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

stick it on the list please Luthier, please can you put it just above dynamic weather and DX11, but not before MP Sound.

[Blackdog_kt]

Originally Posted by cheesehawk

But then you couldn't have people with no trees playing on the server. We'd get a ton of posts saying "OMG I was flying, nothing in front of me, then exploded like I hit an invisible wall!"

That's why i said there's no solution until it's a server enforced setting.

The way i see it a stop-gap solution would be relatively simple to achieve:

1) Forest blocks get a collision boundary, a simple invisible outline like a fence (similar to the solutions proposed by others during the course of this thread)...this would not be for individual trees but for blocks of trees.
2) Different graphics settings means different size of forests which in turn means different placement of the collision boundaries.
3) Servers force all players to fly with the same graphics settings for trees to sidestep that mismatch
4) We now all see the same amount of trees in the server and forests are collidable
5) People cry about having their detail settings lowered "wtf? is this why i bought quad SLI GTX 590s for?"

You know it's going to happen

Originally Posted by 335th_GRAthos

The same discussion took place when the clouds model came after one IL2FB patch. The guys who had realistic and many clouds were trying to hide inside and were screaming at the "cheaters" who were able to see and shoot through clouds
Until they realised they had to better take them off just as everybody else....

That's exactly what this discussion reminds me of. I wasn't flying online much and i wasn't sure about how it all happened, so thanks for confirming it

[ZaltysZ]

Collidable trees are not such complex problem. You don't need to check every tree. You only need to check nearby trees. This usually is accomplished by using octree data structure, which divides space into smaller cells, whose in turn are divided further. This way, when you search "nearby" trees, you begin your "walk" from largest cell (part of map) where aircraft is, then choose smaller one inside the previous one and so on, until you get the set of smallest ones, whose can contain part of your plane. This way even if you have million of trees, you will check only 0-10 of them. It is not something unusual and is widely used.

Problems arise when you have lots of objects to check their collisions with trees. However, if only planes were checked, that object count would not be so big. In DCS, the problem is not collision detection itself, it is possible, but people want more: fire and detection cover provided by trees. That and AI pathfinding is problematic.

[furbs]

I just thought...are we all seeing the same trees? If we are on the same detail level that is.

ofcourse if this wants to be a serious sim we all should see trees (shouldnt be as an option to turn off - rsather, let them optimise the sim WITH trees) but we should be able to adjust the complexity of textures and shadows of trees...like we can in other sims...serious or not

[JG53Frankyboy]

as long one can set the amount of trees, collision modell for these will not work IMHO !

In il2 there were two kind of trees, fixed ones, mostly around villags, with collision, and otheres in free area, without one.

[whoarmongar]

If you cant collide with tree then the trees are not there. Its up to the developers to fix this glitch. All online games have glitchers its just the way it is.

[kedrednael]

"In Il-2 we have two types of trees - with collision model and without. These that are without are graphical feature and loads with maximum settings. It was don that to make equal gameplay of players with different power of their PC and its settings. In BoB we will have only type with collision model".

This promise was the one where I thought: this will make a difference in my gameplay. I will not use CEM or so, but out side landings are a lot of fun when you need to find a big field without trees, I really like this in ROF, and the runways there need to be shorter so it's simpler there.
When you have an engine failure in cod you can just glide to your airfield, see if you'll make it. (avoid villages) and flare when the ground comes too close, it doesn't matter that you glide through 20 trees, and for me that is a big immersion killer.
In ROF I once landed near a forest and taxid all the way trough it avoiding every tree seperatly, I got my wing stuck on one of them and I liked the realism.
With the new forest distance you can see how many forests there are in ROF, I doubt there are less trees than in COD.

[bongodriver]

Well my feeling is that eventually the devs will pay it some attention, it has been shown they do pay some attention to our demands, for now is it not possible to live without crashable trees? it's a flight sim not a luberjack sim.

[Jugdriver]

IRL if you fly a plane close to the ground and hit a tree what happens? This is a simulator, the effect of flying too low and hitting a tree should be simulated. It has nothing to do with lumberjacks or tactics, trees are objects in the COD virtual world that one should not be able to fly an aircraft thru, just like buildings, other aircraft or the ground.

But I do agree with Tree_UK, MP sound, well sounds all the way around, should be the top priority IMO, this can wait because I think it will take them some time to figure out.


JD
AKA_MattE