Pilot Archive
Thread: Any ETA on when they'll fix the RGI's hit box?
Attacca
Sat Aug 27, 2005 7:44 pm
#14
No ones arguing the size - at least, I didn't think that was the issue. The hit box isn't centered over the ship, which makes shooting it considerably more difficult. Even if it's not impossible, it's still a bug. And if you're flying the RGT, that gives you an unfair advantage.
quadpers0n
Sat Aug 27, 2005 8:21 pm
#15
the size is 50% of the issue, the reason the ship is difficult to hit is primarily because of the size, a slight adjustment is all you need to start hitting the scalp of the ball. the wings, as a previous poster mentioned, don't "block" hits. they look like they do, but if you aim right at the scalp from the side of the ship you can hit through the wings. easily tested with a stationary IGI and a /duel. the other 50% of the issue isn't that the hitbox is off center persay, but rather that it's only a fraction of the size of the model, creating an "optical illusion" for lack of a better term, when you are fighting one at high speeds. however, the hitbox could be in the center of the ship and it wouldn't be any easier to hit, instead of thinking "center" think "top" when you are aiming. don't believe this works in practice? prove it. duel your friend 10 times in an IGI, then go out and work the NPC IGI's until you can one shot them. then go back and duel your friend again. you'll find "miraculously" you can now start hitting them with guns about as much as you'd hit a similarly equipped JSF.
as forthe IGI notbeing a bugfirst of all, we as players don't have enough information to determine that the IGI's hitbox isn't a bug. on one hand we have the equal size of other small ROTW ships, and the fact that the tie heavy, heavy Z and vaksai don't have similarly misplaced hitboxes. on the other hand we have a hitbox that is remarkably smaller than the model of the ship, something that no other ship in the game has, not only that, but it's offcenter. you could argue it's intentional, but you could make a strong case for it being a bug as well. since the devs don't have the stones to tell us cause they know people will flip out, we can't really say either way, but i mean, let's use a little common sense.
as for the actual hitboxes of the JSF/B22/IGI not being a bug, it's giving the devs a bit too much credit to say "it was a design decision".is freelancer'sinabilityto grind faction in DS a design decision? what about 0 mass KSE parts? is the 5000 speed engine a design decision? what about a corellian IG2G making all krayt guns fire out of the center slot? i could go on and on. many many things go to the live game that are obviously absurd that are bugs/not thought out design decision/intentional design decisions, and we as players don't really have enough information to differentiate between the three.
take the recent XP changes. we all know that was an intentional design decision. yet what did the devs call it in the recent chat? a bug.
TomoRainer
Sat Aug 27, 2005 8:22 pm
#16
I'm really not sure whether this is intentional, but I've been trying to look into it. I'm pretty ambivalent over the issue personally, it's just that it seems a little weird, to the point where I'd like to make sure either way.
LeaphChausew
Sat Aug 27, 2005 8:24 pm
#17
TomoRainer wrote:
I'm really not sure whether this is intentional, but I've been trying to look into it. I'm pretty ambivalent over the issue personally, it's just that it seems a little weird, to the point where I'd like to make sure either way.
I just personally feel that what by all recognition should be a direct hit..should count. I mean you can sit there with a disabled RG TIE blasting directly at the target lead reticle and even adjust your fire for a good few seconds before anything happens. To me, it's like giving an RG TIE A free, ready made exploited shield with the package.
Thats just me though and I know that is such a bold statement, but its the truth. I've fought enough of the things and JSFs to know. Personally, I got a lot less against the JSF than I do against the RG TIE.
Message Edited by LeaphChausew on 08-27-2005 08:29 PM
quadpers0n
Sat Aug 27, 2005 8:27 pm
#18
LeaphChausew wrote:
Attacca wrote:
No ones arguing the size - at least, I didn't think that was the issue. The hit box isn't centered over the ship, which makes shooting it considerably more difficult. Even if it's not impossible, it's still a bug. And if you're flying the RGT, that gives you an unfair advantage.
'Tis true.
JSF are miles easier to bring down than RG TIES and so far all the JSF people I've killed on SS have been superior in skill to the RG TIE people. So..if I'm pounding a pilot who can't touch me and aren't scoring damage and taking less hits to killa better pilot in a JSF..it kind of acknowledges a siginificant difference in the ship's hitboxes whether it is a matter of size or position.
unfortunately that doesn't make a lick of sense. all a ship is, is a flying hitbox. no more, no less. do the tests on a stationary IGI and a stationary JSF, i have. the hitboxes are damn near identical. as i've already said, the reason you see a difference isn't because the hitbox is off center, it's because your eye is looking to the model of the IGI and not the tiny hitbox on the ship. off center doesn't make any difference, if they center it, and still make the model 6 times the size of the ship, you're going to have the same amount of problems hitting it. also, nobody is mentioning that the IGI is a 1.0 speed mod ship, while the JSF is not, that alone makes it much more difficult to hit.
Message Edited by quadpers0n on 08-27-2005 10:58 PM
DeepFatFryer
Sat Aug 27, 2005 8:27 pm
#19
For the love of... If you shoot a ship and it hits, that should be a hit. Anything else is just a bug, don't try and defend it with this "let me keep my space-crutch", we're all bloody sick of it by now.
Kyrillos
Sat Aug 27, 2005 8:29 pm
#20
When you blast away at a disabled ship, aim directly for the chassis - NOT the lead indicator. The lead indicator becomes completely useless once a ship is disabled. You won't hit a disabled Krayt if you fire at the lead indicator.
