[QUOTE=powersurge91;51869493]Comes with the job.
No Drama about it. Just Drama management...[/QUOTE]
No need to defend him either. He can write for his own.
[QUOTE=powersurge91;51869469]To be fair, he gets a lot of Flak like this all the time. Every time he logs in he is bombarded with everything from requests to blames. He is right to be agitated when people make assumptions and immediately berate him.[/QUOTE]
So, lets say I am loaded with shit and I cant handle it, and I just rant and call you a dick because [I]you said something I didn't like or didn't want to hear[/I]. What would you say?
It's [B]never[/B] okay to call someone a douchebag because youre [I]agitated[/I] or any other personal problem, thats no excuse If we put it like that anyone would have a reason to call each other assholes, [B]either every reason is okay or no reason is okay[/B].
People will allways have their opinions on whatever you do overtly, theres people that thinks its good and theres people that think its bad, putting aside any kind of bias said folks would have, if you can't handle it and start going around calling people "[I]douchebags, dicks, assholes, idiots[/I]" just because they said something you did not expect or wanted to hear you should simply cut it off and stop doing stuff so openly.
ACF r574
-Fixed fuel capacity being lower than original
--Capacity multiplier is now half of realistic
-Updated RAC textures
-Updated ACF logo courtesy of SeikiMatt
[QUOTE=Damnation;51869684]ACF r574
-Updated RAC textures
-Updated ACF logo courtesy of SeikiMatt[/QUOTE]
Haha, I love these
[QUOTE=Kardel;51869563]So, lets say I am loaded with shit and I cant handle it, and I just rant and call you a dick because [I]you said something I didn't like or didn't want to hear[/I]. What would you say?
It's [B]never[/B] okay to call someone a douchebag because youre [I]agitated[/I] or any other personal problem, thats no excuse If we put it like that anyone would have a reason to call each other assholes, [B]either every reason is okay or no reason is okay[/B].
People will allways have their opinions on whatever you do overtly, theres people that thinks its good and theres people that think its bad, putting aside any kind of bias said folks would have, if you can't handle it and start going around calling people "[I]douchebags, dicks, assholes, idiots[/I]" just because they said something you did not expect or wanted to hear you should simply cut it off and stop doing stuff so openly.[/QUOTE]
Motherfucker you brought up shit from my personal life in the ACF thread because you felt it'd give you an edge in an argument. You're one of the cocksuckers that was traipsing around with people's personal information in a bid to actively push people out of the building community. You're the scummiest piece of shit in the universe and shouldn't even consider giving advice on matters of decorum.
[i]and your models look like hot garbage[/i]. I'm glad you're finally deciding to try to contribute positively, but you can't help yourself but lurch out of the fucking shadows whenever I post anything to vomit more garbage.
I've spoken to lintz before when he's made sassy as fuck remarks about balance changes. Any time a balance change or server tweak occurs that doesn't immediately match with what he specifically wants, he is endlessly sassy without ever considering why the changes were made.
[editline]24th February 2017[/editline]
Seriously, has anyone that's ever interacted with Kardel on a long enough timeframe ever really thought long and hard about how much he really contributes to an average conversation or server population? He's a disingenuous troll, a twitchy dickbag that avoids all criticism by being loud and abrasive to a ridiculous degree. He hides behind walls of irony and absurdism while at the same time needling everyone around him until he provokes a response. He's toxic, unpleasant to be around to say the least, even his friends consider him a mere acquaintance because of how much of a pain in the ass he is. He's not shy to use personal information, or even spend his time doxxing people in a bid to fuck with them. He crosses the line from video games to real life a shocking amount, and will bleat about unsettled scores from years ago if he thinks it'll get him a sympathetic ear.
God I wish you'd just fuck off Kardel, nothing good will ever come from you developing for ACF or being part of its community. You're a fucking awful person and that fact will never change unless you're lobotomized by someone beating you with a brick.
[highlight](User was banned for this post ("DRAMA SHIT" - Craptasket))[/highlight]
[QUOTE=Sestze;51869791]Drama Outburst[/QUOTE]
See? This is what Im talking about, the almighty Sestze has spoken again! And he says: Fuck you all youre all twats.
You accept no sides in conversations that arent yours, which makes talking with you pretty pointless as you start shitting stuff like this. You say I am a troll to difame me around your friends, but whats actually happening is that you don't want to accept it that you are being mean and you think its right only when you do it. When someone tries to make a change to stop, you just make it worse, it got worse when I replied surge, how much of a coincidence. In that last reply I was trying to be as neutral as possible, but no, you have to go out and start saying trash about me because you[B] simply dont like me[/B] and think it will hurt me in any possible manner.
Saying shit from me or my real life won't affect me personally in any way, you could just go up and make up all the shit you want and I just wont give a fuck about it.
