Well...we said it would be a problem..

[AndyJWest]

Originally Posted by Tree_UK

Surely they could put an object in amoungst a group of say 8 trees, like a brown telegraph pole or something, going back to Robert regarding IL2 i dount remember being able to fly through tree's?

Actually, Tree seems to have come up with a sensible suggestion for a fix - there must be objects that can be added to server maps to deter this sort of tactic. They don't need to be in amongst every group of trees, just the ones most likely to be abused - i.e. near airfields, and exposed ones on hilltops etc. Perhaps someone should look at the server map with 'low' trees setting (so they avoid putting too many hazards where there are few trees visible), and add some at random - to discourage cheating, they could be moved around every so often. I've no idea how many could be added before it started to cause problems though - this might need a little experimentation.

[Skoshi Tiger]

Originally Posted by Tree_UK

Surely they could put an object in amoungst a group of say 8 trees, like a brown telegraph pole or something, going back to Robert regarding IL2 i dount remember being able to fly through tree's?

+1, I was about to suggest something similar.

Not having flown through the trees before, what is the graphics like. You'ld have to be a bit desperate to be flying below 10m completely blind. Maybe they could just have irregular terrain in forested areas?

Cheers!

[jimbop]

Originally Posted by Tree_UK

Surely they could put an object in amoungst a group of say 8 trees, like a brown telegraph pole or something, going back to Robert regarding IL2 i dount remember being able to fly through tree's?

Yes, good idea in the interim. Couldn't this be done in FMB anyway?

Also, I don't see how it can broadly be called cheating when you can turn forests off. The pilot may be flying low but not in forest on his machine.

[Trumper]

Originally Posted by furbs

even if it was random...say 3 in 10 trees(don't ask me how) it prob would stop this.

At least that way you put doubt in the mind of the pilot,may work may not.
So you could end up with a small hit and run raid flying low over the channel,up into the trees and staying below tree height until they reach the target,mmmmm.

Talking balls, trees can't have "hitboxes because it would kill the server". Tree with no hitbox = 1. Tree with hitbox = 2. It's a data-point with a nominal value. The reason the trees have no 'hitboxes' is because the game was coded by chimps. That's why the entire enchilada is a bus-wreck.

[xnomad]

Originally Posted by Langnasen

Talking balls, trees can't have "hitboxes because it would kill the server". Tree with no hitbox = 1. Tree with hitbox = 2. It's a data-point with a nominal value. The reason the trees have no 'hitboxes' is because the game was coded by chimps. That's why the entire enchilada is a bus-wreck.

Are you serious? So creating a configuration file variable auto-magically does all the coding for you in the back end? I'm going to open my config file tonight and put in fw190=1 and I'll be flying the butcher bird all night! Sweet!

Your solution ignores creating the objects in the physics engine. Sure the flipping a bit from 0 to 1 is simple but that's only a parameter value, what happens in the background? Going from no collision model to suddenly every tree has a collision model would require creating each tree in the physics engine. I'm not a software developer so I don't even know what goes into creating hit boxes but I can appreciate that just doing that would eat up resources with a map of this size.

[Tiger27]

Originally Posted by Langnasen

Talking balls, trees can't have "hitboxes because it would kill the server". Tree with no hitbox = 1. Tree with hitbox = 2. It's a data-point with a nominal value. The reason the trees have no 'hitboxes' is because the game was coded by chimps. That's why the entire enchilada is a bus-wreck.

Ah good, so you will be fixing this issue, as I imagine only a skilled programmer would know enough about programming to be able to call other programmers chimps, so how long until you release the fix?

[JimmyBlonde]

What if there were collision boxes for, say, 1/4 of the trees.

Then you would never know which ones they were and it would make this stupidity very risky.

[Tiger27]

Originally Posted by furbs

even if it was random...say 3 in 10 trees(don't ask me how) it prob would stop this.

I like this idea, even if 1 in 10 trees had a hit box, it would be very risky to fly into the forests

[Gribbers]

He'll get the shock of his life if/when they fix it.

He'll also probably be rubbish at online if he relies on it now.