Post by: Biggamer on December 08, 2018, 03:07:19 PM
we need some daily missions to complete in the main arena that pay out rewards like PERKS!
a new way to capture a field would be kinda cool
oh yeah we need some new planes and tanks in the game how cool would that be for EVERYONE!
rant over flame away :bolt:
Post by: waystin2 on December 08, 2018, 03:29:24 PM
Post by: Molsman on December 08, 2018, 05:21:26 PM
Post by: mako04 on December 08, 2018, 05:56:52 PM
Post by: hgtonyvi on December 08, 2018, 06:01:41 PM
Post by: AKKuya on December 08, 2018, 07:05:11 PM
Be able to launch B-25s off the carriers.
Add gliders with troops to capture bases.
And the one thing that will make Aces High Great Again is for all players to vote me for the position of Supreme Military Intelligence Liaison Extraordinaire!!!!!!
You'll like the initials for that. :D
Post by: Vraciu on December 08, 2018, 07:38:34 PM
Post by: Max on December 08, 2018, 08:33:38 PM
Post by: Joker on December 09, 2018, 09:48:01 AM
One small thing I thought of recently was how about allowing the goon to transport small gv's, like maybe just a jeep.
If the VH was down, defenders could fly in minimal gv support, albeit at great risk.
This is at least historically accurate.
Towed artillery pieces would also be fun.
And I like Kuya's ideas about B-25's off of cv's and troop carrying gliders. :aok
Post by: JOACH1M on December 09, 2018, 09:54:28 AM
Post by: caldera on December 09, 2018, 11:23:29 AM
Collision model needs serious work.
Perhaps you don't understand it. Don't collide and you take no damage.
As soon as the internet can move faster than the speed of light, there will be no lag and both planes seemingly in the exact space and time will collide. Since there is lag, both planes are not always in the exact space and time, hence one collides and the other does not.
The alternatives are no collisions at all or dying from a collision when you didn't collide.
Regarding MAGA, we do need new planes. The most recent new fighter was added in July 2013 and January 2014 for the newest bomber.
Post by: SilverZ06 on December 09, 2018, 11:24:23 AM
I agree. Eye candy be damned. I just love to blow stuff and kill red guys. New and interesting ways to do that are always nice and lots of red guys are needed for these types of activities. Rant handed to next post... :furious
The sad part is we don't even have good eye candy. I was helping a fresh 2 weeker from Germany last week or the week before and his two complaints on his very first flight were, "The graphics are horrible" and "Where are all the enemies?" It didn't help that just as he was asking where the enemies where the war was won and he was booted off the server 4 minutes later probably wondering wtf just happened.
Post by: CptTrips on December 09, 2018, 12:33:19 PM
Regarding MAGA, we do need new planes. The most recent new fighter was added in July 2013 and January 2014 for the newest bomber.
New planes are always fun, but do you think a new Italian or Japanese bomber or fighter would fundamentally change the marketability of the game at this point?
Post by: JOACH1M on December 09, 2018, 12:37:48 PM
Perhaps you don't understand it. Don't collide and you take no damage.Oh I know entirely how this collision model works, and I totally understand what you are saying.
As soon as the internet can move faster than the speed of light, there will be no lag and both planes seemingly in the exact space and time will collide. Since there is lag, both planes are not always in the exact space and time, hence one collides and the other does not.
The alternatives are no collisions at all or dying from a collision when you didn't collide.
Regarding MAGA, we do need new planes. The most recent new fighter was added in July 2013 and January 2014 for the newest bomber.
BUUTTT playing other flight sims regarding their collision modeling Aces High’s is extremely awkward, inconsistent, and most of the time extremely wrong.
Take a look at this. https://youtu.be/UOjVumXSXpE
Also the amount of times IVE been rammed by another plane (that I had no clue was even in the fight) and taken deadly damage while they just fly off damage free had to be well over 60 times in my time playing this game.
Post by: CptTrips on December 09, 2018, 12:52:31 PM
Also the amount of times IVE been rammed by another plane (that I had no clue was even in the fight) and taken deadly damage while they just fly off damage free had to be well over 60 times in my time playing this game.
Because on their front end, they did not collide with you. On your front end, it did appear the planes collided. There is no other reasonable way to handle the discrepancy, is there?
The fact you didn't see them coming isn't the fault of the algorithm. That's the same as getting shot down by someone you didn't see coming. War is Hell.
Are you saying you had collisions with planes that on your front end were clearly not close? Since you said you didn't see them coming, I take it that is not the case.
Post by: pembquist on December 09, 2018, 01:52:25 PM
Post by: Lusche on December 09, 2018, 02:03:10 PM
Post by: CptTrips on December 09, 2018, 02:12:43 PM
I suppose you could modify how the collision works by excluding all collisions where the AC of the player whose computer experiences the collision is overtaken. Or some sort of nuance that takes into account the vectors of the colliding aircraft to exclude collisions that seem especially irritating and unavoidable.
You could do something like that. You could define a certain angle of velocity vector difference to determine if the collision is because you are being overrun. But should you? Is that just training-wheels? Besides, coming up from behind you is generally not how this would happen. Because of lag, it would be more likely they would see a collision and you wouldn't if they were coming up behind you. So really, we are practically talking collisions in the 9 o'clock to 3 o'clock sector.
A common example I had seen, I was diving on the 12 clk position on a bomber. As I pass across his nose, I clearly missed on my front-end , but I guess because of lag he saw me crash into his windshield? Should I have died? Should he have maneuver to avoid a collision he could have seen coming on his front end? Should he have seen me pass through his cockpit without damaging him?
Should we disable bullets coming from the front because getting HO'd is annoying?
It's technically possible to handle it any number of ways. It just seems to me, that short of turning off collisions, this is the most reasonable compromise.