Edit:
[QUOTE=Sestze;51869791]You're a fucking awful person and that fact will never change unless you're lobotomized by someone beating you with a brick.[/QUOTE]
So I now have someone over the internet who wants to break a bottle on my head and now someone wants to break a [U]brick[/U] on my head.
explain why HMGs have been nerfed into the ground then. at this moment in time, not only do autocannons penetrate a greater amount and are more accurate, they also have far larger magazines and far less drag.
and at what cost? being a little heavier, which already doesn't mean jackshit except when trying to build smaller things, for which an autocannon is far more useful than a HMG in any case for the sheer virtue of actually being able to penetrate anything.
why was drag increased again? the entire reason it was decreased was so that we'd see less brawling "shove your gun up the other tank's ass" type fights. more drag means less accuracy over distance, which means rapid fire weapons which rely on hitting accurately will not only have to fire more often to hit a target, they'll have to hit with more rounds to achieve the same effect as previously due to the drop in penetration and damage over distance.
MGs are designed to KILL PEOPLE. a full size 7.62x51 round hitting anyone in the chest is going to put them 6 feet fucking under. in real life there's this little thing call momentum, which gmod infantry don't have as they start at full speed instantly.
not only that, they can still sprint at absolutely ridiculous speeds, which, if your tank has a more realistic turret rotation speed, means your tank will just be run circles around, even if they're not sprinting because a: people can't be run over by gmod tanks at low speeds and b: they'll just spam HE grenades or rockets and end up blowing your wheels off at no penalty to themselves.
according to bubbus, it now takes TWO 14.5mm rounds to kill someone at 300 hp. TWO. a fucking .50 BMG round is used as a light fucking anti materiel round for fucks sake, you mean to tell me that gmod infantry apparently are capable of eating rounds that would stop a light fucking IFV?
so now in order to kill infantry at longer ranges you'll need to put even more bullets down range, half of which won't even stop the target for long enough to put them down before they start sprinting and jumping around like a jackrabbit on crack.
why was it necessary to nerf the spread of SAs? they're small magazine fed cannons, emphasis on CANNONS. they're supposed to be on the more accurate side. i can agree with the weight reduction on the 76mm because i've literally never seen anyone use it because of its sheer size. the model for the 76mm more closely matches a 90mm cannon than what it's supposed to be.
originally the ALs were exactly 1t heavier than their regular cannon counterparts. now in many places they're actually more efficient to use than a regular cannon due to the reduced weight and rate of fire. why was this change necessary?
i make these "sassy as fuck" remarks about balance changes because oddly enough, a large percentage of these changes seem to come about after baikonur gets filled up from time to time and these changes are purposely made in order to counter whatever new design has proven to be too strong for an admin to beat with a design that's 2 years old
Very convenient to point out that with the increase of drag and the increase of Rate of Fire on machineguns means, since it will deal less damage over range and it will be more inaccurate, people will just start strapping on more machineguns on their tanks and spamming more, which leads to have more traces floating on the server (since they will travel more time) and with it, more lag, and more chances of traces ghosting through props, which is game-breaking until this bug stops existing.
[QUOTE=Kardel;51869849]See? This is what Im talking about, the almighty Sestze has spoken again! And he says: Fuck you all youre all twats.
You accept no sides in conversations that arent yours, which makes talking with you pretty pointless as you start shitting stuff like this. You say I am a troll to difame me around your friends, but whats actually happening is that you don't want to accept it that you are being mean and you think its right only when you do it. When someone tries to make a change to stop, you just make it worse, it got worse when I replied surge, how much of a coincidence. In that last reply I was trying to be as neutral as possible, but no, you have to go out and start saying trash about me because you[B] simply dont like me[/B] and think it will hurt me in any possible manner.
Saying shit from me or my real life won't affect me personally in any way, you could just go up and make up all the shit you want and I just wont give a fuck about it.
Edit:
So I now have someone over the internet who wants to break a bottle on my head and now someone wants to break a [U]brick[/U] on my head.[/QUOTE]
Man, you're bad at reading.
I'm not saying "fuck all of you", I'm saying "fuck Kardel in particular" because you're a cunt that yelled out into the last thread shit from my personal life when you felt like it'd give you an advantage. You are now giving advice on personal decorum like you've been a genteel individual this whole time. You are not an eloquent, neutral individual, do not even pretend like you have been. I don't need to "defame" you, you've been a dumb prick around people for a long period of time. If you'd like to reform your image, I'd start by registering a new account and burning this one, it's too far gone.
You won't be a better person unless someone lobotomizes you with a brick. That is not a threat. I am not volunteering for it, I'm saying that it'd probably be a net positive for you, and the world in general, if someone blindsided you with a bit of masonry.
