Jump to content

Unrealistic way of flying when chased


pburnage

Recommended Posts

It ihas become common practice  to see players throw themselves in all sorts of unrealistic manoeuvres when chased by an opponent. They jiggle, go left, right, up, down, in such a frantic and quick way that they become a very difficult target indeed. Fair enough, you may say, stop complaining and learn to shoot. Not quite so in my opinion.  Just try to resist to such manoeuvres in a real plane for more than 20 seconds, you will be thrown around your cockpit so much an so hard that you will probably knock yourself out, or at least become so sick that you'll be incapacitated. Look at all the gun camera footage you may find, you will never see the like. We pride ourselves in flying dcs because it is a sim and not a game, I believe this should be taken into consideration. If we are allowed to black out, surely, we should not be allowed to fly in such a way that it would be physically impossible to go on for long. Of course, blacking out happens when the g force exceeds a certain limit. I think the g force standard deviation, or the number of time it changes sign (from positive to negative, or right to left) over 10 or 15 seconds should also be considered to trigger some kind of pilot incapacitating measure. 


Edited by pburnage
  • Like 10
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Il-2GB implemented a similar system some time ago. Apparently It tamed online "rodeo riders" quite a bit 😉. And although the whole physiological limits simulation has been a subject of heated debates in that sim, it still was a step forward compared to having no limits (apart form G) at all. Your request sounds reasonable.

There's always some "gaming the game" involved in competitive MP community, however, and I gather it's not the first, nor the last loophole in the simulator to be exploited by some guys.

  • Like 5

i7 9700K @ stock speed, single GTX1070, 32 gigs of RAM, TH Warthog, MFG Crosswind, Win10.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Exploits have existed in gaming since ever, and DCS is no different in that than any other gaming software where you just take advantage of you being in front of a screen and not suffering whatever is happening inside the game. Tough to solve problem since it's only up to the players using the software in a "realistic way" now DCS allow us to do so, or not and still no matter how realistic DCS is it ends up in another shooter played with a gamepad. Sadly you can't send the police to every player's home to check how they use the software 😅 .

  • Thanks 1

"I went into the British Army believing that if you want peace you must prepare for war. I believe now that if you prepare for war, you get war."

-- Major-General Frederick B. Maurice

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wouldn’t those sorts of manoeuvres have the possibility of structural damage? I suppose in reality the control aero forces at high speed would exhaust any pilot pretty quickly.

There’s quite a bit in one of Eric Brown’s books about high speed dive tests in the Spitfire and the controls becoming very stiff over 400mph.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, Mogster said:

Wouldn’t those sorts of manoeuvres have the possibility of structural damage?

Not really, IRL it's usually the pilot the weakest "structure" of it all.

  • Like 2

"I went into the British Army believing that if you want peace you must prepare for war. I believe now that if you prepare for war, you get war."

-- Major-General Frederick B. Maurice

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Am 12.7.2022 um 08:34 schrieb pburnage:

It ihas become common practice  to see players throw themselves in all sorts of unrealistic manoeuvres when chased by an opponent. They jiggle, go left, right, up, down, in such a frantic and quick way that they become a very difficult target indeed. Fair enough, you may say, stop complaining and learn to shoot. Not quite so in my opinion.  Just try to resist to such manoeuvres in a real plane for more than 20 seconds, you will be thrown around your cockpit so much an so hard that you will probably knock yourself out, or at least become so sick that you'll be incapacitated. Look at all the gun camera footage you may find, you will never see the like. We pride ourselves in flying dcs because it is a sim and not a game, I believe this should be taken into consideration. If we are allowed to black out, surely, we should not be allowed to fly in such a way that it would be physically impossible to go on for long. Of course, blacking out happens when the g force exceeds a certain limit. I think the g force standard deviation, or the number of time it changes sign (from positive to negative, or right to left) over 10 or 15 seconds should also be considered to trigger some kind of pilot incapacitating measure. 

