1 (edited by Parson Grimes 2011-07-12 22:50:04)

Topic: Collision Detection and Tracking please!

I think the game should have tracking (with angular/transverse velocity) so that when you strafe it makes a difference (not too much, but some).

I read somewhere that the game used to have tracking but it was abused by people going through their enemies so they lost tracking.

Solution: have collision detection.  Let robots bump into each other.  Make it so that people have to steer down highways and avoid collision.  It's somewhat immersion breaking not to have that, and to be flitting through each other constantly like ghosts.  Possibly open to griefing of course, but I think the positives would outweigh that (City of Heroes had this and it was never a really big problem, just very occasionally inconvenient, even with lots of people whizzing about with superspeed and flight).

I guess maybe these things are possible but too computationally intensive for the moment? 

Maybe something for the future?  I hope these features do come.

Re: Collision Detection and Tracking please!

Collision is possible but exploitable.
Tracking is possible but very complex and once terrain issues are resolved then knowing your terrain and the way weapons work = staying alive much longer. Light robots aren't much fun unless in a group fight but heavy mechs get to be a lot of fun!

Re: Collision Detection and Tracking please!

Tracking is a big fat yuss, also collisions. Make it a non issue by having no gunfire on the highway.

Would also like a travel mode that disabled your guns and doubled your speed or sommat. Deactivated by demobs of course. Would give people a way to disengage.

Re: Collision Detection and Tracking please!

No to collision.

If this was critical for PVP I would understand and try to work around the inevitable alpha griefing, but its not required, it only makes it a little more interesting.

Unless you can find a way it benefits both combat and industrials, that is makes the game more interesting to  miners to balance out the griefing.

Re: Collision Detection and Tracking please!

play supreme commander 2 for a few times, and you would see that collision between 200 player would be a really really bad idea.

(its already an issue to bring 20 units through a chokepoint in that game)

*Disclaimer: This post can contain strong sarcasm or cynical remarks. keep that in mind!
Whining - It's amazing how fast your trivial concerns will disappear

Re: Collision Detection and Tracking please!

Not to mention that supreme commander's 2 devs are proud of the way they handle choke points, formations and unit tracking/movement lol. There were some vids about that too.

<GargajCNS> we maim to please

Re: Collision Detection and Tracking please!

Annihilator wrote:

play supreme commander 2 for a few times, and you would see that collision between 200 player would be a really really bad idea.

(its already an issue to bring 20 units through a chokepoint in that game)


Thats the point, its a great anti-blob mechanic.

Re: Collision Detection and Tracking please!

The point is it didn't work as they wanted and it hogged the CPU.
Now try to do the same with 50 people. It would increase the connection use and cpu use because they still have to predict movement for you to make the movement smooth. Collision will create new problems which to address, the netcode would have to be changed. So many thing going wrong.  People are not sitting next to each other atm anyway, because they are afraid to die in a fire with an ally who just died.

<GargajCNS> we maim to please

Re: Collision Detection and Tracking please!

I'm pretty sure the increased packet load resulting from implementing this would bring the dreaded Lag Monster to show it's ugly head. Unless Devs can somehow magically make lag a non-issue then yes please implement. Otherwise no.

This is my blob. There are many like it, but this one is mine.

Re: Collision Detection and Tracking please!

actually, the supcom2 system needs way less cpu then the supcom1 pathfinding.

they where proud of it, but if you see it in action... urgs... experimentals getting stuck in own base because they cant walk over smaller units or building anymore.
increased fps traded for more micromanagement. game turned into SupCraft, just like C&C-Craft

agy - it wouldnt be an anty blob mechanic... just an anoyance. if you dont combine it with friendly fire... (even more serverload because it has to calculate which player robot is in LoS of your shot)

*Disclaimer: This post can contain strong sarcasm or cynical remarks. keep that in mind!
Whining - It's amazing how fast your trivial concerns will disappear

Re: Collision Detection and Tracking please!

