Model Poll

[RedLion]

I would just like to reiterate (yeah, I know it has been said already) that we are ALL trained to aim at invisible dark space, because ALL of us aim for where the enemy ship is going to be not where it currently is when we shoot. I realize that those pictures aim at showing how center of bubble hitbox != center of visible ship, but you cannot disregard how in actual gameplay none of us actually aims at the ship to begin with (well, most of the time at least).

What those pics show very clearly instead is how, everything else equal, bubble hitboxes give a larger hittable surface. Now, sure you can scale the model up two or three times to obtain the same hittable surface area, but that would still not eliminate bullets passing through the cracks of the ship and not doing any damage. A smoother, no cracks, no pointy parts, no holes hitbox is MUCH easier to hit, really, it is.
So the question really is, do we want to make some faction's ships harder to hit than others?

[HSharp]

That's what I was trying to say but you have said it much better.

[Weedman]

dont know who red lion is, but he gets it

[Raven_42]

I still dont think it really matters, sure theres more to hit on the bubble shaped version, but the ship is still the wrong shape - the nose is too thin, its too much of a wedge, making getting a good burst of fire (with both guns) on the hard to hit fast dreg int too hard. I think close mapped hitboxes was a fine buff to IC sup, and can be done right.

[badpazzword]

What Red Lion says is mostly correct... mostly.

[Adept]

QUOTE (RedLion @ Apr 11 2011, 11:14 PM) What those pics show very clearly instead is how, everything else equal, bubble hitboxes give a larger hittable surface.

So the question really is, do we want to make some faction's ships harder to hit than others?

Good post Redlion, but things aren't quite this simple. The new close mapped ships have been scaled really big, precisely so that they would be equally hittable. It's different, but it shouldn't be any harder.

/addition

Quiz and Hanta who did the new dreg artwork took inspiration from Veggy's spiky originals. All well and good, and the ships are pretty, but of course it left us with the same problem as the originals. Spiky ships in Allegiance either mean super complex hitboxes (ask Weed or Rain about the complexity if you don't believe me) or ships where the visuals don't match the hittable area very well.

Babelfish and others are probably most in the right here. There are a few cases where it's worth doing the extra work on a multi-part hitbox, but not so for most of them. Just for convenience, if nothing else.

[Icky]

If I'm going to take advice from someone on how hitboxes should be scaled/designed, it's probably going to be Weed/Shiz/Gui, not Adept/Spinoza/Turkey.

One of these groups is a lot better at DMing than the other.

If they were worried about it being harder to hit, they would still be at an advantage since they can all, you know, aim.

[Jimen]

QUOTE (Raven_42 @ Apr 11 2011, 06:56 PM) I still dont think it really matters, sure theres more to hit on the bubble shaped version, but the ship is still the wrong shape - the nose is too thin, its too much of a wedge, making getting a good burst of fire (with both guns) on the hard to hit fast dreg int too hard. I think close mapped hitboxes was a fine buff to IC sup, and can be done right.

Well, that issue ultimately comes as a result of the ships being plain old poorly designed, rather than anything hitbox-specific. It's not much better than the old TF int, which was hell to hit even with its bubble hitbox because of its ridiculous shape - but as bad as it was with the bubble hitbox, it would have been even worse with a close-mapped hitbox, and scaling it up even more would have done little to help that.

The whole miner docking issue really highlighted the differences between the way the community designs stuff and the way the original Alleg devs designed stuff. I wonder if many of the original ships were specifically designed with bubble hitboxes in mind, just as the original bases often incorporated specific design elements for the sake of the autodocking code. Once you know what to look for, the difference between the often-oblong original bases and the near-spherical fanmade bases really sticks out.

[badpazzword]

QUOTE (Icky @ Apr 12 2011, 01:59 AM) If I'm going to take advice from someone on how hitboxes should be scaled/designed, it's probably going to be Weed/Shiz/Gui, not Adept/Spinoza/Turkey.

It's just easier for us people who suck at DM to blame things on the hitbox, the netcode and other hidden subtle but gamechanging mechanisms

[TurkeyXIII]

QUOTE (RedLion @ Apr 12 2011, 06:14 AM) What those pics show very clearly instead is how, everything else equal, bubble hitboxes give a larger hittable surface. Now, sure you can scale the model up two or three times to obtain the same hittable surface area, but that would still not eliminate bullets passing through the cracks of the ship and not doing any damage. A smoother, no cracks, no pointy parts, no holes hitbox is MUCH easier to hit, really, it is.

They should be scaled up further than that; to the point where the smooth, no crack, no pointy parts, no holes section of the hitbox is almost as large as the original section. The hittable surface would then be larger - how much larger depends on the individual model.

Hey Icky, are you going to form your own opinion or just reiterate that of some guy you know?