Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Wishlist => Topic started by: EVZ on February 04, 2012, 10:07:40 AM
-
Probably an OLD rant? but -I- really wish (Hostile) Midair Collisions left no survivors. I'm not sure what the criteria IS for surviving a midair. I've been told several different things by people whose info is generally reliable ... REAL aircraft SELDOM survive midair collisions and certainly are unable to continue to fly and fight as if nothing has happened. RAMMING seems to be a 50/50 ATTACK TACTIC employed consistantly by some people who can't even manage a decent HO ... If that's what it takes, so be it ... but they shouldn't fly away from it to do it again, just because the dice came up lucky for them.
:rock
-
It is incredibly hard to intentionally ram someone in game.
Damage is done to your aircraft if you "see" a collision on your end. I think you'd end up find it even more frustrating if you were flying and clearly missed another plane but still received the damage from it. This is a concession we have to make due to the internet.
-
this again? really? :bhead
http://trainers.hitechcreations.com/lag/lag.htm (http://trainers.hitechcreations.com/lag/lag.htm)
-
It is incredibly hard to intentionally ram someone in game.
QFT. :aok
-
Probably an OLD rant? but -I- really wish (Hostile) Midair Collisions left no survivors. I'm not sure what the criteria IS for surviving a midair. I've been told several different things by people whose info is generally reliable ... REAL aircraft SELDOM survive midair collisions and certainly are unable to continue to fly and fight as if nothing has happened. RAMMING seems to be a 50/50 ATTACK TACTIC employed consistantly by some people who can't even manage a decent HO ... If that's what it takes, so be it ... but they shouldn't fly away from it to do it again, just because the dice came up lucky for them.
:rock
just because your flying was poor enough NOT to avoid the collision, the other guy shouldn't be punished for flying better and AVOIDING it. What you see on your computer will ALWAYS be different than what the other guy sees on his due to lag.
-
I was just reading about a P-61 that RTB'd with an 8" diameter tree stuck in it's wing.
Fix the trees.
:neener:
Now, are we talking about the collision model again or a damaged plane, missing a big chunk of wing or horizontal stabilizer due to a collision, continuing to fly?
It makes you wonder.
This plane made it back:
(http://www.daveswarbirds.com/b-17/photos/body/torn-up.gif)
This one didn't:
(http://www.303rdbg.com/pp-bombed-b17c.jpg)
Both missing horizontal stabs.
wrongway
-
Probably an OLD rant? but -I- really wish (Hostile) Midair Collisions left no survivors. I'm not sure what the criteria IS for surviving a midair. I've been told several different things by people whose info is generally reliable ... REAL aircraft SELDOM survive midair collisions and certainly are unable to continue to fly and fight as if nothing has happened. RAMMING seems to be a 50/50 ATTACK TACTIC employed consistantly by some people who can't even manage a decent HO ... If that's what it takes, so be it ... but they shouldn't fly away from it to do it again, just because the dice came up lucky for them.
:rock
My advice would be to not make wishes on things you clearly don't understand. You're wish would result in a rammer's paradise.
-
its even funnier when the other person is charged with the collision and you take all the damage in the world and they dont have a scratch
-
It is incredibly hard to intentionally ram someone in game.
The story: I was de-acking a town in a 109K4 (which is surprisingly effective), and in comes a 262 with a smoking engine. The evil grin on my face just got 10x wider. With only ~20 taters left, I try to spray him down from d800. No luck, I'm all out of ammo. He then loses his smoking engine, I start peppering him with the MGs from d1000 down to d200. Only a handful hit (yea, I suck at aiming), and he's still flying. "It's a Me262", I tell myself, "all 262s MUST die."
The inevitable:
Who else can say they rammed a 262 from behind? :devil :D :bolt:
(http://i990.photobucket.com/albums/af23/titanic3/NewPicture.jpg)
(http://i990.photobucket.com/albums/af23/titanic3/262ram.jpg)
-
(http://i990.photobucket.com/albums/af23/titanic3/NewPicture.jpg)
(http://i990.photobucket.com/albums/af23/titanic3/262ram.jpg)
Those pictures do not show what you think they show.
-
Those pictures do not show what you think they show.
Sense of humor. Gone.