[QUOTE=lintz;51869873]explain why HMGs have been nerfed into the ground then. at this moment in time, not only do autocannons penetrate a greater amount and are more accurate, they also have far larger magazines and far less drag.
and at what cost? being a little heavier, which already doesn't mean jackshit except when trying to build smaller things, for which an autocannon is far more useful than a HMG in any case for the sheer virtue of actually being able to penetrate anything.
why was drag increased again? the entire reason it was decreased was so that we'd see less brawling "shove your gun up the other tank's ass" type fights. more drag means less accuracy over distance, which means rapid fire weapons which rely on hitting accurately will not only have to fire more often to hit a target, they'll have to hit with more rounds to achieve the same effect as previously due to the drop in penetration and damage over distance.
MGs are designed to KILL PEOPLE. a full size 7.62x51 round hitting anyone in the chest is going to put them 6 feet fucking under. in real life there's this little thing call momentum, which gmod infantry don't have as they start at full speed instantly.
not only that, they can still sprint at absolutely ridiculous speeds, which, if your tank has a more realistic turret rotation speed, means your tank will just be run circles around, even if they're not sprinting because a: people can't be run over by gmod tanks at low speeds and b: they'll just spam HE grenades or rockets and end up blowing your wheels off at no penalty to themselves.
according to bubbus, it now takes TWO 14.5mm rounds to kill someone at 300 hp. TWO. a fucking .50 BMG round is used as a light fucking anti materiel round for fucks sake, you mean to tell me that gmod infantry apparently are capable of eating rounds that would stop a light fucking IFV?
so now in order to kill infantry at longer ranges you'll need to put even more bullets down range, half of which won't even stop the target for long enough to put them down before they start sprinting and jumping around like a jackrabbit on crack.
why was it necessary to nerf the spread of SAs? they're small magazine fed cannons, emphasis on CANNONS. they're supposed to be on the more accurate side. i can agree with the weight reduction on the 76mm because i've literally never seen anyone use it because of its sheer size. the model for the 76mm more closely matches a 90mm cannon than what it's supposed to be.
originally the ALs were exactly 1t heavier than their regular cannon counterparts. now in many places they're actually more efficient to use than a regular cannon due to the reduced weight and rate of fire. why was this change necessary?
i make these "sassy as fuck" remarks about balance changes because oddly enough, a large percentage of these changes seem to come about after baikonur gets filled up from time to time and these changes are purposely made in order to counter whatever new design has proven to be too strong for an admin to beat with a design that's 2 years old[/QUOTE]
Ok, so those are some interesting words about HMGs, but let me just pause here a moment. They were poorly designed as HE chuckers to begin with, and people realized that you could mass them to easily eat through practically any vehicle. When they lost the ability to use HE on GGG due to this stacked weapon abuse, they really lost that role entirely. As for a current place for HMGs, we could reallow HE again, seeing as there's been a significant nerf to the weapons themselves, as well as the global RoF limiter. I don't particularly like HMGs because they seem to be good at too much (or were, at least.) One hit kills from weapons that are 400-500 RPM is a whole pile of unfun, same with if they're AOE and can completely fuck up vehicles.
The ACF damage routines for players is all kinds of fucked up at the moment to say the least. Blast armor's been removed, max HP for a player is 200 with 100 suit. Two shots from most MGs will actually kill a player currently. That's with a changed ACF damage routine that we're running that's a bit of a kludge, because the current damage model in there is flat busted bad. Keep in mind, I'm trying to give infantry at least a bit of a chance, considering that simply being mown down any time you stick your head out of a trench or walk along a hill is zero fun. I'm not aiming for 100% realism because this isn't the game that'll ever deliver on that promise.
edit: also we've rolled back the drag changes on GGG. That happened like 30 minutes after the patch hit. Stop assuming that I'm in cahoots or agree with 100% of the balance changes.
Also, who woulda thunk that the only acf combat server with regular infantry would have the most impact on ACF's infantry balance.
ok but you see, baikonur is a custom gamemode with a lot of other shit on top. you can't balance acf around infantry on a server that already has alterations to the base gameplay.
acf isn't exclusive to ggg
"im not gonna respond to these people"
*responds*
*gets owned*
plays victim
nice
Here me and aki made some new ACF rules
[T]https://puu.sh/uifME/5264f0c8d0.PNG[/T]
[QUOTE=lintz;51870072]ok but you see, baikonur is a custom gamemode with a lot of other shit on top. you can't balance acf around infantry on a server that already has alterations to the base gameplay.
acf isn't exclusive to ggg[/QUOTE]
Right. It isnt and i dont. You keep confusing actual changes to base acf with changes to the stuff on ggg. You even pose the issue like infantry is a problem in the lens of baikonur.
Seriously, look at damage calcs outside of ggg for infantry. There is very little consideration for it in the damage code. Structured infantry vs vehicle combat is not a thing for a reason.
