)
You are the Jug pilot. Picture shows the actual moment of "collision".
You would have no problem dying to this? You think there would be no complaints by anyone? ;)
-
I have been reading about collision attacks since I hve been playing. There is a simple solution to end the complaints. If there is a collision both planes go down no one gets the kill. Sounds simple to me
With a statement that bright .... you have been playing now for how long? about 3 days??? Sounds about right. Please refer back to above posts explaining THAT TWO PLANES DON'T ALWAYS COLLIDE!!!!!!!!
Holy thick-heads, Batman. These fledglings just WON'T get it.
-
Lusche: Read him again carefully. He has come up with something no one asked for before. He didn't say they don't take damage. Only that no one is awarded the kill.
This really would not change things much.
It would only change things if the plane was undamaged and exploded do to crash awarding a maneuver kill. Most of the time on the head on both would be damaged already by guns and hence a kill would still be awarded.
But as I think threw it, it penalizes the guy who missed and rewards the guy who screwed up by not awarding his kill.
HiTech
-
Lusche: Read him again carefully. He has come up with something no one asked for before. He didn't say they don't take damage.
I'm not that sure... "If there is a collision both planes go down no one gets the kill." To me, the "no kills" is just on top of that. :headscratch:
-
You could be correct. In which case same ow sane ow.
-
I always felt that to take away the potential for the other guy to get a kill in that situation. Would in fact promote more people to joust and collide that way. Without that possibility of death, and the other guy gets a kill to discourage that behavior. The potential is there for it to be abused much more often.
Bearing in mind of course that it is your sandbox HT. But I feel that would negatively impact game play in the long run.
-
Simpler solution: Don't crash into the plane flying at you and you won't go down.
I think HTC needs to implement collision stats for each player, so the newbs that whine can see that the vets don't collide that much and maybe there's a reason for that hmmm?
Grizz - at first blush, I liked this idea - but as I thought about a bit more I realized something.
All that it would "prove" to the players that want to argue the collision modeling is that the veteran players know "how to game collisions". And as further proof, since the vets who understand it argue against changing it, you "just know" they must benefit from it. (Which is actually true, although not in the way they think- more in the same way that having killshooter on benefits everyone sane.)
It all depends on your preconceptions. And while you can bring the donkey to water, you can't stop him from braying.
<S>
-
Grizz - at first blush, I liked this idea - but as I thought about a bit more I realized something.
All that it would "prove" to the players that want to argue the collision modeling is that the veteran players know "how to game collisions". And as further proof, since the vets who understand it argue against changing it, you "just know" they must benefit from it. (Which is actually true, although not in the way they think- more in the same way that having killshooter on benefits everyone sane.)
It all depends on your preconceptions. And while you can bring the donkey to water, you can't stop him from braying.
<S>
You're probably right, you can't fix stupid.
My personal favorite way to game the collision model is by trying to avoid the aircraft flying towards me. It works like a charm most of the time. The stats would still be nice though just to try and make flying improvements. There's definitely a correlation between ramming frequently and being a member of Teh Suk Klub.
-
There's definitely a correlation between ramming frequently and being a member of Teh Suk Klub.
Bah, I rarely collide, and I'm a card carrying member. :joystick:
I don't see how it can be explained more clearly than it has been. Has someone with the knowhow ever done, or could they do a 'split screen' video showing the pony and jug from Lusche's screenshot there moving in realtime, so they could see 'This is what the pony sees.' 'This is what the jug sees.' 'Do you still want both planes to die in a collision if you are in the jug?' Perhaps running through the 5 seconds before impact maybe 3 or 4 times, asking the same question.
It could be uploaded to Youtube, and then we would have a handy clear as day video example of why it's a bad idea. I'd do it but I have no idea how to go about doing such things.
Wiley.
-
Bah, I rarely collide, and I'm a card carrying member. :joystick:
I don't see how it can be explained more clearly than it has been. Has someone with the knowhow ever done, or could they do a 'split screen' video showing the pony and jug from Lusche's screenshot there moving in realtime, so they could see 'This is what the pony sees.' 'This is what the jug sees.' 'Do you still want both planes to die in a collision if you are in the jug?' Perhaps running through the 5 seconds before impact maybe 3 or 4 times, asking the same question.
