Author Topic: ace pilots (Read 5665 times)

Simaril · « **Reply #150 on:** February 21, 2007, 04:51:29 PM »

Dred,

You keep focusing entirely on the "blame" aspect of collisions. Don't forget that blame -- who's responsible for the collision happening -- is irrelevant to the programming. It's also irrelevant to the entire situation, since no matter WHO"S fault a real collision is, if your plane hits another one you are in deep doo doo.

Step by step....

1) The internet is not going to be perfect, so the perfect correlation between FE's isnt going to happen.

2) Our choices will therefore NOT be perfect. Designers have to pick the route that has the least unfairness, that's best for game play.

3) Turning collisions off completely means overly aggressive, unskilled, non-ACM flying becomes more successful, with less penalty -- since you can't get too close, you won't pay the price for not flying realistically.

4) Our current collision model has the problems you've detailed. But, the vast majority of collisions can be avoided, and the only bad thing about the system is that there will be a very few unavoidable collisions (like the bomber warp I talked about).

I know you don't like this, but -- I KNOW collisions can be essentially eliminated by changing your flying. I know that because I did it myself. I used to collide all the time, until I decided that I was cutting things too close, not allowing for "safe operational distancing." All I did was not cut it close, and the collisions stopped. And that includes in turn fighting furballs, where I still don't get collisions.. The only times I collide now are when I KNOW there wasn't enough distance, and I made the move anyway.

The current system is absolutely, 100% fine. It is simply the best solution in this imperfect world, because the results depend almost completely on what YOU do. It is in your control.

Ghastly · « **Reply #151 on:** February 21, 2007, 05:21:56 PM »

If you mean the Late War arenas, yes those are where I mostly fly.

As a Corsair pilot, I do tend to avoid turning in the mass of a furball - in order to survive to land my plane, I need to keep up my speed because in AH there's a lot that can run an F4U down if it has any kind of an E advantage over it (and those planes seem to be the more popular ones) and not a heck of a lot that an F4U can outclimb, out-turn or generally out-maneuver. On the other hand, I'm still learning to handle the AH F4U and a lofty perch usually just get's me killed since I smacktard on a regular basis if I come in from too high, so I'm usually somewhere in between.

But I won't argue that there isn't a considerable amount of dweebery - every sims I've ever flown has always had what seemed like more than it's fair share of it - some because folks don't know better, some because they aren't capable of better, and some because some people are capricious and have put an amazing amount of effort into perfecting it.

What I'm actually saying is that I think that you underestimate somewhere around 10-fold the amount of dweebery that would result from pilots knowing that they could strike another vehicle without penalty. I strongly believe that disabling it would make the game so unenjoyable as to class it as nearly unplayable for the slower aircraft and vehicles.

And you are right, nobody is completely perfect, and no one is going to avoid it 100% of the time. But like smacktarding while in a dive, g-lock, or getting vulched unawares, by adjusting your flying to avoid it, it can be minimized to the point where it's nearly non-existent. Simaril essentially nails it - what we've got is pretty darn good, and if it's happening often enough to be a problem for you, you are either cutting it too fine - either leaving yourself too little time or seperation or burning E to the point where you can no longer maintain control of your aircraft.

LTARghst · « **Reply #152 on:** February 22, 2007, 08:55:12 AM »

Hehe Chili you know you love us. You My Boy Blue!

Fruda · « **Reply #153 on:** February 22, 2007, 09:38:15 AM »

See Rule #5

Simaril · « **Reply #154 on:** February 22, 2007, 10:50:23 AM »

Fruda:

Not intending to piss anybody off. Sorry if I did that. The "collsiions problem" horse has been beaten into a monomolecular film, and it still wont go away -- wasnt it sudz who posted last time it came up?

Anyway --

First, the time delays in the internet, which amount to hundreds of feet displacements in plane position; and, the unpredicatability of opponents' behavior essentially PREVENTS intentional forced ramming on all but extreme, pure, mutually head on or head to tail collisions. Skeptics have in the past been unable to intentionally force rams when challenged to try in the DA. If you think you're right about this, I'd be happy to meet you there and let you try to make me ram you. It is almost impossible -- remember, our front ends see things hundreds of feet different. (Of course, you'd have much better chance of you ramming me on purpose -- but if I dont ram on my front end, I take no damage, which isnt a bother to me at all.

Now about your preferred last minute shot...well, you're proving my point more than yours. If you are coming so close that you RELY on the other guy doing a certain thing, you're too close. It's not rocket science, it's common sense! Planning based on enemy CAPABILITIES instead of PREDICTED INTENTIONS is a military axiom, ignored at your peril. Really -- If you decide to take a shot that could cause a lethal collision a certain % of the time...that's the other player's fault exactly how?