W.R.T. HMGs: Their role has been changed to something more fitting for aircraft. They offer a quick burst of rounds, instead of the slower and more consistent fire rate of autocannons. Think of HMG as aircraft autocannons now, whereas autocannons themselves are more oriented to ground vehicles.
The current state of HMGs are by no means the final stats; for ACF, balance is an iterative process, and HMGs will be adjusted as needed in the future. If you feel autocannons are the better option right now, use them. :) But please don't completely disregard HMG because they look inferior on paper. Give them a try, just keep in mind their intended role has changed.
W.R.T. ALs: I felt they needed a buff, as the current model makes them particularly difficult to mount in anything that's not an oscillating turret, pintle mount, or hull mounted. They're very rarely fielded, so I am making them a more attractive option.
Player damage is also something I'm intending to rebalance for stock (non-ggg/baik) ACF.
HMG irl were literally just renamed auto-cannons on German aircraft though.
[QUOTE=Lufteh;51870128]"im not gonna respond to these people"
*responds*
*gets owned*
plays victim
nice[/QUOTE]
Really? You're calling the tu quoque equivocations of an actual mouthbreather with "getting owned"? You are siding with Kardel when he feigns innocence? Boy you fucked up.
You are an emotionally fragile 16 year old fucknut that needed his hand held every fucking time someone said something mean about you
You ignored every bit of good advice ever given and had a near meltdown over you own self professed perfection of your armored vehicles. You whined about neing excluded by other admins while at the same time calling them rats.
Keep your snide bitchy shade throwing to yourself you fucked up guido knob gobbler, you are a dumb fucking child who needs to spend less time on the internet.
[QUOTE=Sestze;51870166]Really? You're calling the tu quoque equivocations of an actual mouthbreather with "getting owned"? You are siding with Kardel when he feigns innocence? Boy you fucked up.
You are an emotionally fragile 16 year old fucknut that needed his hand held every fucking time someone said something mean about you
You ignored every bit of good advice ever given and had a near meltdown over you own self professed perfection of your armored vehicles. You whined about neing excluded by other admins while at the same time calling them rats.
Keep your snide bitchy shade throwing to yourself you fucked up guido knob gobbler, you are a dumb fucking child who needs to spend less time on the internet.[/QUOTE]
Im not feigning anything, you just keep talking shit about me for no reason, and you do this to anyone who you don't personally like. Luft just said something you didn't like, and now youre calling him an [I]"emotionally fragile 16 years old"[/I], and as far as I remember, you dont quite like Luft. Really makes you think...
Second of all you never give good advice, you just tell others what they should think about, I dont see that as good advice.
Additionally, whats funny is that Luft is right, you said that you wouldn't reply to "us" anymore twice, but you keep replying, but this time youre getting fruity and start trying to offend absolutely everybody you deem as "guilty" of who knows what. I mean, you just said Im [B]"feigning innocence"[/B], but I simply can't tell what am I guilty of...[I]Did I push someone into suicide?[/I] [I]Attention: Joke.[/I]
I simply can't understand why you suddenly go full apeshit because of that, I don't care if youre [I]stressed [/I]or youre [I]agitated[/I] or whatever you want to come up with, [B]don't put your personal problems in here, keep them to yourself[/B]. No, I'm not fucking defending him, I'm just saying youre going too far by picking on anybody you want just because you feel like you have the right to do so.
Ses, that was really edgy.
If only you put as much energy into having an actual argument, as much as your trying to hurt my little feelings.
Maybe it's a jersey thing.
"siding with kardel"
I love being a pain in the ass. Take a vacation
Your advice on "please kindly walk off a bridge" will be treated the same as "go read a book"
Damm I got the feeling that someone is gonna get banned again for this ****
Jokes aside does the update include a fix for the tracer issue of the last revision ? Im not gonna see my rig till mid next week and already need to plan my time thats why I dont wanna waste time on improving my builds when the bug still persists
[QUOTE=Blachnick;51870275]Damm I got the feeling that someone is gonna get banned again for this ****
Jokes aside does the update include a fix for the tracer issue of the last revision ? Im not gonna see my rig till mid next week and already need to plan my time thats why I dont wanna waste time on improving my builds when the bug still persists[/QUOTE]
Not sure, but ferv mightve have fixed it already, should ask him if you have him on steam.
So HMGs got:
-Nerf to capacity (massive one)
-Increase to ROF (I think? haven't played in a while)
-Increase in pen (again, maybe?)
-Nerf in velocity
-Nerf in spread
-Buff in weight
So they're supposed to be light, aircraft mounted guns for the purpose of killing other aircraft? Why would I pick this over a standard autocannon, though?
EDIT: weights are way more different than I thought, the 30mm AC for example is 2x the weight of the 30mm HMG
Still though, 480kg seems like a relatively small price to pay. Aircraft are anywhere from 10-20 tons (or even higher in some cases), 480kg isn't that much.