I agree with the poster who said we lacked the information to determine whether the hitbox size is a bug. However, given that various ships other than the IGInterceptor each have variously sized hitboxes, not all of which encompass the entire chassis, and that at least one other ship has a hitbox the same size, I think it's reasonable to conclude that there's likely nothing unintended going on here.
I DO agree that the off-center box appears to be a bug, and should be fixed if so. It's still hardly game-breaking.
Edit: What advantage doesa 1.0 speed mod give over a .9 speed mod? I'd rather keep my speed relatively low in a PvP dogfight, actually. If I'm missing something here, please let me know. 
And for the "space crutch" guy... what, exactly, is the rationale behind your acerbic tone here? Other than frustration at having to fight Imperial ships with small hitboxes, that is.
This is a game. If you're so hung up on the idea that a hit on the model somehow MUST equal an actual hit, regardless of game balance, regardless of anything else, you must be seriously upset about MANY other ships in this game whose hitboxes are too large, too small, or improperly sized, allowing hits on vacuum to register, or hits on the actual visible model to "pass through".
Message Edited by Kyrillos on 08-27-2005 10:34 PM
TomoRainer
Sat Aug 27, 2005 8:30 pm
#21
Sometimes I think that, sometimes I think "Oh come on, it's no smaller than an Eta-2. What's the problem?"
"Yeah, but the wings get in the way. It just seems all crazy."
"At least people are flying a TIE and not some dinosauric hulk. Besides, I'll say it again, it's not even the smallest hitbox out there."
"It can only be hit on the top of the ball, though? That just makes no sense."
"Hmm."
"Hmm."
That's the way I think about it, anyway, and that's why I'd like to get dev clarification on the matter.
"Yeah, but the wings get in the way. It just seems all crazy."
"At least people are flying a TIE and not some dinosauric hulk. Besides, I'll say it again, it's not even the smallest hitbox out there."
"It can only be hit on the top of the ball, though? That just makes no sense."
"Hmm."
"Hmm."
That's the way I think about it, anyway, and that's why I'd like to get dev clarification on the matter.
LeaphChausew
Sat Aug 27, 2005 8:33 pm
#22
Kyrillos wrote:
When you blast away at a disabled ship, aim directly for the chassis - NOT the lead indicator. The lead indicator becomes completely useless once a ship is disabled. You won't hit a disabled Krayt if you fire at the lead indicator.
I agree with the poster who said we lacked the information to determine whether the hitbox size is a bug. However, given that various ships other than the IGInterceptor each have variously sized hitboxes, not all of which encompass the entire chassis, and that at least one other ship has a hitbox the same size, I think it's reasonable to conclude that there's likely nothing unintended going on here.
I DO agree that the off-center box appears to be a bug, and should be fixed if so. It's still hardly game-breaking.
I know. However when the ship is stopped the indicator is more or less -on- the hitbox. In either case, it is on the ball cockpit of the RG TIE. I was quick to realise where this hitbox was located but even still...it takes a bit of shooting. You cannot deny with any justification that this ship is not dodgy.
Higginsis
Sat Aug 27, 2005 8:37 pm
#23
I'm not a bad shot in JTL, not by any means, and i know when i land hits on things that should hurt it, and not just get the shield flare and on the 2 times i've fought a RGI (space PvP is really dead on FarStar) its been a 5 and 10 minute long fight. Both times, even though i could get the guy clean in my sites, i got 2 counting hits. Numerous others appeared to be just glances, but i know myself well enough to know they weren't.
And frankly, with the relative of which i've taken other Eta-2's out, there is really something up with it in my eyes. And please don't think this is me wanting them nerfed because i got pwned, both fights ended in a stale mate, with the RGI pilot hypering out.
And frankly, with the relative of which i've taken other Eta-2's out, there is really something up with it in my eyes. And please don't think this is me wanting them nerfed because i got pwned, both fights ended in a stale mate, with the RGI pilot hypering out.
Kyrillos
Sat Aug 27, 2005 8:38 pm
#24
The ship is very dodgy
I will admit that, as an Imperial pilot, I have never fought an IG Interceptor myself.
I have fought plenty of rebel JSFs, however, and I find that player skill and engine quality (along with chassis maneuverability, of course)play a FAR greater role than hitbox size when it comes down to getting a blaster shot in.
I did fly in an IG Interceptor until I learned of the controversy surrounding them, and I was taken out by blaster fire twice. I do feel that I did better than I would have flying any other ship, since I was a space PvP noob at the time, which also contributed to my decision to stop flying it.
Message Edited by Kyrillos on 08-27-2005 10:39 PM
Firesped
Sat Aug 27, 2005 8:42 pm
#25
The first time I flew my RGI, I laughed hard when I got into combat. If someone can't see that it's bugged just from flying against NPCs, they must be daft or delusional.
Then again, there have been so many problems with hitting and the way it displays it in the game that it isn't even funny. I can't believe that nearly a year later, it's still showing hits that aren't real. When I came back to the game, it took me a few flights to remember that.
Slysix
Sat Aug 27, 2005 8:46 pm
#26
Heh..I remember posting something about something wonky about the RGI way back when....
I think it was titled, Bug Verification: Imperial Overseer Interceptor...or something like that....
No one seemed to notice it back then...Ah well.
That's how bugs are usually found though..the more usage something gets the more occurance of the bug "happening" the easier it is to isolate and replicate the problem...
I think it was titled, Bug Verification: Imperial Overseer Interceptor...or something like that....
No one seemed to notice it back then...Ah well.
That's how bugs are usually found though..the more usage something gets the more occurance of the bug "happening" the easier it is to isolate and replicate the problem...