Wouldn't implementing tracking be a nerf to turrets compared to missiles ?

Re: Collision Detection and Tracking please!

Etil DeLaFuente wrote:

Wouldn't implementing tracking be a nerf to turrets compared to missiles ?

Hugely.

13

Re: Collision Detection and Tracking please!

Annihilator wrote:

actually, the supcom2 system needs way less cpu then the supcom1 pathfinding.

they where proud of it, but if you see it in action... urgs... experimentals getting stuck in own base because they cant walk over smaller units or building anymore.
increased fps traded for more micromanagement. game turned into SupCraft, just like C&C-Craft

agy - it wouldnt be an anty blob mechanic... just an anoyance. if you dont combine it with friendly fire... (even more serverload because it has to calculate which player robot is in LoS of your shot)


You make it look bad but the server already has all this.

It already has to check if theres an obstackle (a robot is nothing else), and its ofc a annoyance if you cant walk or shoot without hurting someone on your own team. (smaller groups ftw)

And afaik .. this is what many people are asking for (anti blob mechanics).
But unlike interference (which is even more annoying) this would work.

Re: Collision Detection and Tracking please!

Alexander wrote:
Etil DeLaFuente wrote:

Wouldn't implementing tracking be a nerf to turrets compared to missiles ?

Hugely.

This is sounding like a better and better idea...

->You just lost The Game<-

15 (edited by Parson Grimes 2011-07-14 00:13:48)

Re: Collision Detection and Tracking please!

I can only think back to the fact that another fairly successful MMO, City of Heroes, had collision detection between superheroes who were whizzing about at ultra fast speeds (with ultra-fast PvP in the PvP zones), not just on ground but in the air; some of the missions were in instances with corridors, etc.; and with all that, there were only very occasional problems, not even enough to cause threads on forums about it (I think I saw maybe 2 or 3 complaints about it in the 3 years I played CoX).  Champions Online also has it (free to play, so if you haven't experienced collision detection in an MMO, you can test it out for yourself).  Collision detection is workable in an MMO, the gain in immersion is pretty big (and would be great in this game, where you're supposed to be in a substantial metal object), and I don't think griefing would really be that big of a problem, bearing in mind that the Alpha islands are purely PvE anyway - and one would think that whoever gets to the PvP action on the Beta islands is either going to be sensible or get a very quick lesson in being sensible.

Also, tracking just makes sense - what's the point in WASD steering unless you can strafe and it has some effect?  So ok, you're not targeting directly as in a shooter, so let there be some effect from angular/transverse velocity.

16 (edited by Arga 2011-07-14 00:45:37)

Re: Collision Detection and Tracking please!

Parson Grimes wrote:

and I don't think griefing would really be that big of a problem, bearing in mind that the Alpha islands are purely PvE anyway

It would depend on how it's implemented of course, but alpha is surely the place griefers would put it to the test.

The tellesis outpost has 5 entry points that could be blocked by 3 or 4 bots at each point. If there was no pushing, you could secure the outpost and stop people from entering or leaving. If there was pushing, well I think the griefing there speaks for itself.

Re: Collision Detection and Tracking please!

or you could use 2 or 3 people to stop a person from running away from a mob spawn, killing them in the process.

<GargajCNS> we maim to please

Re: Collision Detection and Tracking please!

And ill be able to kill that mesmer with my arkhe! Yay!

Have a productive day, runner!
R.I.P. Chenoa, you'll never be forgotten.
DEV Zoom: Line, sorry, I was away for christmas.
http://perp-kill.net/?m=view&id=252086

19 (edited by Loco 2011-07-14 23:59:47)

Re: Collision Detection and Tracking please!