And about the change in the last year....I call you manure and raise you some sheep dip. If your explanation were correct -- that it was everyone else's fault -- then EVERYONE (including me) should have seen the same increas in collisions. In fact, though, I've found my collisions dramatically dropping the more experienced I get.

That's not being full of myself. I am far, far, far away from a skilled ACM master. I am not a natural at any computer game I've played. Every step I take comes from working at it, learning from others and from my own experience.

No ego here. Simplest thing for me is to walk away and let you rant. But, I can honestly say that if you choose to change your flight style, you CAN stop colliding, becuase that's exactly what happened to me.

Fruda · « **Reply #155 on:** February 22, 2007, 04:08:10 PM »

But that's just the thing. I'm not getting that close when I make my getaway. My problem is that it takes effort to collide with me when I go for a head-on pass. Whether or not it's pilot error on the other side or just a freak latency accident, it still happens regardless.

Though to be honest, it's only happened four times in about three days, so I guess I'm blowing it out of proportion. It's still highly annoying and equally frustrating.

Now, I did have a collision last night which was entirely my fault. I did get too close on that one, and my opponent's wing clipped my engine (resulting in an oil leak). Then again, I'm not too good in Thunderbolts anyway, so I really shouldn't've gone for the suicide pass. Even so, I usually give a hard right rudder and roll out at around 200 yards, though sometimes I will get in really close and take the risk of collision (or a well-placed shot to the cockpit).

wrag · « **Reply #156 on:** February 22, 2007, 05:05:07 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Bronk
Well if you get the white text ..... Yup the live with it works for me.
There own damn fault they choose not to learn how the model works .
Or they just can't except the fact they put themselves in a position where a collision is more probable.

Bronk

Hmmmm...............

OK lets try this.

My 1st post was an explaination. Not a condemnation.

Therefore................

IMHO Your response was UNWARRANTED.

(Do you have a personel issue with me or something? I notice in another similar thread, which Skuzzy closed, a post by yourself just under mine reffering to seeing under the plane. Was that in response to my post?)

As to you viewing enough FILMS...........

AGAIN the film records what YOUR COMPUTER saw, and NOT necassarily what YOU ACTUALLY SAW!

Don't believe me?

Try this! Get a video recorder and RECORD what your MONITOR shows, plus at the same time have the AH film recording.

Now find a situation that works your vid card and cpu HARD! Get into an area that has ALLOT of people. Fly through and take a shot here and there if you like. But get CLOSE! Stay close as long as you can. Mix it up.

When you're done..................

Pretty sure, unless you have a top of the line comp, that when you play them back side by side they will NOT be identical! And even with a top of the line comp IMHO there will still be a VERY slight difference.

I AM FULLY AWARE OF THE FOLLOWING...........

LATENCY HAPPENS!

wrag · « **Reply #157 on:** February 22, 2007, 05:37:41 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Bronk
Dred you have already stated you refuse to film anything.
I don't care the reason why.
With the speeds in game and limited cpit view it is all but impossible to tell what happened unless you film.
So if wish to remain ignorant of what going on around you thats your prerogative.

I'll bet you didn't even look at the films I posted.
If you did tell me why I shouldn't take damage in it.

But I can say sometime during that flight your plane tried to occupy the same space as another. I don't care what part or how you were flying.

On your opponents front end he might have been 100-200 away.

The fact is you let a plane get in withing striking distance.
Due to poor SA, poor ACM, getting back from afk, or just plain out flown.

There is no "blame" when 2 or more AC enter a close quarter fight accidents can happen.

Bronk

You keep dwelling on the AH filmer!!!!!!!!!!!

And I keep saying the AH filmer records what YOUR COMPTER sees!

Some of us have a vid card vs cpu issue RE: speed!

Our VID card is JUST a TAD SLOWER then our CPU. Some have more then a TAD by the way.

So in a tight fast breaking situation what we SEE is NOT always what our CPU sees and what the AH filmer is recording.

So we can avoid a collision on our monitor BUT still collide because our CPU saw a collision.

Say all you want that it's someones fault, that it's bad SA, or whatever you like. It does NOT change computer, vid card, net, servers, latency.

Earlier someone expressed they got rammed by a plane while in a GV setting still and they got the orange text message.

Hmmm........... connection, server, cpu, vid card, etc.... speed vs latency of at least 2 computers.

IMHO While connection speeds and such play a roll, it's more of a case of who's computer/cpu SEES the collision 1st.

hubsonfire · « **Reply #158 on:** February 22, 2007, 05:45:45 PM »

I think HT should make both planes die in any collision whatsoever, and once you've all chewed your arms off out of frustration, you'd understand why what we have now is the best compromise given the limitations of teh intardnet.

hubsonfire · « **Reply #159 on:** February 22, 2007, 05:49:07 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by wrag
You keep dwelling on the AH filmer!!!!!!!!!!!

