Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: DVDA on July 08, 2023, 01:24:42 PM
-
So I haven't played in probably 10 years. (At this point I can't remember) so I doubt anyone remembers me. I stopped because I was tired of the head on collision random penalty and the self inflicted friendly fire damage (also forgot what those two systems were called but they are lame for a realism dogfighting sim).
Anyway I was admiring a painting the other day and it got my wondering what models the planes are.
Figured the best place to ask was my old stomping ground with dedicated WW2 sim pilots. So anyway does anyone know the model of these planes? Obviously people will say BF109 and what not but I am curious of the actual models like BF109 E-4 or whatever. Photo is from August 31, 1940 if that help narrow the models.
(https://i.ibb.co/nPBFrsQ/Action-on-31-August-1940-layers-v3-apr14-2-xgaplus.jpg)
PS is the head on collision penalty the same? If not maybe I'll make my grand return. Thanks guys.
-
I stopped because I was tired of the head on collision random penalty
There is nothing random about it.
-
Planes looks like a hurricane mk1 and 109 E
-
Planes looks like a hurricane mk1 and 109 E
I figured E or F based on date. Maybe E-3?
There is nothing random about it.
You said that last time I posted years ago. Whether true or not the system is dumb. Should be accurate collision detection.
-
I figured E or F based on date. Maybe E-3?
You said that last time I posted years ago. Whether true or not the system is dumb. Should be accurate collision detection.
There is no way to have "accurate" detection due to internet lag. There still is not "faster than light" internet connections and so lag plays a big part in how the collisions work. What you see versus what the other person sees can be a 40 foot difference in game (think wing span) because of the lag.
The best and only control is to avoid any collision on your screen. If you avoid a collision while flying you will not take damage from a collision....... from a cannon round or two is another matter.
Come on back DVDA!
-
You said that last time I posted years ago. Whether true or not the system is dumb. Should be accurate collision detection.
It is true.
It is not dumb.
And it is perfectly accurate on your front-end.
You saw a collision on your front end, so of course you have to suffer the damage. Or else you would see yourself pass thru objects and that would be worse.
He saw no collision occur on his end, so it would be silly for him to suffer phantom damage from no collision that could have been seen from his front-end. Or else he would take unexplained damage any time he passed by a plane but still saw daylight between them.
There is no better system given the basic laws of physics and the non-zero time of travel of packets.
If you have a better system, it onus is on you to describe how your mythical algorithm would do it better. In detail. But first patent it, because you won't find any compromise better in the literature.
-
It is true.
It is not dumb.
And it is perfectly accurate on your front-end.
You saw a collision on your front end, so of course you have to suffer the damage. Or else you would see yourself pass thru objects and that would be worse.
He saw no collision occur on his end, so it would be silly for him to suffer phantom damage from no collision that could have been seen from his front-end. Or else he would take unexplained damage any time he passed by a plane but still saw daylight between them.
There is no better system given the basic laws of physics and the non-zero time of travel of packets.
If you have a better system, it onus is on you to describe how your mythical algorithm would do it better. In detail. But first patent it, because you won't find any compromise better in the literature.
Both players flying head on into each other nose to nose and firing. Only one will receive the penalty. That's dumb. Both should receive damage based on what part of plane struck what.
-
Both players flying head on into each other nose to nose and firing. Only one will receive the penalty. That's dumb. Both should receive damage based on what part of plane struck what.
Are you talking collisions or bullet damage?
Bullet hits are calculated on the shooters side. If your front-end saw the bullets you were shooting hitting, then the other plane will receive damage.
-
Are you talking collisions or bullet damage?
Bullet hits are calculated on the shooters side. If your front-end saw the bullets you were shooting hitting, then the other plane will receive damage.
Well I can't speak from recent experience since I haven't flown since 2009. But I am referring to both planes not taking any bullet damage, colliding head on practically nose to nose only one player will take the random penalty. Other will fly away unharmed. Dumb.
-
Well I can't speak from recent experience since I haven't flown since 2009. But I am referring to both planes not taking any bullet damage, colliding head on practically nose to nose only one player will take the random penalty. Other will fly away unharmed. Dumb.
Well, I think we already covered both enough you should be work that out. I don't know what else to say.
Maybe the best answer is that I don't know of any significant changes in the basic algorithms of collisions or the damage model since at least back to 2012 or so. I don't know if any of that WWI damage ever migrated over or not.
I haven't read every changelog, but I hadn't remember seeing any changes discussed.