See this message http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,294224.msg3751571.html#msg3751571 in this thread. Both views are superimposed on each other, centered on the jug. You can see the pony twice, one representing the position in the pony pilot's universe, one representing it's potion in the Jug pilot's universe.
But I can't recount how often the film and various screenshots have been posted and the players STILL stomped their feet, yelling "but both should die". They just ignored the screenshots & films. There is a reason I almost never get an answer on my standard "should the Jug die?" question ;)
-
Bah, I rarely collide, and I'm a card carrying member. :joystick:
I don't see how it can be explained more clearly than it has been. Has someone with the knowhow ever done, or could they do a 'split screen' video showing the pony and jug from Lusche's screenshot there moving in realtime, so they could see 'This is what the pony sees.' 'This is what the jug sees.' 'Do you still want both planes to die in a collision if you are in the jug?' Perhaps running through the 5 seconds before impact maybe 3 or 4 times, asking the same question.
It could be uploaded to Youtube, and then we would have a handy clear as day video example of why it's a bad idea. I'd do it but I have no idea how to go about doing such things.
Wiley.
It has been done to no avail. I think the limiting factor is a brain incapable of understanding how space/time vary in the internet world. It's just something some people can't wrap their minds around. Like walking and chewing gum at the same time. It's just tough for some.
-
With a statement that bright .... you have been playing now for how long? about 3 days??? Sounds about right. Please refer back to above posts explaining THAT TWO PLANES DON'T ALWAYS COLLIDE!!!!!!!!
Holy thick-heads, Batman. These fledglings just WON'T get it.
if two objects hit there is a collision ergo you collide, but you say nothing to improve your point except insults. as for how long have I been playing, lets just say LONGER THAN YOU, so that would make you the fledgling.
Now back to the point.
1 this is a game
2 the internet has one thing I have only seen addressed once or twice LAG so different points of view will show different things
3 I'm tired of hearing ones like you who complain when anything happens to you ( no matter how good you might be there will always be someone better)that's why the simple solution is the better.
if you cant say anything that is not advise and want to try to insult someone DONT POST
and take an English course if you going to use insults at least spell it correctly
-
Heh. My apologies for missing the post with the GIF in this very thread. Egg on my face.
With that being there, how can ANYBODY argue the point? Really. No, seriously. The 51 sees itself colliding at the front, the jug sees the pony where it shows further back, 6 plane lengths behind it when the collision occurs. Who wants to be in that jug when it goes down and believes that is fair? Really? This animated gif here:
http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,294224.msg3751571.html#msg3751571 (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,294224.msg3751571.html#msg3751571)
Who wants to be in that jug if they say both planes should die when one of them sees a collision?
Wiley.
-
if two objects hit there is a collision ergo you collide, but you say nothing to improve your point except insults. as for how long have I been playing, lets just say LONGER THAN YOU, so that would make you the fledgling.
Now back to the point.
1 this is a game
2 the internet has one thing I have only seen addressed once or twice LAG so different points of view will show different things
3 I'm tired of hearing ones like you who complain when anything happens to you ( no matter how good you might be there will always be someone better)that's why the simple solution is the better.
if you cant say anything that is not advise and want to try to insult someone DONT POST
and take an English course if you going to use insults at least spell it correctly
Please refer to Tec's flowchart on page one. If you do not know how to read a flowchart, perhaps another flowchart can be made explaining how to read one. Wait, that wouldn't work... :D
-
From the Jug scenario used earlier:
The overtaking Pony FE's detects a collision and dies, yet the Jug flys on because it never collided from its perspective...
Consider this: what is the difference when a shooter's FE detects hits on the target, and damages/kills it- even if from the target pilot's perspective, the shot was impossible (assuming that lag caused the difference in perspective?)
Why in one instance is the target left unscathed, yet in the other, destroyed? In the second example, the target pilot could deny that the was hit - yet dies because it was a valid solution from the shooter's perspective. In the Pony/Jug example, the Jug (target) survives, yet should have been damaged from the Pony's perspective. In both instances, the Jug wouldn't perceive a cause for his demise. The argument / justification of "how would the Jug feel" in the collision scenario doesn't jive with how the a target might feel if he was killed from a seemly impossible shot.