-
its even funnier when the other person is charged with the collision and you take all the damage in the world and they dont have a scratch
Bullets.
You collided with his bullets. Or was he just flying to close so you could see him wave hello?
There is no charged with the collision.
wrongway
-
its even funnier when the other person is charged with the collision and you take all the damage in the world and they dont have a scratch
You obviously have no idea how collisions work as that is not possible.
-
You obviously have no idea how collisions work as that is not possible.
I might not but thats definantly happend. It happend a few days ago and numerous times before that
-
You obviously have no idea how collisions work as that is not possible.
I think what 4 prop is refering to is the message recieved in the text buffer ? It may say "you have collided with" or it may say "so & so has collided with you." This seems to indicate someone is being tagged as responsible.
As for those who think Collisions are HARD TO DO ... Let me introduce you to a couple guys who will do it to you 5 times straight in 5 passes.
It gets old FAST, but regardless of the cause, If 2 people collide & 2 people go down. There will soon be a lot fewer collisions.
:cool:
-
I might not but thats definantly happend. It happend a few days ago and numerous times before that
Ya, you got shot.
I think what 4 prop is refering to is the message recieved in the text buffer ? It may say "you have collided with" or it may say "so & so has collided with you." This seems to indicate someone is being tagged as responsible.
No, it doesn't. There is NO responsibility. The message is just stating a fact. Either you collided, he collided or you both collided.
The white message: SoAndSo has collided with you.
Some part of his plane intersected with your plane from his perspective, on his front end.
The orange message: You have collided.
Some part of your plane has intersected with his plane from your perspective, on your front end.
If you see both messages then you both collided.
If you want to put "fault" into the equation then it isn't programming but tactics that are to blame.
wrongway
-
ok that explains it better. i thought the white message of fudnucker collided means he was charged with it and he should be the one damaged more
-
ok that explains it better. i thought the white message of fudnucker collided means he was charged with it and he should be the one damaged more
I thought that was probably what you had in mind ... The lag thing is for real ... but keep in mind there are a LOT of "serious" gamers around here who have Very Powerfull Computers and Very Fast Connections ... and they aren't so seriously effected by LAG problems. If you understand HOW lag works it's quite possible to fly your plane and create a collision on the other guys front end that will kill him and leave YOU unscratched.
:O
-
I thought that was probably what you had in mind ... The lag thing is for real ... but keep in mind there are a LOT of "serious" gamers around here who have Very Powerfull Computers and Very Fast Connections ... and they aren't so seriously effected by LAG problems.
A faster computer and connection speed as almost no effect on lag. has ZERO effect on lag.
But connect speed is really a moot point. Because the lag seen is the combined lag of both people, hence you will both see the exact same lag unless your connection in and out do not take the same path. But the lag still will not effect the collision, what you see is what you get, and you have no way of determining what the other person sees.
If you understand HOW lag works it's quite possible to fly your plane and create a collision on the other guys front end that will kill him and leave YOU unscratched.
:O
A great myth.
And if you could actually fly your plane precisely enough to do a pass that you could predict a collision on the other persons end, there would be no reason to do so, it would be simpler just to shoot him with that type of flying skill.
HiTech
HiTech
-
and you have no way of determining what the other person sees. A great myth. HiTech
Could you explain then the Guys who CAN create a collision consistantly ? I've had it demonstrated to me 5 - 6 times in a row ... ???
:cool:
-
Could you explain then the Guys who CAN create a collision consistantly ? I've had it demonstrated to me 5 - 6 times in a row ... ???
:cool:
They've got slow internet and the other guy is bad at flying
-
Could you explain then the Guys who CAN create a collision consistantly ? I've had it demonstrated to me 5 - 6 times in a row ... ???
:cool:
Who are these guys you refer to?
-
Could you explain then the Guys who CAN create a collision consistantly ? I've had it demonstrated to me 5 - 6 times in a row ... ???
:cool:
one would be evz.
-
one would be evz.
No .... Collisions are NOT one of my tactics ... If they were I wouldn't be wishing that I be Killed (too) for creating one. I realise there are technical considerations and that HT doesn't have a magic wand ... I also realise that the reality of intentional Collision Kills has been demonstrated ... I don't think those involved would appreciate being drug thru the mud by the disruptive elements, so I'll spare them that.