But if you called HTC and explained you were an old player considering returning, I'd be surprised if you couldn't get another two-week trial. I don't speak for HTC, but I would be amazed if the declined that.
-
If your FE sees hits, he will be hit. If his FE sees hits, you will be hit. It is NOT like a colision.
-
Another way of saying it is that
each side decides their own outcome in collisions,
but only the shooter decides the outcome of fired ord.
-
Both players flying head on into each other nose to nose and firing. Only one will receive the penalty. That's dumb. Both should receive damage based on what part of plane struck what.
When we both collide, there are actually two collisions. One on your frontend (screen), and one on mine. Depending on total lag between us two going through HTC's server, both collisions can be almost identical… or substantially different, like in this example of an actual online collision of two players with a fairly high combined lag (both were located in Europe):
on player 1 computer
(https://i.imgur.com/vTN1uWB.jpeg)
And at the very same moment, on player 2 computer:
(https://i.imgur.com/f98YyCZ.jpeg)
AH goes by "What you see is what you get", if you are in a collision on your scree, you take damage. If your opponent has a collision on his screen, he takes damage.
Popular objections:
"But there is no collision like that in real life, it takes TWO TO COLLIDE!!!!!"
- There ain't lag in real life...
"Still, both should take damage!"
- So you are telling me that you would like to suffer ramming damage even when you avoided a collision?
"Then just disable collision damage!"
- Oh great, fighters flying guns blazing through their opponents, especially bombers, since there is no risk of collision..
"Pfft, what do YOU know!?!?"
- Well, you could read HiTechs thoughts on this topic in this thread for example: https://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,294224.msg3750026.html#msg3750026
-
But if you called HTC and explained you were an old player considering returning, I'd be surprised if you couldn't get another two-week trial. I don't speak for HTC, but I would be amazed if the declined that.
Eh, I've since got my private pilot license and instrument rating so I do that hobby in my spare time. $15/month isn't much but hardly seems worth it if I am only going to play once a month or so.
Did they get rid of the free head to head mode? That was fun for a few fights before logging off.
Too bad this thread got derailed I was really curious about the models of those planes from the painting.
-
Eh, I've since got my private pilot license and instrument rating so I do that hobby in my spare time. $15/month isn't much but hardly seems worth it if I am only going to play once a month or so.
Did they get rid of the free head to head mode? That was fun for a few fights before logging off.
Too bad this thread got derailed I was really curious about the models of those planes from the painting.
There is still free player arenas, and the dueling arena is free too. Sometimes it's populated with a few guys, but it always has drones.
-
"Still, both should take damage!"
- So you are telling me that you would like to suffer ramming damage even when you avoided a collision?
Yes see reference Sonderkommando "Elbe"
-
There is still free player arenas, and the dueling arena is free too. Sometimes it's populated with a few guys, but it always has drones.
Hmm maybe try that for some member berries and see you guys in another 14 years.
-
on player 1 computer
...
Do you have a macro for all that? :D
Doesn't seem like your first rodeo. :rofl
-
I figured E or F based on date. Maybe E-3?
Certainly E, not F. Exact model cannot be seen from this pic and all E:s looked pretty much the same.
Bf 109E variants and sub-variants
E-0 (Pre-production aircraft with 4 × 7.92 mm/.312 in MG 17 machine guns)
E-1 (Similar to E-0)
E-1/B (Fighter-bomber version of E-1, usually with DB 601Aa)
E-2 (Limited production, additional Motorkanone engine mounted MG FF cannon, otherwise as E-3)
E-3 (Similar to E-1 but 2 × 20 mm MG FFs in the wings instead of the MG 17)
E-4 (Armour and structural improvements, change of MG FF cannons to MG FF/M. "Square" canopy)
E-4/B (Fighter-bomber version of E-4, 1 × 250 kg/550 lb bomb, usually with DB 601Aa)
E-4 trop (Version of E-4 modified to serve in tropical regions)
E-4/N (E-4 with DB601N engine)
E-4/BN (Fighter-bomber version of E-4/N, 1 × 250 kg/550 lb bomb)
E-5 (Recon version of E-3, camera equipment, 2 × 7.92 mm/.312 in MG 17)
E-6 (Recon version of E-4/N, camera equipment, 2 × 7.92 mm/.312 in MG 17)
E-7 (Similar to E-4 but with optional 300 L drop tank)
E-7/N (Similar to E-4/N but with optional 300 L tank)
E-7/NZ (also known as E-7/Z, an E-7/N with additional GM-1 nitrous oxide injection system)
E-7/U2 (Ground attack variant of E-7 with additional armour)
E-8 (Long-range version of E-1 using drop tank installation of E-7, 4 × 7.92 mm/.312 in MG 17)
E-9 (Recon version of E-7/N, drop tank, camera equipment, 2 × 7.92 mm/.312 in MG 17)
-
I figured E or F based on date. Maybe E-3?
