It appears that all you have to do to automatically avoid fire is simply barrel roll continiously. I always new that you could barrel roll to make yourself harder to hit (duh!), but never realized that barrel rolling involved virtually immunity to most weapons while 'aim' was engaged (ei the target is targeted). After playing around with the constant barrel roll for a while I realized that basically the 'smartest' thing would be bind the two actions to the same key - effectively giving you a 'dodge' button. I've always said that the reason I liked Vendetta was that there was no 'attack' button. I'm afraid finding out that there is something like a 'dodge' button deflates my opinion of the game play sufficiently that I won't play until the problem is addressed.

The problem is the engine doesn't figure out you are going in a circular pattern, the current aim bot assumes you are going in a straight line, it adjusts your aim to where you will be when your shot gets there.

This is why we need a weapon that is instant (point to point) and turns off the aimbot.

Why should it be so hard to add a correction for presumed constant roll as well as presumed constant translation?

Mabye the developers didn't want the aimbot to be perfect...if it were, then it's no better than a CounterStrike game with cheaters. Besides, barrel rolling is not a dodge key...try flying with a joystick instead of a keyboard and you'll see what I mean.
If the aimbot compensated for everything, the fire key would become an 'autoattack' key, which is something you just said you don't want.

"Mabye the developers didn't want the aimbot to be perfect...if it were, then it's no better than a CounterStrike game with cheaters. If the aimbot compensated for everything, the fire key would become an 'autoattack' key, which is something you just said you don't want."

Err... that's based off at least three false assumptions. First, that the targeting reticule effects a 360 degree area. It doesn't. The ability to hold the crosshairs close to the area effected by the 'aimbot' itself requires a varying skill depending on the size of the circle effected by aimbot. If the circle is sufficiently small, then its not much different than just aiming.

Second, it based of the assumption that evasion is itself not a thing requiring skill. Since the motion of the munitions is slow enough that the human eye can follow them and human reflex can respond to them, a defender can try to adjust his position to avoid incoming munitions. We know this is possible because the 350 bots are damn good at it. This method of actively responding to attack has been the method I've been trying to employ. I've only recently learned the magnitude of the that folly, and that a mere holding down two buttons continiously would accomplish the same goal much more effectively largely without the need for skill or reflex.

Thirdly, it is based on the false assumption that any algorithm could ever adjust for the potential changes in the vector of the target, random or intended, between the time of firing and the impact of the munition. I mean, almost by definition, evasive action involves random and semi-random changes in course so as to be unpredictable. If someone is just steadily holding down 'roll left' and 'strafe left' (or whatever similar combination), that isn't evasive action. I, the firing vessel, can predict where you are going to be and compensate. The 'aimbot' should be able to as well. What shouldn't happen is that I predict well, the target acts in a predictable fashion, and the 'aimbot' goes 'No, I won't let you hit that target'. That's not a feature. That's a bug.

On the other hand if you go into a barrel roll and I fire at you and you go out of it at the same time, then I should miss a well aimed shot (but possibly hit with a more random one).

Unlike counterstrike, this game features no infinite velocity weapons. Not even close, thanks be the makers.

knew*

Well, I personally don't even think the game should have an aimbot unless it's for a remotely-controlled turret of some sort. It doesn't make any sense. Fixed weapons shouldn't swivel. I think the developers should take the aimbot out of the game. If you need to learn how to shoot, go duke it out with the AI until you get reasonably skilled.

Celebrim, your theory is somewhat correct and somewhat flawed.

Barrel rolling to dodge a gattling turret is reasonably successful. However, last night Janelle attacked me with dual gausses and I barrel rolled to avoid them as I do with gats.

We ended up killing each other. She was in a valk, I was in a marauder.

If you'll notice, gattling turrets don't aim perfect even at a perfectly stationary target. It's a flak weapon, so some random shots are built in to the firing mechanism.

Heh, the secret is that autoaim doesn't take acceleration into account. So keeping your velocity non-constant is the trick. It's not the easiest thing to do though. Autoaim was mainly in there because we felt it was a little too hard to keep someone exactly in your sights back when ships moved much faster. And of course we don't want it to be like aimbots a-la cstrike either.

raybondo: I already knew aimbot didn't take acceleration into account, what I'm saying here is that it apparantly doesn't take roll into account either. That is, if I've got a steady roll rate about my centerline and a steady sideways vector, the aimbot's prediction of where I will be at the time the munition gets there (Does the aimbot take into account the potentially varying velocities of your equiped primary weapon?) that I will have moved straight sideways at the velocity I'm currently strafing at, when in fact I will move in a curve. At the least it ought to make the prediction that the vector that more closely represents my actual motion is one that is rotated by a certain theta from my current one based on my roll velocity.

Celebrim, that is because you are moving in a circle, thus constantly accelerateing, so the aimbot doesn't notice that.

Also, you're a hippocrit

2003-04-26 16:58:07
 Celebrim

I keep wondering why people use 'I'm leaving' as a threat, or if they are leaving why they feel the need to advertise it.

I don't think there is anything wrong with the advanced gatling.

Celebrim, take a closer look at your speed indicator when you're dodging. When you're spiral strafing, while moving forward or backward, you'll notice that your speed is constantly slowing down and speeding back up. So yes, the ship IS under a constant flux of acceleration and deceleration.

Heh, ok, I should modify my reply to even though you may have a constant speed, your velocity vector is constantly changing when you're rolling and strafing at the same time.

btw, speed is just the magnitude of the velocity vector.

w00t, free physics course. ^^ /me loves physics, and can't wait for senior year.

Hehe... Physics is cool, but chem is better... :P

mmmm styrofoam disolved in gasoline...

No napalm! Bad! :P

Naw, physics is better. Just barely passed chemistry. Don't wanna go through that crap again.

/me shudders.

But getting bases on your hands is FUN! I did that by accident at CTY... Not one of my better ideas...