The collision model SUCKS I hate it.

[Bronk]

I would like you to answer my question.

He cant answer truthfully because it doesn't revolve around HIM.

[CAP1]

umm you have once again foolishly and incorrectly assumed things. I know how the collision model works. I don't like it. Get it?  I have a problem with only one plane taking damage, since the damaged plane had to hit something .

This was Bronk's first effort here in this thread: 
I haven't read anything he posted beyond that sentence, nor am I interested.

but only on your screen. that's part of what they're trin to tell ya.

[Tumor]

The worse aspect of an otherwise wonderful game. A tempy jams on the brakes in front of me, causes the collision, I go down... he flies off unscathed. Hitech, fix the code. If I take damage, he has to take damage, dammit.                 

Yep... both should take the damage and to #$%^ with all the bs (repeat B. S.) about lag and front ends and blah blah ad nauseum, period.  Happens far too frequently that the one causing the collision fly's away unscathed which is the point (as opposed to collisions in general).  Heck, make it so NEITHER pilot gets the kill while your at it.

I'd much rather smack another plane and know he's got damage too than otherwise... and ya, 90% of the time it's avoidable.  The point is who gets the kill and gets to keep going when they do NOT deserve it. 

Make it so or take collisions away all together and we can go back to fighting without worrying about some dork slamming on the brakes (which I doubt was the typical WWII fighter pilots primary method of responding to an attack), you know... like in AW (as bad as that was, it was better than this)

[Bronk]

Yep... both should take the damage and to #$%^ with all the bs (repeat B. S.) about lag and front ends and blah blah ad nauseum, period.  Happens far too frequently that the one causing the collision fly's away unscathed which is the point (as opposed to collisions in general). 

Film? Ohh wait I forgot collision whine rule #1. Never post film to back up whine.

[CAP1]

Yep... both should take the damage and to #$%^ with all the bs (repeat B. S.) about lag and front ends and blah blah ad nauseum, period.  Happens far too frequently that the one causing the collision fly's away unscathed which is the point (as opposed to collisions in general).  Heck, make it so NEITHER pilot gets the kill while your at it.

I'd much rather smack another plane and know he's got damage too than otherwise... and ya, 90% of the time it's avoidable.  The point is who gets the kill and gets to keep going when they do NOT deserve it. 

Make it so or take collisions away all together and we can go back to fighting without worrying about some dork slamming on the brakes (which I doubt was the typical WWII fighter pilots primary method of responding to an attack), you know... like in AW (as bad as that was, it was better than this)

wait a minute?? how does pilot A NOT deserve a kill on you if you hit him? he was in a fight with you, and if you augered, he'd get the kill on ya too.

 it is still simple.....allow enough room. if you're in a furball, it's gonna happen. the planes, gas, ammo, and paint jobs are free, so who really cares?

 if you hit the guy while jumping him, then you were not in control of your aircraft...

[E25280]

umm you have once again foolishly and incorrectly assumed things. I know how the collision model works. I don't like it. Get it?  I have a problem with only one plane taking damage, since the damaged plane had to hit something .

This was Bronk's first effort here in this thread: 
I haven't read anything he posted beyond that sentence, nor am I interested.

You refuse to answer any basic questions, and instead continue to attack and/or deflect, proving that you do NOT understand the collision model, and furthermore, are too closed minded to care to understand it, despite anyone's efforts.

I think that pretty much defines a whine.  Congratulations.

But, please, continue to close your eyes and say "nyah nyah nyah I see nothing."  Your inability to react maturely or intelligently has become quite entertaining.

[Steve]

You refuse to answer any basic questions,

I'm not refusing to answer any questions.  I understand how the collision model, I just don't think it's the best way. Why does this make me a whiner?

People are still entitled to opinions, aren't they?  Am I a whiner because my opinion differs from yours?

[Steve]

but only on your screen. that's part of what they're trin to tell ya.

Cap, you are trying to define the current collision model. I understand the difference between the two Fe's and only one might show a collisoin.... etc.

[Lusche]

I try it again:



You are the P47, I'm the ramming P51. Picture shows moment of collision from your point of view. (See "Lusche has collided with you" at bottom)

When you could change our current collision model: Should your plane (the 47) take damage from this?

[Bronk]

I try it again:

(Image removed from quote.)

You are the P47, I'm the ramming P51. Picture shows moment of collision from your point of view. (See "Lusche has collided with you" at bottom)

When you could change our current collision model: Should your plane (the 47) take damage from this?

Nope, not in the situation you describe. "Why?" you ask.  Simply because  STEVE is flying the p-47 anyone else must take damage.

[Steve]

I try it again:

(Image removed from quote.)

You are the P47, I'm the ramming P51. Picture shows moment of collision from your point of view. (See "Lusche has collided with you" at bottom)

When you could change our current collision model: Should your plane (the 47) take damage from this?

OK, here's how I feel it should work, and I will answer your question herein, then your gang can go about belittling me for having a different view.

Each plane has a bubble around it, determined by something like average distance between what  two typical FE's see  a plane's position is.  For this discussion, let's say this bubble is 20 feet.  Let's call it  a bubble of latency.

In your scenario, the 51 reached a distance on it's FE of say.. -1' from the 47. in other words, the 51 actually intruded on the 47 by one foot. Only if one FE shows an actual collision should the following occur:

The 51's FE then querys the 47's FE and asks what distance it sees. If the 47 doesn't see the 51 intruding at least half way into it's latency bubble, in this case 10 feet, no collision takes place. If the 47 sees the 51 more than half way into its latency bubble a collision occurs. I think that if one plane takes damage from a collision, the  other plane must as well. That's it.  I'm not trying to change your mind, I'm just giving my opinion.  If that makes me a whiner, so be it.

[Bronk]

If that makes me a whiner, so be it.

Acceptance is the first step.

[CAP1]

Cap, you are trying to define the current collision model. I understand the difference between the two Fe's and only one might show a collisoin.... etc.

right......i understand that, but if i remember for  a few pages back, you suggest that your computer basicly ask my computer if it saw a collision too. am i understanding that right? if not, then they ask each other how close we were on my screen.
 but even if we collided, and on my screen you were 50 yards behind me as you passed at the time your machine saw you fly through my wing, how is it right that i take damage too? i think it's really rare that we'll both have the same sight picture at the same time.
 i also think that even if you hit me, and take damage, my plane will take damage too....if my machine sees you and i collide.

 i understand you'd like to improve the game, but in all seriousness, and with the way people "game" the game, anything else would probably only result in more problems than there are now.

[WMLute]

Ok, after keeping tabs on this thread I will take a stab at it.

In a One on One fight, there are FOUR planes.

The two that you see and the two that you opponent sees.

To both, the fight is slightly different. 

Duel someone and both film the fight, and you will see this.

If you hit them, you take damage.  If you don't, you won't. 

When you collide with someone and they fly off undamaged it is because THEY did not hit you.  They did not "collide with you" and fly off undamged.  They never hit you in the first place.

Repeat: They Never Hit You.

The thought of taking damage when you DO NOT HIT THEM is rediculous.  Hit bubble?  That is crazy talk.  If you give that even the slightest bit of thought, you will see just what a horrible idea it is.  The way it works now if fine.  Actually, it's durn near perfect.

Quit flying into them and you will not have any problems. 

[Steve]

Ok, after keeping tabs on this thread I will take a stab at it.

Repeat: They Never Hit You.

 

Then I never hit them...  it takes two objects to have a collision. repeat: it takes two objects to have a collision.