:angel:
-
No .... Collisions are NOT one of my tactics ... If they were I wouldn't be wishing that I be Killed (too) for creating one. I realise there are technical considerations and that HT doesn't have a magic wand ... I also realise that the reality of intentional Collision Kills has been demonstrated ... I don't think those involved would appreciate being drug thru the mud by the disruptive elements, so I'll spare them that.
:angel:
:noid orly?
I'm more of the opinion that there isnt anyone specific, you're just trying to prove a point regardless of whether you have any facts or proof about your ideas.
-
No .... Collisions are NOT one of my tactics ... If they were I wouldn't be wishing that I be Killed (too) for creating one. I realise there are technical considerations and that HT doesn't have a magic wand ... I also realise that the reality of intentional Collision Kills has been demonstrated ... I don't think those involved would appreciate being drug thru the mud by the disruptive elements, so I'll spare them that.
:angel:
Either post the evidence, or it's just paranoia BS. To save the "parties" involved, send it strait to HTC. Other wise it's BS
-
The 'if you see it' premise is completely incorrect. I've had many instances where in forcing an overshoot, rather than do the right thing and shoot past into my gun sights, the plane will press to keep with a manuver he cannot hope to match, and ram me squarely from behind.
In almost every instance of this happening, my plane is in two pieces, I am 'charged' with the collision, and the other guy flies past unscathed.
-
:noid orly?
I'm more of the opinion that there isnt anyone specific, you're just trying to prove a point regardless of whether you have any facts or proof about your ideas.
This is pretty much what this guy does. I haven't seen much lucid thought from him since he found the place. I've put him on the shelf with the DW's of our forums.
-
its even funnier when the other person is charged with the collision and you take all the damage in the world and they dont have a scratch
It's even funnier to see posters like yourself posting about things they're utterly clueless on. Learn how the collision model works before you post about it.
ack-ack
-
I also realise that the reality of intentional Collision Kills has been demonstrated ... I don't think those involved would appreciate being drug thru the mud by the disruptive elements, so I'll spare them that.
:angel:
In other words, you're talking out of your brown orifice again.
ack-ack
-
The 'if you see it' premise is completely incorrect. I've had many instances where in forcing an overshoot, rather than do the right thing and shoot past into my gun sights, the plane will press to keep with a manuver he cannot hope to match, and ram me squarely from behind.
In almost every instance of this happening, my plane is in two pieces, I am 'charged' with the collision, and the other guy flies past unscathed.
I'm not sure if you're making a joke or not, but that fits perfectly with how collisions work. When someone says "if you see it" they mean the game, from your end, from your computer, detected that two aircraft were in the same place at the same time. Since your computer detected that collision, you receive damage. However, your computer cannot dole out damage to other people. The second aircraft "sees" on his computer that he pulled up and away so his computer sees two aircraft in two separate locations, thus no damage is done.
It's hard for a lot of people to grasp that one fight can look different to each pilot. Read up on the lag page link if you haven't already.
-
Outstanding Jayhawk. :aok
-
The 'if you see it' premise is completely incorrect. I've had many instances where in forcing an overshoot, rather than do the right thing and shoot past into my gun sights, the plane will press to keep with a manuver he cannot hope to match, and ram me squarely from behind.
In almost every instance of this happening, my plane is in two pieces, I am 'charged' with the collision, and the other guy flies past unscathed.
it is NOT actually see's the other plane, it's as Jayhawk says your computer detects a collision. So Hitech quote should really read....
A faster computer and connection speed as almost no effect on lag. has ZERO effect on lag.
But connect speed is really a moot point. Because the lag TIME is the combined lag of both people, hence you will both HAVE the exact same lag unless your connection in and out do not take the same path. But the lag still will not effect the collision, what your computer detects is what you get, and you have no way of determining what the other persons computer detects.
A great myth.
And if you could actually fly your plane precisely enough to do a pass that you could predict a collision on the other persons end, there would be no reason to do so, it would be simpler just to shoot him with that type of flying skill.
HiTech
HiTech
-
The 'if you see it' premise is completely incorrect. I've had many instances where in forcing an overshoot, rather than do the right thing and shoot past into my gun sights, the plane will press to keep with a manuver he cannot hope to match, and ram me squarely from behind.