Also, RAC tracers seemed to be glitched, they originate from about 1-2 meters behind the gun. Looks really weird.
Other than that, good shit, nice to see ACF is still in development.
20mm MG needs some love. Maybe not for infantry damage but mostly for planos
For now I find it useless or just a powerful coax
[QUOTE=Lufteh;51871711]20mm MG needs some love. Maybe not for infantry damage but mostly for planos
For now I find it useless or just a powerful coax[/QUOTE]
20mm MG is literally a mini-autocannon with modified stats, works well for aircraft but people tend to whore it a lot on their tanks. Theyre also quite light and accurate, which might be why people put so many of these on their tanks. The only downsides I can find are the tiny capacity (since MG update) and the fact theyre restricted from firing explosive payloads. Maybe this one needs attention too, probably a rebalance for this specific one?
Most of Kardel's, and his friends', responses to sestze in the past six months have been at least 50% trolling and agitating, no fucking wonder he's peeved. Should we consider an alternative forum for development? I mean, the last thread turned into a mess, and it seems devs can't get any sort of backing or support from FP mods, so might be prudent.
If you want to see your changes and ideas implemented in ACF, you have to either A: make them yourself and make your own branch, or B: don't piss off devs and try to convince us they're good ideas. Or contribute yourself, which is generally preferable. Example: I couldn't stand what I perceived as huge gaping holes in balance in missiles; planes could fire rockets cross map without aiming and hit anything, rockets clipping through armor moving at 9000mph, etc. So I asked bubbus "do you mind if I do some balance tweaks, here are some issues I see", he said "sure", I worked on it, and voila, missiles are more fun, and probably will get merged into main SVN soon. Example 2: gimme a few days Cheese, hot model mate. Next update I'd like to add historical engines so this'll make a fine addition.
Changes in drag have only a minimal, edge-case effect for tanks, encouraging larger weapons for long range sniping. This prevents some of the armor-whoring because you need a larger gun if you want to sit at long range and maintain effectiveness; a 120 maybe 70% as effective as a 140 at 200m, but only 50% at 600m. If you want to close to 300m, it'll require tactics and probably taking a few hits. At the usual range people slug it out glacis-to-glacis on most non-Cre8ive/GGG/FRS servers it shouldn't have any real effect. No sympathy for 60t/120c meta tears. Adapt.
It has a more pronounced effect on aircraft and light vehicles, by increasing the effect of range. It's a rough estimate that about an inch of armor will stop light (20MG, 14.5MG, usually 20AC) AAA at 200-300m most of the time. This means range provides an element of protection--high flying, long range aircraft are [B]far[/B] less vulnerable to small, rapid-firing weapons, requiring heavier and more dedicated AAA at the cost of not being able to strafe as effectively. You should not be able to shoot down an attack aircraft with a 7.62 or 12.7 at half map range. If you notice from my missiles updates, missiles follow the same sort of formula, making combat more interesting and balanced. Small scout cars will be far more resistant to coax fire at long range as well, so people who build fast/small can more easily coexist with 60t spam.
This was very carefully considered, tested for several months both in my singleplayer and in actual use on my server, and coincides with the missiles patch having fixed the insta-gib of racked weapons and continued attempts to improve diversity in combat. It's worth noting: [I]dragdiv 40 was the [B]original[/B] acf drag divisor for many years[/I].
[editline]25th February 2017[/editline]
[QUOTE=lintz;51869003]so now hmgs are even more useless? autocannons are literally better than them in just about every single function[/QUOTE]
HMG is 2x the damage in time, at ~75% the weight. Brrrt.
[editline]25th February 2017[/editline]
[QUOTE=ted234521;51871471]So HMGs got:
-Nerf to capacity (massive one) [B]yes[/B]
-Increase to ROF (I think? haven't played in a while) [B]massive increase. 50-100%[/B]
-Increase in pen (again, maybe?) [B]yes, almost on par with AC[/B]
-Nerf in velocity [B]buff, actually, they're almost on par with AC[/B]
-Nerf in spread [B]minor nerf[/B]
-Buff in weight [B]technically a nerf, slightly heavier than before[/B]
So they're supposed to be light, aircraft mounted guns for the purpose of killing other aircraft? [B]yes, but also for strafing, rapid fire AAA, etc. Anything where you'd see an automatic cannon biased for higher rate of fire over accuracy, so they're equally good for SPAAGs, light armored cars, helicopter nose mounts, etc.[/B] Why would I pick this over a standard autocannon, though? [B]any situation where putting a lot of rounds downrange fast in a short period is preferable to an accurate, sustained fire (AC), or to high accuracy and penetration for weight (SA), and where weight is restricted[/B]
Other than that, good shit, nice to see ACF is still in development. [B]:D[/B][/QUOTE]
if an attack aircraft should not be able to be shot down by 12.7mms explain why most world war 2 planes have either 7.62s/.303s/7.92s or 12.7s
most ww2 air combat took place at ranges of 300m
explain why russia put 3 DShKs on a GAZ-AA truck
explain why america put 4 M2 brownings on an m3 half track
do you know why they did? because planes are made of PAPER.