:salute,
CptTrips
Post by: j500ss on December 09, 2018, 05:56:21 PM
People may not like that, but in reality ( and sometimes reality kinda sucks ) the real world result would be you both die.
Post by: Vraciu on December 09, 2018, 06:02:53 PM
AH's collision model is the perfect solution for a game in which players all over the world play on a single server in Texas.
WBs had a better one. Maybe it was because of my distance to the server being different back then compared to now with AH, I don't know. Any way, I've seen some just plain whacky things regarding collisions here that I never saw there.
Post by: Lusche on December 09, 2018, 06:14:01 PM
Frankly, as I see it, and this is just me. You both should have died, end of story.
People may not like that, but in reality ( and sometimes reality kinda sucks ) the real world result would be you both die.
In the real world, both get damage because both collide.
In AH, occasionally just ONE collides.
What you are asking for is getting a collision hit even if you clearly evade the other plane.
Post by: CptTrips on December 09, 2018, 06:16:37 PM
Frankly, as I see it, and this is just me. You both should have died, end of story.
People may not like that, but in reality ( and sometimes reality kinda sucks ) the real world result would be you both die.
But wouldn't the guy that saw he clearly dodged successfully only to magically blow up for no apparent reason then say that collisions are broken?
If you really wanted to do a voting thing, I'd say that when one sees a collision and the other not, then you bias towards no collision for either, instead of collision for both.
But, I'd vote against that. I think the way it is now is the best compromise.
:salute
Post by: j500ss on December 09, 2018, 06:47:32 PM
Apparently many do fly away undamaged.
Make no mistake, I ask for nothing from this game. The people who own it, do as they see fit, not what the customers necessarily ask for. ( again reality )
So far as the OP, they are indeed great ideas :aok
Post by: Lusche on December 09, 2018, 07:05:49 PM
In my personal experience in AH, if I cause the collision, I get damage. Ok fair enough. If someone collides with me, I get damage. I honestly cannot say I have ever flown away from a collision in the game undamaged. None that I can recall, but hey I don't play a lot anymore.
You maybe just did not notice the 'collisions' that didn't hurt you, because there was none on your side - just on your opponents.
It's all in the messages :
"XY has collided with you"
"You have collided".
If you see the first one, your opponent had a collision on his screen and will take damage (the actual amount can vary a lot, of course).
If you see the second one, you had a collision on YOUR screen and you will take damage.
Often you see both messages, with consequences to both participants.
If there is only the first one, you might not even notice it, because the is no bang and no damage to you, and it's easy to miss a single message during a dogfight. (And people are more inclined to take note of events that hurt them)
Post by: The Fugitive on December 09, 2018, 07:36:46 PM
In my personal experience in AH, if I cause the collision, I get damage. Ok fair enough. If someone collides with me, I get damage. I honestly cannot say I have ever flown away from a collision in the game undamaged. None that I can recall, but hey I don't play a lot anymore.
Apparently many do fly away undamaged.
Make no mistake, I ask for nothing from this game. The people who own it, do as they see fit, not what the customers necessarily ask for. ( again reality )
So far as the OP, they are indeed great ideas :aok
I had at least 4 of them last night. Tight turn fights and I rolled my plane out of the way at just the right time and bang, he got a collision, and I didnt. I worked hard to avoid a collision and so DIDNT get penalized for one.
The system HTC uses is the best of all worlds, you just need to understand how it works.
Post by: Meatwad on December 09, 2018, 07:40:47 PM
Perhaps you don't understand it. Don't collide and you take no damage.
As soon as the internet can move faster than the speed of light, there will be no lag and both planes seemingly in the exact space and time will collide. Since there is lag, both planes are not always in the exact space and time, hence one collides and the other does not.
The alternatives are no collisions at all or dying from a collision when you didn't collide.
Regarding MAGA, we do need new planes. The most recent new fighter was added in July 2013 and January 2014 for the newest bomber.
Years ago I played Unreal Tournament quite a bit, and there were some servers online that had a mod called zero ping that even with a 120ms connection, everything was real time. No lag/delay with a shot or any player interactions. Guess on a big server like this that would be a nightmare to try to implement
Post by: JOACH1M on December 09, 2018, 09:00:47 PM
Because on their front end, they did not collide with you. On your front end, it did appear the planes collided. There is no other reasonable way to handle the discrepancy, is there?Uhhh quite sure many times on their screen and my screen both showed planes colliding many times. I know for a fact from thousands of 1v1’s that is the case majority of the time.
The fact you didn't see them coming isn't the fault of the algorithm. That's the same as getting shot down by someone you didn't see coming. War is Hell.
Are you saying you had collisions with planes that on your front end were clearly not close? Since you said you didn't see them coming, I take it that is not the case.
The fault of the algorithm is that damage is not ever consistent for either player. So many times I get rammed and instantly killed while other player flys off in harmed. When I get the message that they “collided with you”.
Also did you even look at the film link I posted? There is no reason we can’t have a collision system like that ingame.
Post by: CptTrips on December 09, 2018, 09:05:36 PM
Uhhh quite sure many times on their screen and my screen both showed planes colliding many times. I know for a fact from thousands of 1v1’s that is the case majority of the time.
The fault of the algorithm is that damage is not ever consistent for either player. So many times I get rammed and instantly killed while other player flys off in harmed. When I get the message that they “collided with you”.
Also did you even look at the film link I posted? There is no reason we can’t have a collision system like that ingame.
Sorry, I might have misunderstood your point.
So you are saying that both of you saw collisions but you felt your aircraft was unfairly damaged more?
I did watch your video. I wasn't sure what you were illustrating with it. I assume that was offline play footage?