 

I agree

But try to fly yourself the manoeuvres you observe online, some will not be possible for you
Watch the video and try it in the Spitfire, you will faint very quickly at such -g

 

 

 

Either there is desynchronisation, which makes the wobble even worse.
Or the person has turned off the G-limits.

 


Edited by Hobel
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

LOL...  I only saw ONE questionable juke there...  it was pretty early and did look to be caused by network prediction code but...  I just don't see anything there being a problem.

 

Have any of you ever been shot at?  I mean I think the pilot is well strapped in...

I've been on amusement park rides better than that.  OK maybe not really but...  I don't see much there to complain about.

  • Like 2

Nvidia RTX3080 (HP Reverb), AMD 3800x

Asus Prime X570P, 64GB G-Skill RipJaw 3600

Saitek X-65F and Fanatec Club-Sport Pedals (Using VJoy and Gremlin to remap Throttle and Clutch into a Rudder axis)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This crazy maneuvering is also practiced by some AI fighters, e.g. P-51D when they are chased. So In order to kill the beast I have to do pretty much the same. Now if ED implemented what the OP suggests just for human pilots it would become almost impossible to defeat these AI. We are already handicapped because the AI do not suffer from blackouts, and that's bad enough. What I'm saying is: If this kind of restriction is introduced by ED, it should apply to AI as well.

  • Like 1

LeCuvier

Windows 10 Pro 64Bit | i7-4790 CPU |16 GB RAM|SSD System Disk|SSD Gaming Disk| MSI GTX-1080 Gaming 8 GB| Acer XB270HU | TM Warthog HOTAS | VKB Gladiator Pro | MongoosT-50 | MFG Crosswind Pedals | TrackIR 5

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ever blacked out in a roller coaster? And the more you are thrown around, the less you control your stick, which you do not need in an amusement park. It's not even close I think. As I suggested, look for combat films, gun camera footages, there are not difficult to find,  try to see something similar.  Why was it never done? There were evasion manoeuvres, violent ones, but never like what I see on DCS. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

While we remain not feeling the consequences of those manoeuvres in our bodies sadly that's not going to change. People in video games do crazy stuff running for their virtual lives that never would happen IRL.

  • Like 2

"I went into the British Army believing that if you want peace you must prepare for war. I believe now that if you prepare for war, you get war."

-- Major-General Frederick B. Maurice

Link to comment
Share on other sites

vor 3 Stunden schrieb pburnage:

Ever blacked out in a roller coaster? And the more you are thrown around, the less you control your stick, which you do not need in an amusement park. It's not even close I think. As I suggested, look for combat films, gun camera footages, there are not difficult to find,  try to see something similar.  Why was it never done? There were evasion manoeuvres, violent ones, but never like what I see on DCS. 

Could you please show an example of exactly which manoeuvres you mean, that you observed in DCS?

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, =475FG= Dawger said:

Rapid oscillations from negative to positive G greatly reduces the positive G required to g-LOC, IRL.

If this were modelled, the stick pumping would disappear.

That is the missing piece here.

Agree, and addition to this, pilot can not pull high g all day long, he get exhausted. So maybe it is possible to do such a thing for short time but definitely not for longer periods.

System specs: I7 14700KF, Gigabyte Z690 Aorus Elite, 64GB DDR4 3600MHz, Gigabyte RTX 4090,Win 11, 48" OLED LG TV + 42" LG LED monitor

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, grafspee said:

Agree, and addition to this, pilot can not pull high g all day long, he get exhausted. So maybe it is possible to do such a thing for short time but definitely not for longer periods.

Please, no. As another implementation clearly demonstrates, modeling “fatigue” is not a good idea.

Fatigue disappears when adrenaline is pumping.

  • Like 1

 

 

 

 

EDsignaturefleet.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, =475FG= Dawger said:

Please, no. As another implementation clearly demonstrates, modeling “fatigue” is not a good idea.

Fatigue disappears when adrenaline is pumping.