do you think a fucking plane in wwii could stand up to sustained fire? because they didn't and it was only with the advent of the jet era that 12.7s were phased out of service, usually because they didn't have enough velocity for the faster moving jets, not because they couldn't penetrate.
a common side mount for the littlebird is a m134 minigun on either side, which happens to fire 7.62, which absolutely tears through anything it hits
AA calibres were increased to get more range due to propellant and more post penetration effects due to the size of the round. but even now 30mm is the largest calibre you'll see for a SPAAG.
typical combat ranges in real life were within the ballpark of 500>1km ranges, not the atrocious sub 150m ranges that we see in gmod. there has to be a compromise between real life and in game balance, sure, but there was a reason drag was reduced.
as i said, more drag means more bullets down range to compensate for the loss of accuracy. putting more and more entries into the acf bullet table is a bad idea when the penetration glitch still hasn't been fixed. the current patch is just a stopgap solution until a true fix can be worked out.
[QUOTE=RedReaper;51873532]Shit about drama[/QUOTE]
For short, youre saying you dont want any opinion unless you agree, otherwise you will just turn it down into a shitfest and then accuse the other party of being annoying and invasive. [I]Beautiful[/I].
[QUOTE=RedReaper;51873532]Shit about changes[/QUOTE]
Actually, for drag, decreasing drag will simply not encourage long range engagement as all your rounds will be ineffective, and as you said, [U]would need to mount bigger guns for it[/U], which also means I will have a heavier vehicle because of it. In addition to this, you handicap light tanks firepower, as they rely on moving fast and being far away from the target in order to make their almost inexistent armor any effective, even that if in consequence you are practically helping with the later, you are practically killing them. In most cases you will want your light tank to be a light, fast chasis with a powerful gun [I](Or incase you go with the old standards, something to kill infantry)[/I]. Adding what Ive said previously, increasing drag means people will miss more and do less damage, which will lead to them shooting more, which means more traces flying around, which means more lag.
As for aircraft, unlike what Lintz said, their engagement range depends on muzzle velocity of the ammo (Which on their kind of guns tends to be quite low in most cases) they carry. The average aircraft engagement range withguns swings betwheen 300 and 700 meters. One curious fact is that after the developement of missiles for aircraft, guns are no longer used, because with a missile you [B]can shoot someone down from the other side of the battle zone[/B]. If you need an example, Vietnam war: only [I]5% of aircraft battle kills are achieved with their maingun, and in very limit situations.[/I]
Another curious fact about aircraft is that the only part where aircraft is armored is around the cockpit canopy and some other key areas like the engine. Military grade aircraft can only withstand small arms (Talking about Pistols, Submachineguns) and even they do it [I]hardly[/I], which means is completely okay you can shoot down a plane with your AK-47 if its flying low[I](good luck with doing it from far away though)[/I]. Even if what Lintz said about Russians and Americans mounting machineguns on their trucks to use them as Anti-Air, which quite only applied during WW2, it still does for cold war and modern warfare, but its very unlikely you're going to shoot down a jet moving at 300 meters per second. Still you can shoot down a low-flying helicopter which also is an aircraft.
Drifting towards mid/late cold war, SPAAGs were being discontinued by most countries because of the extensive use of jets. Trying to shoot down a plane that moved really fast [B]required a lot of leading, which would be visible from far away and easily avoided.[/B] What was normal is that SPAAG ammo's muzzle vel was betwheen 800 and 1000 meters per second, but still, even for a round that moves 1km in one second, planes were still really fast and SPAAGs had problems hitting them. This made using SPAAGs at all quite a waste of time and money and they moved out to mobile SAMs, which were faster, easier to aim and much more accurate than firing 500 rounds from multiple guns.
Its most likely you ignore everything I said above because its a big explaination, so Im giving out a tl;dr: Aircraft practically [U]dont [/U]have armor and its fine to be shot down easily. Stop thinking about them being able to be able to bounce anything, its not even balanced. The most reasonable armoring you could give to the skin of your aircraft would be betwheen 5 and 10mm, [B]because that way you are accounting for all the stuff inside that you arent actually building.[/B]
Im not trying to force anything into ACF. Im not trying to mock anything. I just need to ask you (all of you) to [B]reason[/B], think before you start saying stuff you don't really want to say, but in effect, you do want.
[QUOTE=Kardel;51874017]For short, youre saying you dont want any opinion unless you agree, otherwise you will just turn it down into a shitfest and then accuse the other party of being annoying and invasive. [I]Beautiful[/I].
