new TF int

[Raveen]

QUOTE (Xeretov @ May 19 2010, 10:57 PM) And while we're at it we should make all guns shoot perfectly straight lines so you only hit what you aim at, right?

In a lag free environment this would indeed be ideal (actually, I'd suggest some sort of angling convergence of the individual guns a bit like the XWing series). However, in a laggy environment the decision made was to compensate for lag by using dispersion (or AOE). There is no reason therefore to double compensate by having hitboxes that don't match the models and it is utterly retarded to have 0 dispersion, 0 AOE guns (except for guns that are for shooting at stationary objects like bases).

Why are non-matching hitboxes a bad thing I hear you ask. Well, look at the rix fig, if you aim at what you see you'll be less likely to hit than if you aim at what we know the hitbox to be. How does that make sense? If you wanted to uniformly scale up the hitboxes compared to the model then that'd be fine. If you scale up the whole thing then that'd be good too (and show off the newer models and textures better which wouldn't be a bad thing IMO). of course, that's a lot of work but that's a poor excuse to not make new models properly.

[theTroy]

As an option HP could be reduced by cubic root of what the proposed scale up value is. (least amount of work needed)

[Adept]

QUOTE (Xeretov @ May 20 2010, 01:14 AM) Maybe next time Adept, you should think about the wisdom of my words before opening your mouth and shouting troll. If you're going to insist on doing that then I'm going to insist on deleting any ill-thought out posts you make from now on.

I said troll because once again you are putting words in my mouth and arguing against a strawman argument I never made.

I've never wanted perfect gunmounts or zero dispersion guns. If you actually read what I've posted those are things I dislike. Non-perfect gunmounts are interesting, and dispersion helps offset differences in ping and makes lag effects less annoying.

Neither is a reason to have hitboxes that don't match what you see. Most hitboxes in Allegiance are passably good, but some are very badly done. Just becuase things were left like that back in 1999 shouldn't mean we are stuck with them forever.

As for having to scale up every ship. Perfect hitboxes aren't going to magically appear. Any adjustments will be done to individual ships one at a time. The question here is that Psych thinks the new TF int is too hard to shoot in the back. If that is a common feeling, then scaling it up is a much better solution than turning the wysiwyg mapping into a sloppy oval.

[TurkeyXIII]

As somebody who dogfights with (relatively) high ping most of the time, I find it more difficult to hit targets for which I can't see the hitbox than for those with have WYSIWYG hitboxes. Simply because I don't know what to aim at.

Overall size is an issue, possibly moreso than for low-latency players. A sidethrusting GT scout, for example, can lagjump distances greather than its own width at 250 ms ping.

The only legitimate reason to not fix the hitboxes is the difficulty and amount of work involved, both in the artwork and in rescaling the affected ships.

[Xeretov]

QUOTE (Raveen @ May 20 2010, 04:12 AM) In a lag free environment this would indeed be ideal (actually, I'd suggest some sort of angling convergence of the individual guns a bit like the XWing series). However, in a laggy environment the decision made was to compensate for lag by using dispersion (or AOE).

The dispersion was also decided upon for the original models, the ones without perfect hitboxes. But you appear to be suggesting that dispersion only helps hit in lag. This seems strange to me, since dispersion will also cause you to miss. Lag only compounds that factor both ways. I would argue the same is true for the hitbox.

I'm not saying that the few ships with silly oversized or off-shape hitboxes (like the Rix fig you mentioned) are a good thing, but the slightly out of shape ones (most of the current ships in my opinion) don't strike me as a big issue. If I line up my shots to hit the ship around its middle, some are going to miss from dispersion and lag, and a few extra will hit because of dispersion and the hitbox. Its not a great system but given how current gameplay works its quite functional.

I'm arguing with you Rav, because here I see complaining that the ship with the conforming hitbox is too hard to hit, and then people telling me all ships should have conforming hitboxes.

QUOTE it is utterly retarded to have 0 dispersion, 0 AOE guns (except for guns that are for shooting at stationary objects like bases).[/quote]So you're suggesting that Sniper, Util, Dis, and all of the TF weapons should have dispersion or AOE added? Not sarcastic here, just curious as its one thats come up before. I'd be interested to know how you think we'd rebalance the SF weapons in particular since they'd have to get closer to do the same damage.

QUOTE of course, that's a lot of work but that's a poor excuse to not make new models properly.[/quote]As I mentioned above, the irony of this sort of statement is that we've had far more complaints/issues with these new conforming hitboxes than we have with the more traditional ones. Bear in mind that this is based off the responses I see in this forum. If you all think that the IC and Rix ints, the belters figs, Giga scouts, etc. are all terribly unbalanced and need to be fixed then speak up and I'll be forced to consider otherwise. Hell, even the new OH ships were supposedly made that way and aside from the flat profile on the int there don't appear to have been any major complaints about those.

And as for the workload, it seems silly to me because you'd achieve the exact same effect with all of this perfect-hitbox stuff that you do now. You're changing the hitboxes to conform (which makes them harder to hit) and then making them bigger as balance demands (which makes them as easy/hard to hit as they are now). That said if somebody were to magically PM me tomorrow with a set of new perfect hitboxes for every ship in Allegiance, I don't think I'd turn it down. Would be fun hearing all the complaints about the new ships being too hard to hit though, especially since it would take us several releases to get them anywhere near the level they are now. It'd also be funny seeing these huge ships flying around afterwards, especially if it began to interfere with docking at small doors.