Fatigues disappears with adrenaline but only as impression, if body is fatigued it will affect top performance regardless.

In DCS we have pilots which are first day well rest, what about over worked exhausted pilots doing missions every day over and over affected by deaths fellow pilots too, all of this impact performance, no matter if some one like that or not. 


Edited by grafspee
  • Like 4

System specs: I7 14700KF, Gigabyte Z690 Aorus Elite, 64GB DDR4 3600MHz, Gigabyte RTX 4090,Win 11, 48" OLED LG TV + 42" LG LED monitor

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/17/2022 at 9:45 PM, =475FG= Dawger said:

Please, no. As another implementation clearly demonstrates, modeling “fatigue” is not a good idea.

Fatigue disappears when adrenaline is pumping.


It’s not just fatigue though, actual strength makes a big difference when flying these aircraft.

Then there’s other stuff, a factor in the poor ETO performance of the P38 was the pilots literally freezing to death at altitude. When jumped they were struggling to operate the controls with frostbitten fingers, and the P38 has a lot of levers… The La-5/7 were known for fumes entering the cockpit, German evaluation of captured examples mentioned this, as did Eric Brown during his evaluation of the La-7. 


I’ve no idea how you model these human factors but historically they were very important.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Fatigue effects can be modeled and simulated just as g effects. But if one can switch them off then whered the point?

Freezing hands etc? Creat delayed laggy input and frost overlay on glass parts to indicate cold.

Fumes in cockpit? Blurred vision /double vision and chocking sounds. Other games have the same effects implemented. No rocket sciene.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/16/2022 at 2:48 AM, M1Combat said:

LOL...  I only saw ONE questionable juke there...  it was pretty early and did look to be caused by network prediction code but...  I just don't see anything there being a problem.

 

Have any of you ever been shot at?  I mean I think the pilot is well strapped in...

I've been on amusement park rides better than that.  OK maybe not really but...  I don't see much there to complain about.

Do abrupt negative G maneuvers like this a couple of time in a row and you will probably suffer a fatal aneurysm.

Negative G are much much more insufferable than positive G.

And therein lies the solution. Just emphasize the Redout-Effects and make the recovery time longer.

"Muß ich denn jedes Mal, wenn ich sauge oder saugblase den Schlauchstecker in die Schlauchnut schieben?"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well...  I'd like to see some evidence that the negative G's here would cause that...  I mean they were already pretty slow through most of that interaction.

Also...  netcode will make direction change look a decent bit more abrupt than it actually is.  That doesn't help much when we're talking about getting guns on because it just is what it is in regards to that but when you're also trying to add in the "instant fatality" (dramatized for effect...) argument I think it's worth separating what was happening on the local side vs. the remote side.  I'd bet $1 that on the opposing pilot's side it looked perfectly normal from all points of view.

 

80ms latency...  Just for example...

At 80ms ping the plane travels just under 30' in 80 milliseconds at 250Mph.  We all know that's not a super high ping and we also all know that 250Mph isn't that fast.  It's already well into "The other guy effed up already anyway" speeds.  That means that the remote aircraft, at 80ping and 250Mph, will appear to travel about 30' BEFORE you SEE it being affected by pilot controls.  The remote aircraft needs to also remain fairly close to where it actually is in the remote players world so the netcode will adjust it's position and bring it back to where it should be.  This creates more abrupt movement on the remote side.  The magnitude of the difference will be almost directly based on ping and speed.  I'm sure there is prediction in the netcode that attempts to keep them from doing really dumb things but at the end of the day (or direction change in this case) the aircraft on the remote end and the local end have to be pretty close to the same place...  so it has to compress abrupt maneuvers into less time than they actually took...  because it didn't know the remote aircraft was moving for about 30' after it started moving (again...  that's at relatively low ping and low speed...).

