Some quick news on collision testing ;)

[92 Sqn. Philstyle (QJ-P)]

I've just conducted 10 collision test. I'll put some video of this up later in the week for you to pour over ;)

First set of 8, mostly head-to-head collisions between 109s and Spitfires. Tests conducted by Folmar and I (both of 92 Sqn)
Test 1: Head to head collision at high speed
Spitfire destroyed, 109 no damage

Test 2: Head to head collision at high speed
Both aircraft destroyed

Test 3: Head to head collision at high speed
Both aircraft destroyed

Test 4: Wing to wing - medium speed
109 wing half to 3/4 removed, spitfire completely destroyed

Test 5: Head to head collision at high speed
Both aircraft destroyed

Test 6 : 109 left wing to spitfire tail section
109 wing 2/4 removed, spitfire tail chopped off

Test 7 : Spitfire nose through 109 right wing from below
spitfire completely destroyed, 109 right wing removed

Test 8: Head to head collision at high speed
109 destroyed, spitfire no damage

I then conducted two further tests with Farber from JG27
Test 9: head to head (109 faster)
109 wing removed. Spitfire completely destroyed

Test 10: head to head (spitfire faster)
109 destroyed, spitfire wing removed


Over the 10 test:
The 109 took more damage than the spitfire on 2 occasions (tests 10 and 8)
The Spitfire took more damage than the 109 on 4 occasions (tests 9, 7, 4 and 1)
The aircraft took equivalent damage on 4 occasions (tests 2, 3, 5 and 6)

Overall (from this limited sample, and taking into account the variations in each test) there is no significant indication that the damage model favours one type over the other when it comes to collisions. There is an unexplained unrealistic element to the collisions that resulted in the odd outcomes of tests 1 and 8, where one of the two aircraft was not damaged at all, whilst the other was destroyed.

Big thanks to 5./JG27 Farber and my squad mate 92 Sqn. Folmar for helping out with this.

[ATAG_Bliss]

I've just conducted 10 collision test. I'll put some video of this up later in the week for you to pour over ;)

First set of 8, mostly head-to-head collisions between 109s and Spitfires. Tests conducted by Folmar and I (both of 92 Sqn)
Test 1: Head to head collision at high speed
Spitfire destroyed, 109 no damage

Test 2: Head to head collision at high speed
Both aircraft destroyed

Test 3: Head to head collision at high speed
Both aircraft destroyed

Test 4: Wing to wing - medium speed
109 wing half to 3/4 removed, spitfire completely destroyed

Test 5: Head to head collision at high speed
Both aircraft destroyed

Test 6 : 109 left wing to spitfire tail section
109 wing 2/4 removed, spitfire tail chopped off

Test 7 : Spitfire nose through 109 right wing from below
spitfire completely destroyed, 109 right wing removed

Test 8: Head to head collision at high speed
109 destroyed, spitfire no damage

I then conducted two further tests with Farber from JG27
Test 9: head to head (109 faster)
109 wing removed. Spitfire completely destroyed

Test 10: head to head (spitfire faster)
109 destroyed, spitfire wing removed


Over the 10 test:
The 109 took more damage than the spitfire on 2 occasions (tests 10 and 8)
The Spitfire took more damage than the 109 on 4 occasions (tests 9, 7, 4 and 1)
The aircraft took equivalent damage on 4 occasions (tests 2, 3, 5 and 6)

Overall (from this limited sample, and taking into account the variations in each test) there is no significant indication that the damage model favours one type over the other when it comes to collisions. There is an unexplained unrealistic element to the collisions that resulted in the odd outcomes of tests 1 and 8, where one of the two aircraft was not damaged at all, whilst the other was destroyed.

Big thanks to 5./JG27 Farber and my squad mate 92 Sqn. Folmar for helping out with this.

The collision damage model is all about netcode. Netcode and FPS also go hand in hand. Ticks and latency do play a factor, but consistency is most important in online gaming - that is also assuming the netcode for w/e particular game is perfect. What we have in Cliffs, for netcode, is not. That's why collisions are less likely to result in both player planes taking damage the more players on the server stressing said netcode. That is exactly why the majority of your tests with just 2 resulted in good results. Do the same tests on a server with 70 players and you will get much worse results.

[92 Sqn. Folmar (QJ-F)]

Thanks Bliss, we will be doing furthur testing with more people online on the server. When this test was conducted there were 5 people connected.

[Wolf]

Take a look at the flight model file for the spit and the 109

You can see all the collision listings in there for each part of the plane. Also see what is metal,wood, steel and their weights etc.

Example on the spit. The nose cone has a number of 1000. The 109 is 180 or something... I forget.

Anyway takea look

[92 Sqn. Philstyle (QJ-P)]

Take a look at the flight model file for the spit and the 109
You can see all the collision listings in there for each part of the plane. Also see what is metal,wood, steel and their weights etc.
Example on the spit. The nose cone has a number of 1000. The 109 is 180 or something... I forget.
Anyway takea look

Hey Wolf, I'll try and catch you on coms soon to chat about this.
Ta.