(Retreating to my corner, dunce cap on)
-
Consider this: what is the difference when a shooter's FE detects hits on the target, and damages/kills it- even if from the target pilot's perspective, the shot was impossible (assuming that lag caused the difference in perspective?)
Why in one instance is the target left unscathed, yet in the other, destroyed? In the second example, the target pilot could deny that the was hit - yet dies because it was a valid solution from the shooter's perspective.
Because it's the only way a game like this could ever work.
The "multiple realities" (one for each player) is given and unchangeable. It creates several problems, each has to be approached individually to enable a working air combat game.
Feel free to ponder about what would happen if you would really happen if you would change the current solutions. ;)
-
Actually, that's a valid point, Maus. I hadn't looked at it being the same as gunnery. My response is pretty much that it feels worse. In most scenarios, you can see the enemy plane coming, and maneuver to avoid it in some fashion. I realize this doesn't happen in all cases, such as buffs getting rammed, but if someone's not sniping you from ridiculous distance, it's practically impossible to see a tracer exit the enemy plane and maneuver to avoid it. I'd say that is the difference. In most collision situations, you could do something to avoid it. In most gunnery lag 'wtf just happened?' type situations you couldn't.
I do see that it's a valid point, I just think the right call has been made to minimize the downside. I think the other guy not dying when you die because you observed a collision is significantly less enraging than you dying just because the other guy observed a collision and you were nowhere near him.
Wiley.
-
From the Jug scenario used earlier:
The overtaking Pony FE's detects a collision and dies, yet the Jug flies on because it never collided from its perspective...
Consider this: what is the difference when a shooter's FE detects hits on the target, and damages/kills it- even if from the target pilot's perspective, the shot was impossible (assuming that lag caused the difference in perspective?)
Isn't that the exact same thing?
You are getting hit at what seems to be an impossible angle on your FE, say a front ¼ shot or taking hits after the enemy has passed you or even blowing up long after the enemy is out of his guns solution, and yet on his FE you're sitting right in front of his guns fat, dumb, and happy.
Think of the extreme example of the majorly warpy pilot that actually manages to land some hits on you.
It's all perspective and I suspect that most of those who "don't get it" are only looking at the situation based on what they are seeing and fail to grasp that the other player may be seeing things slightly differently.
Look at it from the other side.
wrongway
-
Actually, that's a valid point, Maus. I hadn't looked at it being the same as gunnery. My response is pretty much that it feels worse. In most scenarios, you can see the enemy plane coming, and maneuver to avoid it in some fashion. I realize this doesn't happen in all cases, such as buffs getting rammed, but if someone's not sniping you from ridiculous distance, it's practically impossible to see a tracer exit the enemy plane and maneuver to avoid it. I'd say that is the difference. In most collision situations, you could do something to avoid it. In most gunnery lag 'wtf just happened?' type situations you couldn't.
I do see that it's a valid point, I just think the right call has been made to minimize the downside. I think the other guy not dying when you die because you observed a collision is significantly less enraging than you dying just because the other guy observed a collision and you were nowhere near him.
Wiley.
Wiley it would be better said it is a correct fact, not a valid point.
There is no valid reason why they should be handled the same. The issue isn't one of consistency. The issue is how to solve the many different problems created by the limits of the communication medium. Assuming that all should be handled the same is nothing but a straw man.
The real topic is why are there collisions of any kind, The reason they are in the game is to prevent people from holding down the trigger and flying threw the other plane, both from behind and from H2H. Having the 2nd person die actually works against the very purpose of putting collisions in the game.
HiTech
HiTech
-
Assuming that all should be handled the same is nothing but a straw man.
Makes sense to me. I tend to think in terms of keeping things consistent by default, it's not always the best course of action like this case.
The real topic is why are there collisions of any kind, The reason they are in the game is to prevent people from holding down the trigger and flying threw the other plane, both from behind and from H2H. Having the 2nd person die actually works against the very purpose of putting collisions in the game.
HiTech
And there we go. Makes sense to me. I was just pointing out I could see a valid logical point to asking why is gunnery working one way and collision another. But you're right, it's a point of fact, and they're accomplishing different things, hence why they work differently.
