Planes hiding in the bushes - is it a joke?

[reflected]

I flew some online sessions in CloD, and my jaw dropped when I realized that many people use the same defensive maneuver, that is, they dive down under tree level where they can't be seen because one can't collide with trees.

Seriously? *couldn't find a WTF smiley*

Lol!

They will have their eyes wide open when they'll wrap themselves around a tree sooner or later.

[JG53_Valantine]

I've encountered this quite a few times when hanging around the south coast near RAF Manston: I've damaged quite a lot of spitties there and many of them used that thick patch of forest to slink away.

Personally I'de rather see the return of "oleg" trees combined with the visibile trees, if the outer layer of trees is the visibile type then having the oleg trees of '46 in the center then we not only can see the trees but also damn well collide with them too!
V

[335th_GRAthos]

It is a great idea

What happens if the hunter sets his own graphics to: Trees= very low?


~S~

I have trees off....no point in having them without collision model...

[pupo162]

Originally Posted by reflected

I flew some online sessions in CloD, and my jaw dropped when I realized that many people use the same defensive maneuver, that is, they dive down under tree level where they can't be seen because one can't collide with trees.

Seriously? *couldn't find a WTF smiley*

you could blame me for this i guess. i have tress off for performance, so i have no ideia were the trees are.

And that's probably why we do not have a collision model - because ppl can turn them off.

Solution would be to implement performance-friendly (simple looking) trees as option, remove the "tree-off" option (after proof that these don't impede performance for weaker machines) and equip all trees with a collision model.

My guess however is that we will have collision models only in a couple of years when the weaker machines have disappeared or have become marginal.

[335th_GRAthos]

Originally Posted by pupo162

you could blame me for this i guess. i have tress off for performance, so i have no idea where the trees are.

Ooops! That was a good point. Thanks for mentioning it Pupo!

I fly with trees very low (=no trees) or trees low (very few) so it does not hinder visibility even if somebody is low near ground.

~S~

[reflected]

Originally Posted by 41Sqn_Stormcrow

And that's probably why we do not have a collision model - because ppl can turn them off.

Solution would be to implement performance-friendly (simple looking) trees as option, remove the "tree-off" option (after proof that these don't impede performance for weaker machines) and equip all trees with a collision model.

My guess however is that we will have collision models only in a couple of years when the weaker machines have disappeared or have become marginal.

Err...you're saying this as if it was an impossible task to develop trees that look good, have a collision model and have no impact on performance, and nobody has done it before..

Try RoF for instance.

I am not overwhelmed by the trees in RoF, that's all. I like the CoD trees better except that they don't have a damage model right now.

It is true that RoF fixed basically their performance issues that they had initially (remember the I've-got-stutters-threads in the Rof Forum?). But I also think that CoD has the edge in terms of graphics right now and I even don't run it yet on max settings.

BTW: I do not have any performance issues with trees at all in CoD. Some seem to have though.