Post by: The Fugitive on December 09, 2018, 09:07:16 PM
Post by: JOACH1M on December 09, 2018, 09:13:51 PM
How much of that film you talk about is an on line server? A mission in the game would have no lag issues as your playing by yourself on your computer so sure those collisions work well. With lag involved in an on line environment you need a system that damages those that DO collide.I can log in to IL-2 and achieve the exact results if you would like. I’ll stream it live and post it here.
Sorry, I might have misunderstood your point.Yes both enemy and I seen each other crash into each other on both screens. There has been many times I’ve taken no damage (with or without collision), took some reasonable damage (with or without collided message) and times I took all the damage etc... the footage was shot both online and offline play.
So you are saying that both of you saw collisions but you felt your aircraft was unfairly damaged more?
I did watch your video. I wasn't sure what you were illustrating with it. I assume that was offline play footage?
Post by: CptTrips on December 09, 2018, 09:29:52 PM
There has been many times I’ve taken no damage (with or without collision), took some reasonable damage (with or without collided message) and times I took all the damage etc... the footage was shot both online and offline play.
I think I got you now.
We made the assumption your were talking about difference in collision detection due to lag. A common complaint.
You are saying that even when both clients detect the collision, the damage model is not as fine grain, and detailed as you want, sometimes leading to inconsistent differences in the levels of damage between the two aircraft.
You might have a point there. Those videos looked very nice.
:salute
Post by: pembquist on December 09, 2018, 09:54:32 PM
So the status quo is fine as far as I am concerned.
Post by: JOACH1M on December 09, 2018, 10:00:48 PM
I think I got you now.My apologies for not explaining it better. :salute
We made the assumption your were talking about difference in collision detection due to lag. A common complaint.
You are saying that even when both clients detect the collision, the damage model is not as fine grain, and detailed as you want, sometimes leading to inconsistent differences in the levels of damage between the two aircraft.
You might have a point there. Those videos looked very nice.
:salute
But yes. It’s things like that might make the game look and feel a lot better.
Post by: caldera on December 10, 2018, 07:36:32 AM
Uhhh quite sure many times on their screen and my screen both showed planes colliding many times. I know for a fact from thousands of 1v1’s that is the case majority of the time.
The fault of the algorithm is that damage is not ever consistent for either player. So many times I get rammed and instantly killed while other player flys off in harmed. When I get the message that they “collided with you”.
Also did you even look at the film link I posted? There is no reason we can’t have a collision system like that ingame.
My guess would be that they also got rounds into you. I've sometimes collided with planes, but killed them with gun fire. They may not look like they have a guns solution on your end but just as you don't see the collision, you don't have an accurate picture of their relative position.
Another factor is that AH3 doesn't have the sound of the rounds hitting you like AH2 did. Sometimes you hear one ping or even none at all.
Post by: mako04 on December 10, 2018, 08:07:48 AM
Post by: Shuffler on December 10, 2018, 10:19:14 AM
Post by: ONTOS on December 10, 2018, 12:35:11 PM
Post by: JunkyII on December 10, 2018, 01:21:50 PM
AH's collision model is the perfect solution for a game in which players all over the world play on a single server in Texas.2 people using LAN would show all the same problems in the collision model as Joachim is describing.
Post by: lunaticfringe on December 10, 2018, 01:29:10 PM
and I think the future of this post will travel to the wish list
Post by: bustr on December 10, 2018, 01:33:42 PM
Both IL2 and WT have in essence a secondary game entertainment action film taking place called "damage model". It's quite extensive and detailed for a reason, lack of numbers. When you don't have numbers and large scale activity taking up the attention span of the customer, you have to fill in everything with detail. Right down to how you kiss the ground. Like how console games are neon eye candy worlds while the real action is not much different than 38 years ago when you paid 25 cents a go in a game center. Run, jump, left, right, gunsight on the other dudes face, blow the sucker away. All in 3D orgasmic eye candy crack cocaine while the underlying shootemup has not changed.
As for the AH collision function that rewards you destruction when you never saw your plane touch the enemy's plane. It kills me only when I try to pull my plane too close to the enemy I'm fighting. When I'm trying to be clever and slip past him by the skin of my teeth thinking I'll win by gaining angles first. There is ACM in an air combat simulator, then there is trying to be clever in a mosh pit called an airplane shootemup computer game. Personally what sucks, you are trying to avoid getting too close and you watch the weenie fighting you pull in too close. Then you loose your wing no matter how hard you were working to avoid a random collision just like that. Why didn't the function see I was doing everything to avoid triggering it while the weenie pulled his nose in to me and flew through me? That happens maybe once a tour and I may get towered once or twice the rest of the tour taking the risk of getting close to gain a kill.
Though, if I spend a tour hopping into every low and slow furball I can find, my random collisions go up becasue everyone one is flying late war monsters on the deck like WW1 biplanes. And we are all getting really close. Some of the biggest complainers about the collision function looked to me over the years to spend most of their time in the middle of those WW1 biplane style combat arcade sessions. And many were not happy with the graphics while they were stuck looking at it waiting to hit the ground to get back in the tower. Shades of IL2 and it's in flight damage model movie to entertain you until you hit the ground.
Post by: CptTrips on December 10, 2018, 03:18:12 PM
Krup used the same IL2 video as Jo back around 2014 to attack Hitech and try to pull players out of AH to IL2. And he gave the lack of a similar detailed damage graphics modeling as one of his reasons for not flying in AH. It's human nature to try to hurt someone by assuming the mantle of a righteous victim avenger when you feel hurt and rejected. It's easy with AH since one individual is AH, and that is Hitech. In the past when AH had numbers, the selling point was not graphics, it was the magic of hundreds of players fighting at the same time.