You're all assuming that the collision size of a mech has to be large. It doesn't. You could have a narrow cylinder/rectangle for collisions. On alpha, the collision could be even smaller. For example, the Tellesis "only 5 entrances" issue. Well, if it takes 15-20 people per entrance to block it on alpha, let the griefers do it if they can pull it off. Gives a whole new meaning to the term "station camp". If it becomes a serious problem, I'm sure the devs could find an easy solution (like expanding the docking region so that to block all the entrances would take more people)

On betas, collision would force people to be more disciplined in larger engagements and in movement. I don't see a problem with that. The collision box on betas could be much larger as well, because if someone is griefing you on beta you can shoot them.

Tracking is something worthwhile to the game if it can be done. As it is, light bots might as well just try to blow up on a mech to try and kill it. Pilot skill needs to be put into play more, and a tracking system would allow for that much more than the current "hit size" limitations. Gun tracking should have simple angular change in addition to hit size calculations for missing, missile tracking could be similar to that other game; explosion radius, explosion size, and explosion speed.


[I'm not a game dev/network junkie, but using what knowledge I have as a learning programmer...]
The game already is sending positional-directional data. Projected angular calculations are not extensively difficult to do, and only need to be calculated probably twice a second, and only on locked targets (assume 8 calculations per player max, assume 200 player battle, that's 3200 calculations a second. Each calculation is definitely less than 100 floating point calculations, but let's assume it's 100. That's all of 320,000 floating point calculations, out of the gigaflops (1,000,000,000) that a server can do. That'd be a 0.032% increase out of total CPU usage if they only had 1 gigaflop. I doubt that would be the issue.
[/end probably half-correct calculations, which are probably only an order of maginitude wrong, if that]


EDIT: And as for all the "but you could kill my [insert big mech here] with a [insert small mech here] comments that are inevitable, that means you're doing it wrong. Being bigger does not always mean you're a better fighter, and if you're getting killed by a castel in your mesmer because you don't have a demob/tracking booster fit or you're not using terrain/cover... you're doing it wrong and should die. Just because you're big doesn't mean you are invulnerable, or at least, it shouldn't. The fact that you are shows imbalance, because it means even an idiot in a heavy mech is worth more than the best pvp pilot in the game in a light bot.

Re: Collision Detection and Tracking please!

Loco wrote:

You're all assuming that the collision size of a mech has to be large. It doesn't. You could have a narrow cylinder/rectangle for collisions. On alpha, the collision could be even smaller. For example, the Tellesis "only 5 entrances" issue. Well, if it takes 15-20 people per entrance to block it on alpha, let the griefers do it if they can pull it off.

Other then the canned 'if it's possible in an mmo someone will do it", it doesn't even have to be all the entrances, just blocking the one closest to the Attalica teleporter can add an irritatingly long delay for no reason.

And if on alpha, the collision size is much smaller than the bot, you lose the 'immersion' factor of collision as you roll through 49% of the bot anyway; which was the primary arguement of the OP.

Re: Collision Detection and Tracking please!

I'm not arguing whether or not to make the game more immersive, I'm arguing to make the game more skill involved. That's the primary argument of my post. I'm supporting the OP through a different means; the combat needs tracking, and tracking needs collision detection, so combat needs both.

And if having to spend a extra minute travelling is the worst that you can be griefed in this game, then the sandbox is limited. Part of playing in the sandbox is that sometimes other kids throw sand in your eyes. Inconvenience happens. griefing happens.

Re: Collision Detection and Tracking please!

I've heard that tracking is impossible due to the game engine. We'll set that aside.

Collision is an interesting topic. On one hand, it would make certain pvp fights more interesting. On the other, griefing.

How about we just steer clear of the griefing...

Re: Collision Detection and Tracking please!

Loco wrote:

griefing happens.

granted, but the mechanic that allows it should add enough value to the game to offset it. The players getting griefed, the alpha dwellers, get no benefit from collision, just all the negatives; not even immersion for the RP group.

Re: Collision Detection and Tracking please!

So add a minor push effect. Problem solved, or rather, more creative solutions and methods to griefing are available.

Re: Collision Detection and Tracking please!

still not feeling any benefit. let me push NPC ewar's over cliffs, then I'm in.