Another small example of this...

in iRacing with an 80ms ping and a 200Mph brake point...  You will see your opponent brake about 24' after they actually do.  Then...  The netcode needs to play catch up to try to synchronize where the car actually is between the local and remote systems so it ALSO makes the brakes appear to outperform what they could actually do.  It also makes the turn in look much more abrupt (noticing any similarities???).  It also makes it appear that the remote car missed the apex so you don't see how much of the curb they're taking.  People watch iRacing alien replays when they are IN SESSION with those aliens and think "WTF!!!!  How can that guy hit the brakes a full on 24' AFTER I CAN, has "super brakes" and then can't even hit an apex...  but is 1/9 seconds per minute lap faster than me???".  Well...  they can't.  And they aren't.

If you run iRacing...  someday ask an alien to provide a fast lap replay to you (some will) from a session that you were also in.  Watch the differences between their replay of what actually happened and you replay of what happened looking through the netcode...

VERY different things.

Same here...  but ED is dealing with speeds that are "a bit" higher than race cars.

 

Anyway...  this is a bad argument.  Shoot better and you won't need to worry about what the other pilot is doing.  There were like 15 times in that vid where the attacker could have killed the defender and they just didn't connect with the target.  Fix that.

  • Thanks 1

Nvidia RTX3080 (HP Reverb), AMD 3800x

Asus Prime X570P, 64GB G-Skill RipJaw 3600

Saitek X-65F and Fanatec Club-Sport Pedals (Using VJoy and Gremlin to remap Throttle and Clutch into a Rudder axis)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

vor 45 Minuten schrieb M1Combat:

Well...  I'd like to see some evidence that the negative G's here would cause that...  I mean they were already pretty slow through most of that interaction.

Also...  netcode will make direction change look a decent bit more abrupt than it actually is.  That doesn't help much when we're talking about getting guns on because it just is what it is in regards to that but when you're also trying to add in the "instant fatality" (dramatized for effect...) argument I think it's worth separating what was happening on the local side vs. the remote side.  I'd bet $1 that on the opposing pilot's side it looked perfectly normal from all points of view.

 

80ms latency...  Just for example...

At 80ms ping the plane travels just under 30' in 80 milliseconds at 250Mph.  We all know that's not a super high ping and we also all know that 250Mph isn't that fast.  It's already well into "The other guy effed up already anyway" speeds.  That means that the remote aircraft, at 80ping and 250Mph, will appear to travel about 30' BEFORE you SEE it being affected by pilot controls.  The remote aircraft needs to also remain fairly close to where it actually is in the remote players world so the netcode will adjust it's position and bring it back to where it should be.  This creates more abrupt movement on the remote side.  The magnitude of the difference will be almost directly based on ping and speed.  I'm sure there is prediction in the netcode that attempts to keep them from doing really dumb things but at the end of the day (or direction change in this case) the aircraft on the remote end and the local end have to be pretty close to the same place...  so it has to compress abrupt maneuvers into less time than they actually took...  because it didn't know the remote aircraft was moving for about 30' after it started moving (again...  that's at relatively low ping and low speed...).

Another small example of this...

in iRacing with an 80ms ping and a 200Mph brake point...  You will see your opponent brake about 24' after they actually do.  Then...  The netcode needs to play catch up to try to synchronize where the car actually is between the local and remote systems so it ALSO makes the brakes appear to outperform what they could actually do.  It also makes the turn in look much more abrupt (noticing any similarities???).  It also makes it appear that the remote car missed the apex so you don't see how much of the curb they're taking.  People watch iRacing alien replays when they are IN SESSION with those aliens and think "WTF!!!!  How can that guy hit the brakes a full on 24' AFTER I CAN, has "super brakes" and then can't even hit an apex...  but is 1/9 seconds per minute lap faster than me???".  Well...  they can't.  And they aren't.

If you run iRacing...  someday ask an alien to provide a fast lap replay to you (some will) from a session that you were also in.  Watch the differences between their replay of what actually happened and you replay of what happened looking through the netcode...

VERY different things.

Same here...  but ED is dealing with speeds that are "a bit" higher than race cars.