And I keep saying the AH filmer records what YOUR COMPTER sees!

Some of us have a vid card vs cpu issue RE: speed!

Our VID card is JUST a TAD SLOWER then our CPU. Some have more then a TAD by the way.

So in a tight fast breaking situation what we SEE is NOT always what our CPU sees and what the AH filmer is recording.

So we can avoid a collision on our monitor BUT still collide because our CPU saw a collision.

Say all you want that it's someones fault, that it's bad SA, or whatever you like. It does NOT change computer, vid card, net, servers, latency.

Earlier someone expressed they got rammed by a plane while in a GV setting still and they got the orange text message.

Hmmm........... connection, server, cpu, vid card, etc.... speed vs latency of at least 2 computers.

IMHO While connection speeds and such play a roll, it's more of a case of who's computer/cpu SEES the collision 1st.

Let me get this straight- what you're saying, Wrag, is that what is displayed on the screen is not what's happening in the game? And that what's captured on film is a third reality altogether?

wrag · « **Reply #160 on:** February 22, 2007, 06:23:07 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by hubsonfire
Let me get this straight- what you're saying, Wrag, is that what is displayed on the screen is not what's happening in the game? And that what's captured on film is a third reality altogether?

OK I'm saying this..................

RECORD what your monitor shows using a video camera.

AT THE SAME TIME.

RECORD using AH FILM.

Put yourself in a situation that WORKS both your CPU and your VID CARD.

Play them both back side by side.

I'm pretty sure you will find they are NOT identical. I don't think they can be. I don't think it's possible. Close but..................

For some people what they see is NOT ALWAYS what the CPU sees.

Not talking a 3rd reality.

Talking LAG between vid card, cpu, net, server, etc............

The CPU ALWAYS see everything BEFORE it tells your vid card to show you what is happening on the monitor!

So if you have a really good connect, and a high end cpu, and the best etc etc etc........

Your latency/lag is probably LOW

all the same .............

You can see a collision about to happen and move to avoid that collision BUT if you're real close or moving really fast you MAY have already collided due to latency/lag.

So a person with a low end machine can watch an AH film they recorded and find themself saying WTF? That isn't right?!?! I don't remember it that way?

The AH Film program records what the CPU sees.

THEREFORE what you saw MAY not be EXACTLY the same WHEN you play back the AH film.

BTW the AH film IS CORRECT! Because it IS what the CPU saw and thus what actually HAPPENED! But it may not always be what you remember seeing because your VID CARD got the info just a few miliseconds LATE and sent it to your monitor a few miliseconds LATE!

That is what I'm saying.

Believe me! There were times when, with my older machine, using dialup, I got popped because I was a few miliseconds behind someone. On my FE, while flyin in the sim, they WERE NOT pointing at me. When I played back the AH FILM it showed they were.

(BTW the Dallas server didn't help things either!)

Got a faster system and faster vid card and DSL. Now when it looks like they're not pointing at me they aren't pointing at me. Unless, of course, there is a net burp. Which sometimes happens.

Edbert · « **Reply #161 on:** February 22, 2007, 06:50:30 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Masherbrum
They prefer to HO, you are correct Rod.

Panzers always HO.

Bronk · « **Reply #162 on:** February 22, 2007, 08:48:39 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by hubsonfire
Let me get this straight- what you're saying, Wrag, is that what is displayed on the screen is not what's happening in the game? And that what's captured on film is a third reality altogether?

yea hub the .000000000000000000000001 ms it takes for your vid card to send pic to the screen sucks.

Wrag go by some tissues.

Bronk

Edit: Not to mention the.0000000000000000000000000 00000000000000001 ms it takes the cpu to tell the vid card to draw.

hubsonfire · « **Reply #163 on:** February 22, 2007, 09:00:32 PM »

I give up. It's hopeless.

Quote

You can see a collision about to happen and move to avoid that collision BUT if you're real close or moving really fast you MAY have already collided due to latency/lag.

wrag · « **Reply #164 on:** February 22, 2007, 09:03:51 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Bronk
yea hub the .000000000000000000000001 ms it takes for your vid card to send pic to the screen sucks.

Wrag go by some tissues.

Bronk

Edit: Not to mention the.0000000000000000000000000 00000000000000001 ms it takes the cpu to tell the vid card to draw.

Are you ALWAYS the worlds authority on computers, computer systems, and how they preform, under ALL circumstances?

And Are you always so ILL MANNERED?

Again.... do you Sir have a problem with ME?

Are you trying to say something?

It's not VERY DIFFICULT to say you disagree without being rude or ill mannered.

Many things affect a computer. BUT you Sir are claiming that what I reported is not possible?