Wiley.
-
Old salts, too!
I just wanted to point out that the glitch in the BBS search is not just with basic search - the advanced search is not working properly either. I think we should lighten up on deriding people for not searching, particularly new people.
-
I'm in a B-24, out of gas, two bases back, in Auto-Level and the Mossie I saw coming is attacking me. I managed to smoke one of his engines. He comes back and rams one of my planes. He dies and now I have two bombers. All is good! Rare that happens, when both die in a collision. Should have taken more gas, landed farther back.
If there's a collision on your screen, you take damage. If there's a collision on your enemies screen, he takes damage. Game doesn't care whos "fault" it was. What you see is what YOU get, and that works this way for everyone involved.
Read THIS first: http://trainers.hitechcreations.com/lag/lag.htm
Then do a forum search for "collisions", and learn why the things are the way they are.
-
I'm in a B-24, out of gas, two bases back, in Auto-Level and the Mossie I saw coming is attacking me. I managed to smoke one of his engines. He comes back and rams one of my planes. He dies and now I have two bombers. All is good! Rare that happens, when both die in a collision. Should have taken more gas, landed farther back.
Rare that both he and you collided, at the same time, and took damage or lost aircraft? No. Not really.
:neener:
wrongway
-
That is what happened. Really. Run the video tape.
Rare that both he and you collided, at the same time, and took damage or lost aircraft? No. Not really.
:neener:
wrongway
-
We could have it scored as like a damage score i.e
Kills 23
Damaged 54
Assists 65
Bail's 32
I mean if a collision happens then if one gets to fly away with no problem's then if he hasn't had a single cannon round hit you why should there be a kill awarded ( although an extra kill here and there wont go amiss to anyone ) But i believe the thing that gets on people's nerves is the fact that he got a kill from it without firing his gun's and as i say if he did get some hits on you then its a kill. But only if he gets hits on you. If he doesn't and it happens allot in the dueling arena the initial first pass if neither player fire's but they collide and one goes down and the other doesn't then he can only get a damage awarded like :- HOST You Damaged Soon SO
Now i believe that this may be a good compromise to the original post :)
( Remember in WW2 pilots where recorded on Kills, Damaged, Assists and Bails
-
We could have it scored as like a damage score i.e
Kills 23
Damaged 54
Assists 65
Bail's 32
I mean if a collision happens then if one gets to fly away with no problem's then if he hasn't had a single cannon round hit you why should there be a kill awarded ( although an extra kill here and there wont go amiss to anyone ) But i believe the thing that gets on people's nerves is the fact that he got a kill from it without firing his gun's and as i say if he did get some hits on you then its a kill. But only if he gets hits on you. If he doesn't and it happens allot in the dueling arena the initial first pass if neither player fire's but they collide and one goes down and the other doesn't then he can only get a damage awarded like :- HOST You Damaged Soon SO
Now i believe that this may be a good compromise to the original post :)
( Remember in WW2 pilots where recorded on Kills, Damaged, Assists and Bails
Nope is a terrible choice. It's not a compromise in any way it is a change to an existing system that does nothing to improve game play in anyway. It would simply be an appeasement to those stupid enough to collide with another plane. And why would we wish to appease them? When they are the ones who screwed up? Why should the guy who missed the other plane now be forced to go find another fight?
HiTech
-
if two objects hit there is a collision ergo you collide, but you say nothing to improve your point except insults. as for how long have I been playing, lets just say LONGER THAN YOU, so that would make you the fledgling.
Now back to the point.
1 this is a game
2 the internet has one thing I have only seen addressed once or twice LAG so different points of view will show different things
3 I'm tired of hearing ones like you who complain when anything happens to you ( no matter how good you might be there will always be someone better)that's why the simple solution is the better.
if you cant say anything that is not advise and want to try to insult someone DONT POST
and take an English course if you going to use insults at least spell it correctly
You apparently have not been following the thread and have decided to interject yourself like a child into a topic you obviously do not understand. You said, "If two objects hit, there is a collision ergo you collide." The whole point of this thread (or at least the explanations of it) is that in AH just because YOU impact an object, does NOT MEAN THAT SAME OBJECT IMPACTED YOU. Rather than go back and get into a lengthy explanation, I would refer you to Lusches pictures and the previous post regard the "multiple realities" in AH.