You said that last time I posted years ago. Whether true or not the system is dumb. Should be accurate collision detection.
When you can log on with an absolutely perfect connection, this will be adjusted. The collision is such as different folks have different connections.
-
Certainly E, not F. Exact model cannot be seen from this pic and all E:s looked pretty much the same.
Bf 109E variants and sub-variants
E-0 (Pre-production aircraft with 4 × 7.92 mm/.312 in MG 17 machine guns)
E-1 (Similar to E-0)
E-1/B (Fighter-bomber version of E-1, usually with DB 601Aa)
E-2 (Limited production, additional Motorkanone engine mounted MG FF cannon, otherwise as E-3)
E-3 (Similar to E-1 but 2 × 20 mm MG FFs in the wings instead of the MG 17)
E-4 (Armour and structural improvements, change of MG FF cannons to MG FF/M. "Square" canopy)
E-4/B (Fighter-bomber version of E-4, 1 × 250 kg/550 lb bomb, usually with DB 601Aa)
E-4 trop (Version of E-4 modified to serve in tropical regions)
E-4/N (E-4 with DB601N engine)
E-4/BN (Fighter-bomber version of E-4/N, 1 × 250 kg/550 lb bomb)
E-5 (Recon version of E-3, camera equipment, 2 × 7.92 mm/.312 in MG 17)
E-6 (Recon version of E-4/N, camera equipment, 2 × 7.92 mm/.312 in MG 17)
E-7 (Similar to E-4 but with optional 300 L drop tank)
E-7/N (Similar to E-4/N but with optional 300 L tank)
E-7/NZ (also known as E-7/Z, an E-7/N with additional GM-1 nitrous oxide injection system)
E-7/U2 (Ground attack variant of E-7 with additional armour)
E-8 (Long-range version of E-1 using drop tank installation of E-7, 4 × 7.92 mm/.312 in MG 17)
E-9 (Recon version of E-7/N, drop tank, camera equipment, 2 × 7.92 mm/.312 in MG 17)
Paint theme though. There is no yellow on the bottom by engine and prop so I figured that might help with the exact specification.
I am assuming the general consensus on Hurricane is its a Mk1 it can't be anything else. Right?
-
Early 90's there was The Sierra Network, which later became The Imagination Network. Was dial in back then. Their biggest attraction initially was Red Baron. Players would go 2 vs 2 per session. Lag was often as bad as 10 seconds. Made for some interesting fights.
-
Early 90's there was The Sierra Network, which later became The Imagination Network. Was dial in back then. Their biggest attraction initially was Red Baron. Players would go 2 vs 2 per session. Lag was often as bad as 10 seconds. Made for some interesting fights.
LoL. 10 Sec????
You could have just been playing:
(https://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/dQQAAOSw5A5kNsHe/s-l1600.jpg)
-
Paint theme though. There is no yellow on the bottom by engine and prop so I figured that might help with the exact specification.
I am assuming the general consensus on Hurricane is its a Mk1 it can't be anything else. Right?
Paint theme was changing several times depending on many things, model cannot be confirmed with it. About Hurri, looks like it but I must confess I know German kites better.
-
Early 90's there was The Sierra Network, which later became The Imagination Network. Was dial in back then. Their biggest attraction initially was Red Baron. Players would go 2 vs 2 per session. Lag was often as bad as 10 seconds. Made for some interesting fights.
I member AOL Air Warrior 1 you would shoot at planes that weren't there due to lag. They would warp across the screen at random.
-
It's worth the $15
Subscribe - we need more red planes
<S>
Eagler
-
Early 90's there was The Sierra Network, which later became The Imagination Network. Was dial in back then. Their biggest attraction initially was Red Baron. Players would go 2 vs 2 per session. Lag was often as bad as 10 seconds. Made for some interesting fights.
I remember people complaining about being on 2400bps and going up against someone on 9600bps.
Had also heard there was a lot of problems when pentiums first came around but I'd left by then.