Both IL2 and WT have in essence a secondary game entertainment action film taking place called "damage model". It's quite extensive and detailed for a reason, lack of numbers. When you don't have numbers and large scale activity taking up the attention span of the customer, you have to fill in everything with detail. Right down to how you kiss the ground. Like how console games are neon eye candy worlds while the real action is not much different than 38 years ago when you paid 25 cents a go in a game center. Run, jump, left, right, gunsight on the other dudes face, blow the sucker away. All in 3D orgasmic eye candy crack cocaine while the underlying shootemup has not changed.
As for the AH collision function that rewards you destruction when you never saw your plane touch the enemy's plane. It kills me only when I try to pull my plane too close to the enemy I'm fighting. When I'm trying to be clever and slip past him by the skin of my teeth thinking I'll win by gaining angles first. There is ACM in an air combat simulator, then there is trying to be clever in a mosh pit called an airplane shootemup computer game. Personally what sucks, you are trying to avoid getting too close and you watch the weenie fighting you pull in too close. Then you loose your wing no matter how hard you were working to avoid a random collision just like that. Why didn't the function see I was doing everything to avoid triggering it while the weenie pulled his nose in to me and flew through me? That happens maybe once a tour and I may get towered once or twice the rest of the tour taking the risk of getting close to gain a kill.
Though, if I spend a tour hopping into every low and slow furball I can find, my random collisions go up becasue everyone one is flying late war monsters on the deck like WW1 biplanes. And we are all getting really close. Some of the biggest complainers about the collision function looked to me over the years to spend most of their time in the middle of those WW1 biplane style combat arcade sessions. And many were not happy with the graphics while they were stuck looking at it waiting to hit the ground to get back in the tower. Shades of IL2 and it's in flight damage model movie to entertain you until you hit the ground.
Wow.
Post by: Shuffler on December 10, 2018, 04:47:50 PM
Krup used the same IL2 video as Jo back around 2014 to attack Hitech and try to pull players out of AH to IL2. And he gave the lack of a similar detailed damage graphics modeling as one of his reasons for not flying in AH. It's human nature to try to hurt someone by assuming the mantle of a righteous victim avenger when you feel hurt and rejected. It's easy with AH since one individual is AH, and that is Hitech. In the past when AH had numbers, the selling point was not graphics, it was the magic of hundreds of players fighting at the same time.
Both IL2 and WT have in essence a secondary game entertainment action film taking place called "damage model". It's quite extensive and detailed for a reason, lack of numbers. When you don't have numbers and large scale activity taking up the attention span of the customer, you have to fill in everything with detail. Right down to how you kiss the ground. Like how console games are neon eye candy worlds while the real action is not much different than 38 years ago when you paid 25 cents a go in a game center. Run, jump, left, right, gunsight on the other dudes face, blow the sucker away. All in 3D orgasmic eye candy crack cocaine while the underlying shootemup has not changed.
As for the AH collision function that rewards you destruction when you never saw your plane touch the enemy's plane. It kills me only when I try to pull my plane too close to the enemy I'm fighting. When I'm trying to be clever and slip past him by the skin of my teeth thinking I'll win by gaining angles first. There is ACM in an air combat simulator, then there is trying to be clever in a mosh pit called an airplane shootemup computer game. Personally what sucks, you are trying to avoid getting too close and you watch the weenie fighting you pull in too close. Then you loose your wing no matter how hard you were working to avoid a random collision just like that. Why didn't the function see I was doing everything to avoid triggering it while the weenie pulled his nose in to me and flew through me? That happens maybe once a tour and I may get towered once or twice the rest of the tour taking the risk of getting close to gain a kill.
Though, if I spend a tour hopping into every low and slow furball I can find, my random collisions go up becasue everyone one is flying late war monsters on the deck like WW1 biplanes. And we are all getting really close. Some of the biggest complainers about the collision function looked to me over the years to spend most of their time in the middle of those WW1 biplane style combat arcade sessions. And many were not happy with the graphics while they were stuck looking at it waiting to hit the ground to get back in the tower. Shades of IL2 and it's in flight damage model movie to entertain you until you hit the ground.
I know a guy who was over at IL2 and texted me... he got excited as he found a nickle on the ground. Excellent graphics... he said it looked just like one.
Post by: captain1ma on December 10, 2018, 04:55:21 PM
Post by: mako04 on December 10, 2018, 06:29:18 PM
Post by: Max on December 10, 2018, 06:40:13 PM
I know a guy who was over at IL2 and texted me... he got excited as he found a nickle on the ground. Excellent graphics... he said it looked just like one.
:headscratch:
Post by: flippz on December 10, 2018, 06:55:57 PM
Post by: flippz on December 10, 2018, 07:01:35 PM
In the real world, both get damage because both collide.How do you have a collision with one plane? How can I avoid a plane in a time warp continuum? Is the game not smart enough to say wait that bomber was straight and level and this dork in a 190 just rammed the rear of him. Let us give the collision to the bomber and let the 190 fly off.
In AH, occasionally just ONE collides.
What you are asking for is getting a collision hit even if you clearly evade the other plane.
Two planes collide they take same damage mirrored.
Post by: CptTrips on December 10, 2018, 07:16:14 PM
How do you have a collision with one plane? How can I avoid a plane in a time warp continuum? Is the game not smart enough to say wait that bomber was straight and level and this dork in a 190 just rammed the rear of him. Let us give the collision to the bomber and let the 190 fly off.
Two planes collide they take same damage mirrored.
Because due to closure rates and internet ping times between clients, aircraft positions may not be exactly the same on both client's screens.
One player may clearly see the other aircraft pass 10 yards behind his tail.
The other player may have clearly seen himself crash into the tail of the other.
Should the first player blow up when he saw the miss?
Should the second player pass through the tail of the other without damage?