As for complaining.... please show me anywhere in this thread where I have complained about anything (excluding your stupid remark).
And finally, regarding my English. I do speak English very well. If I had a typo, I beg your ultimate forgiveness. My secretary was under my desk rather than working at it. I may have missed a letter.
When you have educated yourself on the topic, please feel free to come back and post again. :aok
-
Wait wait...... AH is a multiverse? :O Do you mean that when I log in I'm dealing with reality as myth? :O :O
That is so COOOL... It's like being in a Heinlein novel. I'm here but over there I'm not here. You're right here but over there you're not right here. Can we can that whole rejuvenating thing too? Living forever and always being able to shave 50 or so years off my age has some appeal....
*runs out hands covering head*
-
Yeah NCLawman tell him i have learned something new here thanks to you and HiTech and a few other's :) And that's with a bad memory Isn't it :)
OK OK OK was just a thought like :)
Well how about if i say hit the engine of a 109 and have to break off becuase his buddy is on my tail and that 109 manages to get to base and land can that be counted as a Damaged Score ????
Or would you like me to post about the last paragraph in the wish list bud ??????
-
Yeah NCLawman tell him i have learned something new here thanks to you and HiTech and a few other's :) And that's with a bad memory Isn't it :)
OK OK OK was just a thought like :)
Well how about if i say hit the engine of a 109 and have to break off becuase his buddy is on my tail and that 109 manages to get to base and land can that be counted as a Damaged Score ????
Or would you like me to post about the last paragraph in the wish list bud ??????
That's between you and HTC. I don't have a dog in that fight. ;)
-
You apparently have not been following the thread and have decided to interject yourself like a child into a topic you obviously do not understand. You said, "If two objects hit, there is a collision ergo you collide." The whole point of this thread (or at least the explanations of it) is that in AH just because YOU impact an object, does NOT MEAN THAT SAME OBJECT IMPACTED YOU. Rather than go back and get into a lengthy explanation, I would refer you to Lusches pictures and the previous post regard the "multiple realities" in AH.
As for complaining.... please show me anywhere in this thread where I have complained about anything (excluding your stupid remark).
And finally, regarding my English. I do speak English very well. If I had a typo, I beg your ultimate forgiveness. My secretary was under my desk rather than working at it. I may have missed a letter.
When you have educated yourself on the topic, please feel free to come back and post again. :aok
you not worth the post, look how you ended that last post. you are vulgar and like to jump in where your not wanted, HTC said he would not change a thing so why are you still posting, think question has been answered. So grow up and keep the postings g rated young ones read this. So go away.since the soultin has been made there is no reason to post anymore unless you need to be held by the hand to see the resolution. but In typical form of a young in you find this your place to use vulgar language and situation.
I poseted and you attacked, so just go home and stfu. I understand the collision situation and you were no help except you have nothing but vulgar things to say. you can post a responce but I will ignore you since you mind is about 15 years old cant wait till this is locked out so you wont have a soapbox to cry from
-
you not worth the post, look how you ended that last post. you are vulgar and like to jump in where your not wanted, HTC said he would not change a thing so why are you still posting, think question has been answered. So grow up and keep the postings g rated young ones read this. So go away.since the soultin has been made there is no reason to post anymore unless you need to be held by the hand to see the resolution. but In typical form of a young in you find this your place to use vulgar language and situation.
I poseted and you attacked, so just go home and stfu. I understand the collision situation and you were no help except you have nothing but vulgar things to say. you can post a responce but I will ignore you since you mind is about 15 years old cant wait till this is locked out so you wont have a soapbox to cry from
What part of my post was NOT g-rated? you are the one posting to STFU.
Second, I have not asked HTC to change anything. I have explained the collision model as it is. I did NOT ask for it change, nor do I want it to change.
I have re-read my posts, and I still have yet to find any vulgar posts. Please, could you be more specific. And, finally, if I am NOT worth the post as you indicated, why did you post again? :rofl
Keep trying little boy, one day you might actually get something right.
-
(http://www.gifanatics.com/files/Jackson_popcorn.gif)