Actually, for drag, decreasing drag will simply not encourage long range engagement as all your rounds will be ineffective, and as you said, [U]would need to mount bigger guns for it[/U], which also means I will have a heavier vehicle because of it. In addition to this, you handicap light tanks firepower, as they rely on moving fast and being far away from the target in order to make their almost inexistent armor any effective, even that if in consequence you are practically helping with the later, you are practically killing them. In most cases you will want your light tank to be a light, fast chasis with a powerful gun [I](Or incase you go with the old standards, something to kill infantry)[/I]. Adding what Ive said previously, increasing drag means people will miss more and do less damage, which will lead to them shooting more, which means more traces flying around, which means more lag.
As for aircraft, unlike what Lintz said, their engagement range depends on muzzle velocity of the ammo (Which on their kind of guns tends to be quite low in most cases) they carry. The average aircraft engagement range withguns swings betwheen 300 and 700 meters. One curious fact is that after the developement of missiles for aircraft, guns are no longer used, because with a missile you [B]can shoot someone down from the other side of the battle zone[/B]. If you need an example, Vietnam war: only [I]5% of aircraft battle kills are achieved with their maingun, and in very limit situations.[/I]
Another curious fact about aircraft is that the only part where aircraft is armored is around the cockpit canopy and some other key areas like the engine. Military grade aircraft can only withstand small arms (Talking about Pistols, Submachineguns) and even they do it [I]hardly[/I], which means is completely okay you can shoot down a plane with your AK-47 if its flying low[I](good luck with doing it from far away though)[/I]. Even if what Lintz said about Russians and Americans mounting machineguns on their trucks to use them as Anti-Air, which quite only applied during WW2, it still does for cold war and modern warfare, but its very unlikely you're going to shoot down a jet moving at 300 meters per second. Still you can shoot down a low-flying helicopter which also is an aircraft.
Drifting towards mid/late cold war, SPAAGs were being discontinued by most countries because of the extensive use of jets. Trying to shoot down a plane that moved really fast [B]required a lot of leading, which would be visible from far away and easily avoided.[/B] What was normal is that SPAAG ammo's muzzle vel was betwheen 800 and 1000 meters per second, but still, even for a round that moves 1km in one second, planes were still really fast and SPAAGs had problems hitting them. This made using SPAAGs at all quite a waste of time and money and they moved out to mobile SAMs, which were faster, easier to aim and much more accurate than firing 500 rounds from multiple guns.
Its most likely you ignore everything I said above because its a big explaination, so Im giving out a tl;dr: Aircraft practically [U]dont [/U]have armor and its fine to be shot down easily. Stop thinking about them being able to be able to bounce anything, its not even balanced. The most reasonable armoring you could give to the skin of your aircraft would be betwheen 5 and 10mm, [B]because that way you are accounting for all the stuff inside that you arent actually building.[/B]
Im not trying to force anything into ACF. Im not trying to mock anything. I just need to ask you (all of you) to [B]reason[/B], think before you start saying stuff you don't really want to say, but in effect, you do want.[/QUOTE]
Spitballing here, but is it possible to increase drag only for very small arms (30mm and lower, maybe) so that long range engagements work but aircraft don't suffer as much? Like it has been mentioned, AAA engages at ranges far lower than it should by virtue of tiny maps. Even with unreasonably thick armor, most planes will fold quite quickly to a hail of 4 30mm autocannons or a couple of RACs.
That way, tanks and ground vehicles still have incentive to fight at longer ranges and aircraft actually stand a chance.
Yes, it's definitely possible. In fact, it's very easy.
In every ammo type we have this little guy:
[code]Data.DragCoef = ((Data.FrAera/10000)/Data.ProjMass)[/code]
We also have all the relevant information necessary to implement the change you want, which isn't a half bad idea and addresses the issue more directly than nerfing guns willy nilly.
The relevant bit of information is the caliber. You could modify the above code in every ammo type to read:
[code]
Data.DragCoef = ((Data.FrArea/10000)/Data.ProjMass) * (1 + (20.3-Data.Caliber) * 0.05)
[/code]
Quick example, but if you threw this in right now it'd cause your drag coefficient to go up linearly as your caliber goes down. A 30mm would have 1.865x the drag of a 203, almost double. Using our data above, our 120mm round would have 1.415x the drag of a 203.
You can, and should, use better math to utilize a curve instead to produce better results, because a 203 being the most aerodynamic thing in the air is silly.
We also have information about the gun type so you could have per gun type modifications.
Since we're talking about code, why was this monstrosity of a change added?
[code]
--Stupid workaround red added to precache timescaling.
hook.Add( "Think", "Update ACF Internal Clock", function()
ACF.CurTime = CurTime()
ACF.SysTime = SysTime()
end )
[/code]
[code]
local DeltaTime = ACF.SysTime - Bullet.LastThink
[/code]
If I remember correctly, the entire premise of the issue is that calculating the change in time on every projectile is [I]stupid[/I] and in doing so asking what the current time is 100 times.