If you figure out how to transmit packets across the internet with zero transit time, please PM me. I have some high-frequency trading ideas I'd like to explore with you. :lol
Post by: Lusche on December 10, 2018, 07:28:50 PM
Two planes collide they take same damage mirrored.
Enemy Pony comes at you for the ram. You dodge him.
So you would be fine with still getting a collision result even if you clearly avoided him?
Post by: flippz on December 10, 2018, 07:33:38 PM
Enemy Pony comes at you for the ram. You dodge him.Yes. I take damage all the time trying to avoid planes. Just the other day I was landing and a ki84 was vulching me and I get the collide as he passes so again yes. Two planes collide two planes take damage. People will learn coming head on taking the risk will not be worth it if there’s a 100% chance they are gonna take damage.
So you would be fine with still getting a collision result even if you clearly avoided him?
Post by: flippz on December 10, 2018, 07:37:15 PM
Because due to closure rates and internet ping times between clients, aircraft positions may not be exactly the same on both client's screens.Again the game can tell where all the Bullets are hitting but not the planes. Does not make since. There’s a guy that flys in the am a lot and I feel horrible for him. On my screen we are 400 apart and then I get xxx has collided with you. I am I willing to take damage on that to even up the guys that almost use it as a weapon? Yes
One player may clearly see the other aircraft pass 10 yards behind his tail.
The other player may have clearly seen himself crash into the tail of the other.
Should the first player blow up when he saw the miss?
Should the second player pass through the tail of the other without damage?
If you figure out how to transmit packets across the internet with zero transit time, please PM me. I have some high-frequency trading ideas I'd like to explore with you. :lol
Post by: Lusche on December 10, 2018, 07:40:49 PM
Yes. I take damage all the time trying to avoid planes
I did not say "trying"
In the current model, you do not get any collision damage if there is no collision on your screen. If you avoid the enemy, you won't get hurt by a collision (you still can get shot!)
So again, if you clearly avoid the enemy plane, you still want to get collision damage?
Just for illustration, here a typical asymetrical collision again:
(http://i1145.photobucket.com/albums/o507/Snaildude/ramp47fe_zps40fa9a20.jpg)
This P-47 pilot's view. Message reads "Lusche has collided with you" (P-51 pilot). Jug didn't get any damage, only the pony did.
"Both take damage" would mean the Jug would go down.
Very same moment on the Pony pilot's screen:
(http://i1145.photobucket.com/albums/o507/Snaildude/ramponyfe_zps68464ed1.jpg)
Post by: CptTrips on December 10, 2018, 07:43:38 PM
Again the game can tell where all the Bullets are hitting but not the planes. Does not make since. There’s a guy that flys in the am a lot and I feel horrible for him. On my screen we are 400 apart and then I get xxx has collided with you. I am I willing to take damage on that to even up the guys that almost use it as a weapon? Yes
Bullet hits are determined local to the shooter's world view.
So you shoot at the plane you see on your client. At the position you see him. When the bullets your client is calculating the flight for are calculated to have hit the enemy as your client see's it, it notifies the other client through the server layer that he has been hit.
[edit]
Collisions are determine locally as well. But only your own collisions.
:salute
Post by: 100Coogn on December 10, 2018, 08:16:27 PM
Coogan
Post by: Ciaphas on December 10, 2018, 08:25:20 PM
I do think that if the server registers a collision, both actors should receive damage based on the impact site for each vehicle, regardless of what the player sees on his screen. For their to be a collision event both players have to occupy the same point in 3d space.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Post by: CptTrips on December 10, 2018, 08:35:26 PM
As far as offline collision and how damage is dealt is concerned, someone will probably run a test and report back here.
I do think that if the server registers a collision, both actors should receive damage based on the impact site for each vehicle, regardless of what the player sees on his screen. For their to be a collision event both players have to occupy the same point in 3d space.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I do not believe the AH server determines collisions.
That would be a massive amount of calculations for the server to do for all players in real time. That is not scalable.
By delegating the calculations of self-fired bullet hits and self-collisions to individual clients, you are distributing the load and parallel processing.
When your plane occupies the same 3d space as another plane (in your world view) you do collide.
When your plane does not occupies the same 3d space as another plane (in your world view) you do not collide.
You simply don't collide when your plane occupies the same 3d space as another plane on their world view but not on yours.
:salute
Post by: CptTrips on December 10, 2018, 08:39:24 PM
Do both planes take damage when a collision occurs playing offline missions? Ping time is not a variable here.
Coogan
I've seen the AI fly through the ground so I'm not sure they process collisions events the same way a player does.
But I have had them ram into me from behind and kill me.
:salute
Post by: Ciaphas on December 10, 2018, 08:42:09 PM
the server should take a scenario reported by two clients and ask "Can this happen and did this happen?". based on the information gathered by the server both clients should receive a response indicating the outcome of the collision trigger.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Post by: Lusche on December 10, 2018, 08:42:18 PM
I do think that if the server registers a collision, both actors should receive damage based on the impact site for each vehicle, regardless of what the player sees on his screen.
Just for for clarification, the server does never register any collisions. Collision detection is done loacally. The server is just the man in the middle.
For their to be a collision event both players have to occupy the same point in 3d space.
But they rarely do. See the pctures aboe, which are coming from an actual online situation. If you would let a collision event happen only if both actually 'occupy the same 3d space', you are openening just another can of worms: Players like me would almost never cause a collision, means they could just fly guns blazing through any opponent. All while other players (with a very low ping) would still have to worry about potential collisions.
Right now AH has 'what you see is what you get'. With a proposed "only if both occupy the same 3d space" the results would be totally inconsistent.