 

Anyway...  this is a bad argument.  Shoot better and you won't need to worry about what the other pilot is doing.  There were like 15 times in that vid where the attacker could have killed the defender and they just didn't connect with the target.  Fix that.

in the example video posted above you can see very well what you mean, in my test I could not fly such maneuvers with the Spitfire.

However, DCS seems to have big problems with the "netcode" again.

in other plane sims where there are also PvP servers, the whole thing is not so extreme.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, M1Combat said:

Well...  I'd like to see some evidence that the negative G's here would cause that...  I mean they were already pretty slow through most of that interaction.

Also...  netcode will make direction change look a decent bit more abrupt than it actually is.  That doesn't help much when we're talking about getting guns on because it just is what it is in regards to that but when you're also trying to add in the "instant fatality" (dramatized for effect...) argument I think it's worth separating what was happening on the local side vs. the remote side.  I'd bet $1 that on the opposing pilot's side it looked perfectly normal from all points of view.

 

80ms latency...  Just for example...

At 80ms ping the plane travels just under 30' in 80 milliseconds at 250Mph.  We all know that's not a super high ping and we also all know that 250Mph isn't that fast.  It's already well into "The other guy effed up already anyway" speeds.  That means that the remote aircraft, at 80ping and 250Mph, will appear to travel about 30' BEFORE you SEE it being affected by pilot controls.  The remote aircraft needs to also remain fairly close to where it actually is in the remote players world so the netcode will adjust it's position and bring it back to where it should be.  This creates more abrupt movement on the remote side.  The magnitude of the difference will be almost directly based on ping and speed.  I'm sure there is prediction in the netcode that attempts to keep them from doing really dumb things but at the end of the day (or direction change in this case) the aircraft on the remote end and the local end have to be pretty close to the same place...  so it has to compress abrupt maneuvers into less time than they actually took...  because it didn't know the remote aircraft was moving for about 30' after it started moving (again...  that's at relatively low ping and low speed...).

Another small example of this...

in iRacing with an 80ms ping and a 200Mph brake point...  You will see your opponent brake about 24' after they actually do.  Then...  The netcode needs to play catch up to try to synchronize where the car actually is between the local and remote systems so it ALSO makes the brakes appear to outperform what they could actually do.  It also makes the turn in look much more abrupt (noticing any similarities???).  It also makes it appear that the remote car missed the apex so you don't see how much of the curb they're taking.  People watch iRacing alien replays when they are IN SESSION with those aliens and think "WTF!!!!  How can that guy hit the brakes a full on 24' AFTER I CAN, has "super brakes" and then can't even hit an apex...  but is 1/9 seconds per minute lap faster than me???".  Well...  they can't.  And they aren't.

If you run iRacing...  someday ask an alien to provide a fast lap replay to you (some will) from a session that you were also in.  Watch the differences between their replay of what actually happened and you replay of what happened looking through the netcode...

VERY different things.

Same here...  but ED is dealing with speeds that are "a bit" higher than race cars.

 

Anyway...  this is a bad argument.  Shoot better and you won't need to worry about what the other pilot is doing.  There were like 15 times in that vid where the attacker could have killed the defender and they just didn't connect with the target.  Fix that.

And an actual solution for that could be, like some old flight sim I recall, the guy is getting the shots in the current place where I'm actually seeing him right now so if the wild yanking is not translated to me due to ping/connection issues and I don't see those exactly how they are due to those being too quick to translate into an online server for what they are, he'll still get the shots making those wildratboyinplaystationgamepad yanks absolutely useless. If you have a bad internet connection problem, or just are connecting to some server too far away from you resulting in too high pings and "suffer" in any way the possible drawbacks caused from such a thing, just get a better connection/PC and fly in closer to you MP servers.

Of course I can think of a lot of drawbacks derived from such a measure (could be a server option), but could be an actual possibility 🤔.

"I went into the British Army believing that if you want peace you must prepare for war. I believe now that if you prepare for war, you get war."