In almost every instance of this happening, my plane is in two pieces, I am 'charged' with the collision, and the other guy flies past unscathed.
RTFM! http://trainers.hitechcreations.com/lag/lag.htm (http://trainers.hitechcreations.com/lag/lag.htm)
-
The 'if you see it' premise is completely incorrect. I've had many instances where in forcing an overshoot, rather than do the right thing and shoot past into my gun sights, the plane will press to keep with a manuver he cannot hope to match, and ram me squarely from behind.
In almost every instance of this happening, my plane is in two pieces, I am 'charged' with the collision, and the other guy flies past unscathed.
Yep ... but these guys are just going to call you a liar or tell you, that wasn't REALLY what happened ...
To be fair ... when they say IF YOU SEE IT ... What (I think) they really MEAN is ... If the event takes place ON YOUR COMPUTER ... For those who have heard that "If your ENGINE is HIT you will die" ... someone has misunderstood the term FRONT END. It doesn't mean the front end of your plane, basically it means what can be seen on your screen.
:aok
-
No one is denying that collisions happen, and sometimes they suck. But you have to be able to back-up accusations that border on impossible with actual proof.
I can tell you that I hit a spitfire five times with a 30mm tator and it didn't die, but unless I show you proof, no one will believe me.
-
Front end does not just refer to what you can see on your screen. Your computer is only displaying a small view of what the camera sees of the 3D environment it is calculating.
As to intentional ramming, yes, it can happen though it takes luck and/or persistence. While you fly back and forth in front of his plane trying to hit it with the image of your plane on his computer, you better hope he is out of ammo or he will just blow you out of the sky.
-
Forcing a collision isn't really THAT hard. It's easiest to do against bombers. You can pull up right in front of them and make a VERY close pass to their nose and fly away without colliding on your end but completely destroy the bomber.
-
Wow... flame-fest, and I even prefaced it with 'if you see it'.
MaB A-Sys Hi shuld ad a reerveew meeror so i can sees it?!?!
:salute
-
Wow... flame-fest, and I even prefaced it with 'if you see it'.
MaB A-Sys Hi shuld ad a reerveew meeror so i can sees it?!?!
:salute
Funny how the "flame-fests" happen when someone says something stupid.
-
...and still it speaks.
:rofl :aok
-
Forcing a collision isn't really THAT hard. It's easiest to do against bombers. You can pull up right in front of them and make a VERY close pass to their nose and fly away without colliding on your end but completely destroy the bomber.
I suspect it's easier to anticipate bombers as they change attitude and altitude at a slower rate. As I understand it, in a Fighter to Fighter HO, you KNOW the guy is trying to hit the image he sees of where your plane has been, if you have a good FEEL for 3D geometry and a sense of WHERE the enemy plane you see WAS before you recieved it's image, you can intuitively distinguish the path he will try to fly to get his guns to bear on the image he is recieving ... intersect that path at the right moment and ... HE has a collision and dies.
:huh
-
M-18 monster trucks and Enemy La on the rearm pad with an unexpected outcome.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IOqS2MfDbjw
Why are guns on some planes (like the La in video) collision proof though?
-
The 'if you see it' premise is completely incorrect. I've had many instances where in forcing an overshoot, rather than do the right thing and shoot past into my gun sights, the plane will press to keep with a manuver he cannot hope to match, and ram me squarely from behind.
In almost every instance of this happening, my plane is in two pieces, I am 'charged' with the collision, and the other guy flies past unscathed.
You don't understand. The bandit didn't fly into you, he flew past you. That's why he's unscathed. He saw where you were and avoided you. There was no collision. This is completely true at the same time that it's true that you had a collision with the same bandit. An aircraft hit you on your PC so you took damage. The only problem is that you want the bandit who didn't hit anyone to have damage too.
-
We need the collision flow chart again it looks like :P
-
We need the collision flow chart again it looks like
Denial is NOT a River in Egypt ...
:lol
-
We need the collision flow chart again it looks like :P
:aok
(http://img163.imageshack.us/img163/3316/collision1.png) (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/163/collision1.png/)
-
Great stuff kvuo75 :aok