Post by: pembquist on December 10, 2018, 09:03:29 PM
Post by: The Fugitive on December 10, 2018, 09:04:57 PM
As far as offline collision and how damage is dealt is concerned, someone will probably run a test and report back here.
I do think that if the server registers a collision, both actors should receive damage based on the impact site for each vehicle, regardless of what the player sees on his screen. For their to be a collision event both players have to occupy the same point in 3d space.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
So on your screen, you and another plane pass basically head on but 40 feet off set, both planes are breaking left say to avoid a HO guns solution. You would be ok with a wing coming off your plane because on the other guys view, due to lag, he was much closer as he turned out late.
I wouldnt, I like it as it is, I have control of my plane, and I avoid the other guy, even if it means giving up angles, I should survive and NOT be penalized because the other guy tried to fly strait through me.
Post by: mako04 on December 10, 2018, 09:06:07 PM
Post by: pembquist on December 10, 2018, 09:08:36 PM
Post by: mako04 on December 10, 2018, 09:10:38 PM
Post by: Ciaphas on December 10, 2018, 09:11:10 PM
So on your screen, you and another plane pass basically head on but 40 feet off set, both planes are breaking left say to avoid a HO guns solution. You would be ok with a wing coming off your plane because on the other guys view, due to lag, he was much closer as he turned out late.
I wouldnt, I like it as it is, I have control of my plane, and I avoid the other guy, even if it means giving up angles, I should survive and NOT be penalized because the other guy tried to fly strait through me.
With what people are saying both positions are relative the the machine. So they are both correct and damage should be cancelled out.
Dale is a very intelligent individual, I'm sure he has client-side reconciliation in place to deal with client-side predictions.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Post by: mako04 on December 10, 2018, 09:12:41 PM
Post by: Ciaphas on December 10, 2018, 09:16:39 PM
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Post by: CptTrips on December 10, 2018, 09:19:09 PM
With what people are saying both positions are relative the the machine. So they are both correct and damage should be cancelled out.
Dale is a very intelligent individual, I'm sure he has client-side reconciliation in place to deal with client-side predictions.
I assure you HT has thought about this for decades. It's been a problem that has had to be considered since the first plane flew on AW in 1988. Of all the possible solutions in an imperfect internet environment, he has chosen this model as the best compromise.
I think he made the right choice.
:salute
Post by: mako04 on December 10, 2018, 09:20:56 PM
Post by: Ciaphas on December 10, 2018, 09:22:04 PM
I assure you HT has thought about this for decades. It's been a problem that has had to be considered since the first plane flew on AW in 1988. Of all the possible solutions in an imperfect internet environment, he has chosen this model as the best compromise.
I think he made the right choice.
:salute
It's a good compromise as far as performance is concerned.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Post by: mako04 on December 10, 2018, 09:24:17 PM
That would MAHGA!
Post by: Volron on December 10, 2018, 11:10:36 PM
I'll take Bomb n Bailer's for 400 Alex.
:D
Post by: JOACH1M on December 11, 2018, 12:47:29 AM
What was this thread about? :bolt:Making Aces High great.
You know whats not great? Collision model.
Post by: flippz on December 11, 2018, 07:16:46 AM
I did not say "trying"Lusche all due respect we have been through this many times. I still personally think it sucks and have played other games I find use collision model more efficiently.
In the current model, you do not get any collision damage if there is no collision on your screen. If you avoid the enemy, you won't get hurt by a collision (you still can get shot!)
So again, if you clearly avoid the enemy plane, you still want to get collision damage?
Just for illustration, here a typical asymetrical collision again:
(http://i1145.photobucket.com/albums/o507/Snaildude/ramp47fe_zps40fa9a20.jpg)
This P-47 pilot's view. Message reads "Lusche has collided with you" (P-51 pilot). Jug didn't get any damage, only the pony did.
"Both take damage" would mean the Jug would go down.
Very same moment on the Pony pilot's screen:
(http://i1145.photobucket.com/albums/o507/Snaildude/ramponyfe_zps68464ed1.jpg)
Post by: lunaticfringe on December 11, 2018, 09:52:43 AM
Krup used the same IL2 video as Jo back around 2014 to attack Hitech and try to pull players out of AH to IL2. And he gave the lack of a similar detailed damage graphics modeling as one of his reasons for not flying in AH. It's human nature to try to hurt someone by assuming the mantle of a righteous victim avenger when you feel hurt and rejected. It's easy with AH since one individual is AH, and that is Hitech. In the past when AH had numbers, the selling point was not graphics, it was the magic of hundreds of players fighting at the same time.
Both IL2 and WT have in essence a secondary game entertainment action film taking place called "damage model". It's quite extensive and detailed for a reason, lack of numbers. When you don't have numbers and large scale activity taking up the attention span of the customer, you have to fill in everything with detail. Right down to how you kiss the ground. Like how console games are neon eye candy worlds while the real action is not much different than 38 years ago when you paid 25 cents a go in a game center. Run, jump, left, right, gunsight on the other dudes face, blow the sucker away. All in 3D orgasmic eye candy crack cocaine while the underlying shootemup has not changed.
As for the AH collision function that rewards you destruction when you never saw your plane touch the enemy's plane. It kills me only when I try to pull my plane too close to the enemy I'm fighting. When I'm trying to be clever and slip past him by the skin of my teeth thinking I'll win by gaining angles first. There is ACM in an air combat simulator, then there is trying to be clever in a mosh pit called an airplane shootemup computer game. Personally what sucks, you are trying to avoid getting too close and you watch the weenie fighting you pull in too close. Then you loose your wing no matter how hard you were working to avoid a random collision just like that. Why didn't the function see I was doing everything to avoid triggering it while the weenie pulled his nose in to me and flew through me? That happens maybe once a tour and I may get towered once or twice the rest of the tour taking the risk of getting close to gain a kill.