-- Major-General Frederick B. Maurice

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Hobel said:

in the example video posted above you can see very well what you mean, in my test I could not fly such maneuvers with the Spitfire.

However, DCS seems to have big problems with the "netcode" again.

in other plane sims where there are also PvP servers, the whole thing is not so extreme.

Well... I would propose that the two different pieces of software have different priorities regarding their netcode... not that one netcode has "problems" and the other doesn't.  I would bet that ED is trying to do a LOT more with their netcode and that if you tried to do the same with the netcode of the other software it may or may not work as well.  We can't test that unfortunately.

Don't get me wrong...  I'm not white knighting...  I'm only saying that I'm not 100% sure that's a safe assumption 😉 

Nvidia RTX3080 (HP Reverb), AMD 3800x

Asus Prime X570P, 64GB G-Skill RipJaw 3600

Saitek X-65F and Fanatec Club-Sport Pedals (Using VJoy and Gremlin to remap Throttle and Clutch into a Rudder axis)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Ala13_ManOWar said:

And an actual solution for that could be, like some old flight sim I recall, the guy is getting the shots in the current place where I'm actually seeing him right now so if the wild yanking is not translated to me due to ping/connection issues and I don't see those exactly how they are due to those being too quick to translate into an online server for what they are, he'll still get the shots making those wildratboyinplaystationgamepad yanks absolutely useless. If you have a bad internet connection problem, or just are connecting to some server too far away from you resulting in too high pings and "suffer" in any way the possible drawbacks caused from such a thing, just get a better connection/PC and fly in closer to you MP servers.

Of course I can think of a lot of drawbacks derived from such a measure (could be a server option), but could be an actual possibility 🤔.

Well...  That's not going to work.  That's called "Client Side Authoritative" and poses WAY more problems than the teency little edge case we're talking about here.

I'd vote no on that for sure...  unless as you say it has a server option where I can do client authority when it doesn't matter (I don't expect people to cheat) and server when it does (so I can't tell my copy of DCS that all bullets are hits no matter where I fire them...)...  But then we're increasing the overhead of keeping the netcode up to date in the first place.

 

Seriously though...  We're discussing this based on a post made by someone who COULD HAVE SHOT DOWN THAT PLANE in my estimation about 15 times but was more concerned with saving ammo.  This was the attacking pilot's CHOICE.  Yes...  it was also some netcode issues, but...  we're not getting around that issue.  Use a little more ammo.  It's like a steel wall.  There is simply no way to accurately predict the future.

Keep in mind that in my previous example that's ONLY for client to server comms...  there's also server to remote client comms...  so either move it all to a 40ms ping for each client or...  DOUBLE that 30' distance for two clients that have 80ms ping.  Then add a few more for server processing time...

 

And...  250MPH is also pretty slow so maybe throw in another 10-15' for EACH END of the comm cycle.

 

You have multiple multi-million and indeed multi-BILLION dollar game companies looking into how to solve this problem in the best most competitive way possible.

 

We're not there yet.  It's simply low ping that's needed.  Aside from that all you can do is try to predict.

 

ED "probably" isn't the company that's going to solve this problem.

 

The guy with the GUNS is...

  • Like 1

Nvidia RTX3080 (HP Reverb), AMD 3800x

Asus Prime X570P, 64GB G-Skill RipJaw 3600

Saitek X-65F and Fanatec Club-Sport Pedals (Using VJoy and Gremlin to remap Throttle and Clutch into a Rudder axis)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, M1Combat said:

(so I can't tell my copy of DCS that all bullets are hits no matter where I fire them...)

Yeah, not that exactly what I was thinking about, but I was sure that wasn't meant to be a technical problems free solution for sure 🤣 .


And, yes, I believe I answered the guy in the firsts posts about his videos and how he was missing the shot 😅 .

  • Like 1

"I went into the British Army believing that if you want peace you must prepare for war. I believe now that if you prepare for war, you get war."

-- Major-General Frederick B. Maurice

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...