This change doesn't address this [I][B]at all[/B][/I]. Ontop of the fact that this is put into a new hook for absolutely [I][B]no reason[/B][/I] because one [I]already exists[/I], [I]every[/I] bullet still calculates the difference in time as seen above. Instead of calling SysTime(), they call ACF.SysTime.
Not only this, but now we are updating two variables [I][B]every single tick[/B][/I], even when there's no projectiles.
Yes, there are other functions that ask what time it is all throughout ACF, and you've made [B]some[/B] of them use these variables. However, almost none of these functions run every tick, and there's still multiple functions that just call CurTime/SysTime despite the variables existing.
Long story short, there are now two global table variables in an extra hook that doesn't need to exist that update [I]every single tick[/I] that only provides an incredibly minor speed increase if there's in excess of what seems to be 3 bullets in flight, which is a [B]very[/B] small fraction of a servers run time.
When there's less than 3 projectiles in flight, which will be getting infinitely closer to 100% of the time the longer the server runs, it will be doing nothing but waste processing power.
At least the comment was accurate.
If you want to "precache" the time, you should do it like this:
[code]
local LastTime -- Local to the ballistics script only, no other script needs to know this. Local is key for speed.
local DeltaTime -- Local to the ballistics script only, no other script needs to know this. Local is key for speed.
function ACF_ManageBullets()
local Time = CurTime() -- Getting the time once per tick, no matter how many bullets there are. A cheap local variable, vastly superior to a global table entry
DeltaTime = Time - LastTime -- Calculating the change in time once, because the time between this tick and the last wont change even if you measure it 100 times
LastTime = Time
for Index,Bullet in pairs(ACF.Bullet) do
if not Bullet.HandlesOwnIteration then
ACF_CalcBulletFlight( Index, Bullet )
end
end
end
hook.Add("Tick", "ACF_ManageBullets", ACF_ManageBullets)
--That's it. No more calculating DeltaTime in every projectile.
--Every projectile will instead call the "precached" DeltaTime.
[/code]
Since we already know how much time has passed we remove this line entirely from every bullet:
[code]
local DeltaTime = ACF.SysTime - Bullet.LastThink
[/code]
No more addition of a pointless hook, no more calling global table variables 100 times, and much faster. The change in time is calculated once, [I]as it should[/I].
Additionally, using CurTime instead of SysTime allows you to, among other things, have slow motion projectiles (since they're appropriately modified by timescale).
I'd also like to point out that calculating delta SysTime on every projectile leads to time travel. The time between two ticks is one set number.
If you loop 100 times and calculate the change in time, you should get one number. This doesn't happen with SysTime, because SysTime is a highly accurate [I]system clock[/I] and does, in fact, change within the execution of code.
[I]But wait, there's more![/I] If you want to go [B]even faster[/B], you can [I]correctly[/I] assume that the time between ticks is [B]the same every time[/B]. What matters is the servers perspective, [B]not ours[/B].
When the server lags and there's a two second delay between ticks things don't warp around to where they would've been if it wasn't lagging, that'd cause a whole mess of problems because time travel.
As far as the server is concerned the is [I]no such thing as lag[/I], the time between ticks is [I]always the same[/I]. If your tick rate is 66, it's the 0.015 seconds we're used to and it always will be.
Every tick on the server is 0.015 seconds server time and therefore every projectile should move 0.015 seconds forward in time, whether it took 0.001 real seconds to calculate or 30.
Utilizing this understanding of how the game works, we can calculate delta time. [B]Once. Ever.[/B]
It'd look like this:
[code]
ACF.DeltaTime = engine.TickInterval() -- This runs one time when the map loads and never again, some other things need to know this which is why it's stored globally
local DeltaTime = ACF.DeltaTime -- We make it local to this script because calling a global var is slow
function ACF_ManageBullets()
for Index, Bullet in pairs(Bullets) do
ACF_CalcBulletFlight( Index, Bullet )
end
end
hook.Add("Tick", "ACF_ManageBullets", ACF_ManageBullets)
[/code]
Delta time was calculated once. And that's it. Dead simple, and significantly faster.
ACF r575
-Fixed issue with tracers appearing to start behind weapon
-Possible fix for FL HE-effect bug
SAM sites are kind of eh, since automatic flare system and acf missiles are so fucked you could outrun them by walking. Hitting a plane that goes 0-120mph in o.1 second, turns very fast due to small maps and can just put one missile into the roof to kill you, is quite hard unless. A : you put a lot of fucking guns on the SPAAG which causes lag. Insane ROF-no pen and still LAG. Then there's HE. You already know the answer to that. My opinion planes(Modern ones) are just not good due to map size and how acf works. Combat always worked better when everyone stuck to the ground.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
