S3 Series

Turning off collisions encourages dweebish, non-ACM type of flying. More so than we have now.

Many hours have been spent identifying the problem and brainstorming on solutions. The solution is re-writing the collision code. It is listed among the many other problems in the code. Stating that it is intentionally being ignored to "frustrate those that are the strikers on the ships" is wrong.

Chunky, don't say something I didn't! I never said it was intentional. I said it was reported and nothing has been done about it.

I did say and agree the change wouldn't be easy.

How are we to know that YOU have spent MANY hours looking into. If nothing is posted, how are we to know that.

As far as your ridiculous statement about "encourages dweebish" is just that ridiculous. Having a unrealistic collision area is ridiculous.

This subject has been covered many times in the past. People have responded over and over again. Pictures were shown of the hitboxes. Testing reported to the community every time. That is how you know that it has been looked at.

Everything you posted says it is intentionally ignored. When you say "This problem isn't new and has been a round for a long time and it's never been addressed or fixed". You are in fact stating it has been ignored......intentionally. You should word your posts a bit better if that is not what you intended to say.

I stand by my post about the dweebish behavior.

I will post another picture showing the hitboxes on the freighters.

I usually don't post in the arguments on this forum but I need some clairification.
Is the "dweebish" behavior you (Chunky) are talking about the deliberate
HO, ram/collision behavior by some players? If so, I am in agreement with you.
IMHO the powerful cannon model is also a big contributor to this behavior. After all,
why use ACM when you can HO and ram with big guns? Just something to think about.
Fencer

(My opinion only, not in any way connected to the 352nd FG)

Exactly.

There are players that do that anyway as they don't care if they die. I also agree that there are other factors that contribute and turning off collisions is not the only thing that encourages it but it is at least one factor limiting it.

Just so you failed English

Search Results

in·ten·tion·al·ly
inˈtenSH(ə)nəlē/
adverb
adverb: intentionally
deliberately; on purpose.
"I didn't do it intentionally"
synonyms: deliberately, on purpose, purposely, purposefully, by design, knowingly, wittingly, consciously; More

I never said that or insinuate it. GET YOUR FACTS RIGHT!

Ok Hawk.

Hawk, to try and explain here’s what I understand.
For a very long time there has been an issue with players (online only?) that say they hit a mast.
The volunteers look into it and discover (many times now) that there is no hit box in the mast.
Players insist there is a hit box in the mast and the volunteers agree that there is an issue and that issue is lag.
Please watch the video that Dob’s posted in the other thread.
The ships, as they move, shift from side to side probably as much as D5 to D10. So if you’re D5 from a ship and it shifts towards you D5, you’ve collided with the ship.
Also player’s aircraft shift fore and aft (I’ve seen it many times even in flight) so if you shift forward D5 and the ship shifts towards you D5, you’ve collided.
It’s either net lag (IEN isn’t going to come to your house and fix your internet connection) or it’s an issue with the collision code that can’t be or is very difficult or would be very time consuming to fix.
The volunteers certainly can’t fix it.
No one who hits these ships ever has gun cam of it.
I’m not saying it isn’t happening we all agree that it is, but having some gun cam of it would help at
least help everyone understand the problem better.
I would suggest (again) that it would help to provide gun cam of the issues and to try an offline experiment/testing attack on ships to see the difference.
Offline, you won’t collide with a ship if you try to avoid it.

Last, I agree with Chunk that your posts come off as an inference that the volunteers have done little or nothing to fix this problem.
Sorry, that’s how I read it and I do re-read threads many times to try and make sure that I understand it.
Forums and text on forums are an imperfection form of communication at best.
No offense meant, it’s just how it reads to me.
<S>