QUOTE (theTroy @ May 20 2010, 04:41 AM) As an option HP could be reduced by cubic root of what the proposed scale up value is. (least amount of work needed)

So what happens when these ships are up against AOE weapons like skycap? Did you even think of that before you hit the post button?

QUOTE (TurkeyXIII @ May 20 2010, 11:24 AM) I find it more difficult to hit targets for which I can't see the hitbox than for those with have WYSIWYG hitboxes.

So the IC int is harder for you to hit than the new TF int?

[Xeretov]

QUOTE (Adept @ May 20 2010, 07:03 AM) I said troll because once again you are putting words in my mouth and arguing against a strawman argument I never made.

Oh the irony. You're the one putting words into mouths here. You suggested making every hitbox perfect and I gave you an equally retarded suggestion to illustrate your stupidity. I'm sorry I ever thought you could understand such a point Adept, I really should've just berated you right away instead of two posts later.

And you really should stop using the word strawman as you obviously don't understand what it means. I'm going to refute your argument because I disagree to the point of believing it stupid, not because its a strawman (or not). Whether you set it up as a sham (or not) isn't something I care about. In fact, I am not yet convinced you understand anything about this game and are not whining simply because you are a terrible player and don't realize it.

QUOTE I've never wanted perfect gunmounts or zero dispersion guns. If you actually read what I've posted those are things I dislike.[/quote]Yet another point goes sailing right over your head. This sort of response is not helping your case. In fact, its strengthening my opinion of you, the same opinion you argue is incorrect. If you want to change that then maybe stop posting stupid @#(!? And using terms you don't understand? Then again, if you could understand that I've formed said opinion because of all your stupid @#(! you would've figured it out a long time ago. We would have even been able to have a civil conversation without my having to make an example of you. Alas...

QUOTE Neither is a reason to have hitboxes that don't match what you see.[/quote]Right, so you don't care if a weapon is programmed to randomly hit or miss, but you also don't want the ship to get randomly hit. Read that again a few times to make sure you understand what I mean. In fact maybe you should contact an adult to help you with this one, its tricky.

QUOTE As for having to scale up every ship. Perfect hitboxes aren't going to magically appear. Any adjustments will be done to individual ships one at a time. The question here is that Psych thinks the new TF int is too hard to shoot in the back. If that is a common feeling, then scaling it up is a much better solution than turning the wysiwyg mapping into a sloppy oval.[/quote]Despite the fact that the conforming hitbox is pretty much the reason for this. Maybe psych was right and we should scale every ship up to the point where anyone can hit them. At least then you'd stop complaining about how hard they are to hit.

In fact I've got an even better idea. Why don't we make you, Adept, the CC ZL so I can watch as you try to make the core skill proof? Just the thought of this makes me laugh so much I want to see it happen. If spidey ever steps down, you sir have my vote for his replacement.

[Drizzo]

I am in favour of changes that will make me more formidable than I already am.

to be perfectly honest, given the small player base such a change might help to stem the learning curve and keep newbies around with a less challenging prospect, but on the other hand you're really just empowering the like 5 people who can join a game and turn it around through sheer force of being better than everyone to have an easier time being better than everyone.

[Xeretov]

QUOTE (Drizzo @ May 20 2010, 05:23 PM) to be perfectly honest, given the small player base such a change might help to stem the learning curve and keep newbies around with a less challenging prospect

Well hey, if the whole community asked us to do such a thing as making all the ships bigger we'd pretty much have to do it.

[DasSmiter]

QUOTE (Xeretov @ May 20 2010, 03:57 PM) I really should've just berated you right away instead of two posts later.

Perhaps next time you'll bother to bring actual points up instead of being sarcastic eh?

QUOTE (Xeretov @ May 20 2010, 03:57 PM) Right, so you don't care if a weapon is programmed to randomly hit or miss, but you also don't want the ship to get randomly hit. Read that again a few times to make sure you understand what I mean. In fact maybe you should contact an adult to help you with this one, its tricky.

Random bullet dispersion is WYSIWYG like he wants the hitbox to be as I understand it. Could guard dog Xeretov not be bothered to think his post through before attacking wildly?

QUOTE (Xeretov @ May 20 2010, 03:57 PM) Despite the fact that the conforming hitbox is pretty much the reason for this. Maybe psych was right and we should scale every ship up to the point where anyone can hit them. At least then you'd stop complaining about how hard they are to hit.

Are you suggesting that instead of actually addressing the problem we should just dumb down the entire core to make it skill proof? I would hate for that to happen

[Jimen]

QUOTE (Xeretov @ May 20 2010, 04:49 PM) So you're suggesting that Sniper, Util, Dis, and all of the TF weapons should have dispersion or AOE added? Not sarcastic here, just curious as its one thats come up before. I'd be interested to know how you think we'd rebalance the SF weapons in particular since they'd have to get closer to do the same damage.

This caught my eye as particularly interesting because except for Dis (which never, ever requires decent aim), everything on that list of zero-dispersion weapons mounts on ships that either have or used to have lead indicators. Dunno if it's relevant, but I figured it's worth pointing out. As long as they're not ridiculous, bubble-hitboxes aren't that bad IMO; I'd rather have something that approximates the shape of the ship without being a literal hull-hugger, especially if it's this problematic.

Honestly, I don't know why we're listening to Psych piss and moan about ints anyway? I don't recall flying many dogfights AGAINST it (as opposed to IN it), but it doesn't look any worse than (or survive any longer than) the old TF int.