Originally Posted by GrayGhost
Originally Posted by - Ice
You must be confused as to what "confession" means. Would "admitted" be a better term?

I'm not. 'Confession/Admitting' has a negative connotation, as in someone was doing something bad or trying to hide something. Neither of those is true.

Sure. Suggest a better, more fitting term? Either way, you've already helped me prove my point. Thanks!

Originally Posted by GrayGhost
In the case of THIS game, the missile on the shooting client's machine is taken as correct. In your scenario, you watch the missile not track or barely miss or explode far from you, but you take damage assigned from the detonation distance on my client.

So in THIS game, it's possible for me to watch me do a successful missile avoidance maneuver but still blow up from a direct hit (your client) even though I just saw it fly past me (my client). Wow. Such advanced MP netcode. Why not simply use the firing client's calculations to extrapolate missile coordinates and use those coordinates to show the defensive client where the missile is? One calculation, done. Why do two only to ignore the other and when the other is also totally unneeded?

Originally Posted by GrayGhost
I suppose each client also simulates the FM of aircraft independently?

They do ... kind of a strange question. smile FMs might not be super-heavy things to simulate (not simple either) but if you can avoid running them all in one place, you probably should.

No, you claimed each client simulates each missile independently.... so does each client simulate the FM of each aircraft independently as well? ie, in a dogfight, your client simulates the FM of the missile and the FM of both our aircraft and my client separately simulates the FM of the missile and the FM of both our aircraft? It was kind of a rhetorical question, obviously if each client calculates the FM of each asset in the air --- aircraft, weapons, missiles, etc, then the game is doing a lot of work it does not need to.

Originally Posted by GrayGhost
In the case of this game, we appear to be using an older solution that reduces network traffic but results in the aforementioned artifacts some times.

I agree! Like you said, it's been broken for some time, ED knows it's been broken for some time, and has simply been accepted as the norm rather than be a priority fix. Who wants accurate positioning of missiles or correct simulation of fuzes if the community has already made up excuses for this behavior? Now let's go back to ensuring accurate wing vapors and correct water droplet behavior on the canopy!! banghead mycomputer

- Ice