Though, if I spend a tour hopping into every low and slow furball I can find, my random collisions go up becasue everyone one is flying late war monsters on the deck like WW1 biplanes. And we are all getting really close. Some of the biggest complainers about the collision function looked to me over the years to spend most of their time in the middle of those WW1 biplane style combat arcade sessions. And many were not happy with the graphics while they were stuck looking at it waiting to hit the ground to get back in the tower. Shades of IL2 and it's in flight damage model movie to entertain you until you hit the ground.
Bustr have you ever thought of writing a book?^^that was so eloquent. felt kinda felt like I was reading a story-seriously
Post by: Wiley on December 11, 2018, 09:56:07 AM
I've seen the AI fly through the ground so I'm not sure they process collisions events the same way a player does.
But I have had them ram into me from behind and kill me.
:salute
AI went through the ground online, or offline? If it's offline the rules might be different for them.
If it's online what people need to keep in mind is that every single thing other than your bullets striking a target and your collisions is an approximation. Where their vehicles are, where their bullets are, where their bombs are... Everything is not exactly where it is on the other end. The only two things that are accurate on your end is what your bullets hit, and whether or not you run into something.
When you see a plane go through the ground, it's because it narrowly missed the ground on its end but because you're only getting periodic position updates with the plane still moving on your end, it can go through the ground on your end when you're a bit of a distance away. It's not hax, it's just latency.
Wiley.
Post by: caldera on December 11, 2018, 11:17:40 AM
AH3 was three years in development. Afterwards, there were fairly regular updates of ancient AH1 models, but those seemed to dry up this year. Aside from some dot radar adjustments, game updates are solely about VR and bug fixes.
What happened to Hop? Wasn't she supposed to be some kind of promoter on social media? We need squeakers in here ASAP. :old:
They are a small company, I get that. But things have been awful quiet on the development front. And no new fighters since July of 2013. I'm beginning to lose interest in this game.
Post by: CptTrips on December 11, 2018, 11:33:19 AM
AI went through the ground online, or offline? If it's offline the rules might be different for them.
The cases I were referring to were offline. Yes, I am sure their collision logic is not the same as a real player. Probably is a compromise given their limitations.
So my point was in response to Coogan, basically I don't think you could use the offline AI mission to explore the 2-player collision behavior. The AI ain't playing by the same rules as you are.
:salute
Post by: JOACH1M on December 11, 2018, 11:34:28 AM
Wondering if anything is cooking at HTC HQ... :noidThe game is simply a hobby and not the money maker for htc.. They will work at their own pace. Not sure where Hop went, but IMO social media presence needs to be aimed at WW2 groups on Facebook.
AH3 was three years in development. Afterwards, there were fairly regular updates of ancient AH1 models, but those seemed to dry up this year. Aside from some dot radar adjustments, game updates are solely about VR and bug fixes.
What happened to Hop? Wasn't she supposed to be some kind of promoter on social media? We need squeakers in here ASAP. :old:
They are a small company, I get that. But things have been awful quiet on the development front. And no new fighters since July of 2013. I'm beginning to lose interest in this game.
Sadly like you many of us have been losing interest.
Post by: Wiley on December 11, 2018, 12:07:52 PM
Sadly like you many of us have been losing interest.
The first time every person logs into this game, or any game really, a clock starts on when they're going to get bored with it. The fact that some people still play this after over a decade considering the simplicity of the game play is kind of astounding.
Personally I really have my doubts that a new plane would do much. Whoopee, we'd get a G55 or a P61 or a Bearcat or whatever. We'd still be doing the same things with it we do with all the other planes.
Wiley.
Post by: caldera on December 11, 2018, 12:58:29 PM
The first time every person logs into this game, or any game really, a clock starts on when they're going to get bored with it. The fact that some people still play this after over a decade considering the simplicity of the game play is kind of astounding.
Personally I really have my doubts that a new plane would do much. Whoopee, we'd get a G55 or a P61 or a Bearcat or whatever. We'd still be doing the same things with it we do with all the other planes.
Wiley.
What would happen if HTC had only one plane to choose from? Would we still be doing the same things, or would the game have died in 1999. Variety is the spice of life.
Post by: Wiley on December 11, 2018, 01:08:40 PM
What would happen if HTC had only one plane to choose from? Would we still be doing the same things, or would the game have died in 1999. Variety is the spice of life.
Going from 1 to 2 is huge. Going from 70 to 71... not so much.
Wiley.
Post by: hitech on December 11, 2018, 02:22:05 PM
The game is simply a hobby and not the money maker for htc.. They will work at their own pace. Not sure where Hop went, but IMO social media presence needs to be aimed at WW2 groups on Facebook.
Sadly like you many of us have been losing interest.
AH Is not a hobby. It has been mine and many others full time employment for almost 20 years. I'm not sure what bug you found up there, but your posting that constantly troll/belittle HTC must end.
HiTech
HiTech
Post by: pembquist on December 11, 2018, 02:44:05 PM
Post by: JOACH1M on December 11, 2018, 03:17:03 PM
The first time every person logs into this game, or any game really, a clock starts on when they're going to get bored with it. The fact that some people still play this after over a decade considering the simplicity of the game play is kind of astounding.Well it almost 10 years for me and don’t get me wrong I do get the bug to play every now and then, but it’s not the same addiction I once had. But with that said that will happen with ANY game. Never have I played a game for more then 2 years in a row let alone almost 10...
Personally I really have my doubts that a new plane would do much. Whoopee, we'd get a G55 or a P61 or a Bearcat or whatever. We'd still be doing the same things with it we do with all the other planes.
Wiley.
I miss the competitive trolling and banter that would happen on 200. Have something lead up to a 1v1 match... I miss SDL, and I even miss the drama and tantrums associated with it. People just don’t seem to care to compete anymore besides KOTH.
TBH I miss skyyr. I miss having to play cat and mouse with someone as good as him. Made me want to better myself and try new things. I like being pushed.
Post by: JOACH1M on December 11, 2018, 03:30:32 PM
AH Is not a hobby. It has been mine and many others full time employment for almost 20 years. I'm not sure what bug you found up there, but your posting that constantly troll/belittle HTC must end.Maybe I’m just sad the game has seemed to stray off the path it used to be on. Used to be all out combat. MA and Furball lake.... Titanic Tuesday’s... idk I understand times got really tough on the community and the numbers fell. I hope we see 400+ players in the MA again I really do.
HiTech
HiTech
Post by: Oldman731 on December 11, 2018, 09:38:38 PM
Used to be all out combat.
You are aging faster than you should, young Jedi.
The game hasn't been all out combat since at least late 2001. There have always been runners, gangers, hordes, NOE missions, HQ porkers, vulchers, and utility griefers. I believe there may be a lower proportion of dogfighting afficionados now, probably because many of the original crowd who longed to fulfill their childhood dreams of being WWII fighter pilots has died, drifted away or lost their minds. But if we had films from 2002, they would show about the same dynamic as we have now - with almost the same number of people.
So pop a beer, find a comfy chair that has a footrest, and listen to "They Way We Were" while you gaze out the window and vegetate.
- oldman (highly recommended activity, actually. better than yoga.)
Post by: 100Coogn on December 11, 2018, 10:02:23 PM
What would happen if HTC had only one plane to choose from? Would we still be doing the same things, or would the game have died in 1999. Variety is the spice of life.
Until the plane-set outnumbers the players.
Coogan
Post by: Mongoose on December 11, 2018, 10:15:33 PM
Maybe I’m just sad the game has seemed to stray off the path it used to be on. Used to be all out combat. MA and Furball lake.... Titanic Tuesday’s... idk I understand times got really tough on the community and the numbers fell. I hope we see 400+ players in the MA again I really do.
None of this is the fault of the game or the developers. It is a change in the type of players that are online now. So many people demand changes to attract new players, but those changes would make this game something completely different than it is. The game is fine. We just need to find a way to show the modern player what a gem Aces High is.
This comes down to we the players making this an inviting place. We have this wonderful playground to play in. Let's stop throwing sand.
Post by: JOACH1M on December 12, 2018, 03:05:01 AM
You are aging faster than you should, young Jedi.
The game hasn't been all out combat since at least late 2001. There have always been runners, gangers, hordes, NOE missions, HQ porkers, vulchers, and utility griefers.
There wasn’t a re-supply dynamic back then. The-supplying avoids fighting by sneaking ground vehicles under the new GV far under trees with engine off. As soon as the enemy flies off the start up and charge into town to re-sup. That didn’t happen back then.
Quote
I believe there may be a lower proportion of dogfighting afficionados now, probably because many of the original crowd who longed to fulfill their childhood dreams of being WWII fighter pilots has died, drifted away or lost their minds. But if we had films from 2002, they would show about the same dynamic as we have now - with almost the same number of people.Do you remember the 12 hour rule? If so if killed a lot of good players attitude towards fighting in the MA.
So pop a beer, find a comfy chair that has a footrest, and listen to "They Way We Were" while you gaze out the window and vegetate.
- oldman (highly recommended activity, actually. better than yoga.)
Post by: JOACH1M on December 12, 2018, 03:07:58 AM
None of this is the fault of the game or the developers. It is a change in the type of players that are online now. So many people demand changes to attract new players, but those changes would make this game something completely different than it is. The game is fine. We just need to find a way to show the modern player what a gem Aces High is.like I said... AH needs to advertise on ww2 Facebook pages as to attempt to attract more players. I’m atleast. 7 groups that have 15k plus members. I’m just a member and can’t advertise without admin approval, but maybe someone can pull a strong or two to advertise.
This comes down to we the players making this an inviting place. We have this wonderful playground to play in. Let's stop throwing sand.
Post by: Shuffler on December 12, 2018, 06:06:37 AM
There wasn’t a re-supply dynamic back then. The-supplying avoids fighting by sneaking ground vehicles under the new GV far under trees with engine off. As soon as the enemy flies off the start up and charge into town to re-sup. That didn’t happen back then. Do you remember the 12 hour rule? If so if killed a lot of good players attitude towards fighting in the MA.
So pop a beer, find a comfy chair that has a footrest, and listen to "They Way We Were" while you gaze out the window and vegetate.
- oldman (highly recommended activity, actually. better than yoga.)
Some things grow, some remain stagnant. We all choose where we want to fit in.
Post by: hitech on December 12, 2018, 08:53:27 AM
like I said... AH needs to advertise on ww2 Facebook pages as to attempt to attract more players. I’m atleast. 7 groups that have 15k plus members. I’m just a member and can’t advertise without admin approval, but maybe someone can pull a strong or two to advertise.
We all ready have done Facebook adds. The ROI was not sustainable.
HiTech
Post by: JOACH1M on December 12, 2018, 12:26:31 PM
We all ready have done Facebook adds. The ROI was not sustainable.I see.
HiTech
Post by: John Galt on December 12, 2018, 05:51:22 PM
Make Aceshigh Great Again. Can we get some new planes in the game please i dont care about all the little things its been way too long now working on them we need something to spice things up a bit here
we need some daily missions to complete in the main arena that pay out rewards like PERKS!
a new way to capture a field would be kinda cool
oh yeah we need some new planes and tanks in the game how cool would that be for EVERYONE!
rant over flame away :bolt:
Sounds like you want to play War Thunder or WOP