180

[sinewav]

Here is my rant about why you shouldn't "180 some more!" It's less about 180's and more about servers that let you do it in ridiculous places, which unfortunately is 99% of the servers out there. Specifically, I am talking about doing a 180 when you are already riding against a wall. This is a years old topic, but I want to give you my own take on why it sucks.

First I need to preface this by recognizing that there is no such thing as a Lightcycle outside of fiction. Since they don't exist and are not subject to physical limitations, why bother imposing any? Because some physics are implied. Given this, I provide you with Exhibit A: Sparks and leaning.



Armagetron cycles respond to their environment. Maybe you never looked closely, but when a cycle comes in contact with a wall it is forced into a lean and sparks start flying. What this means is, "Hey you are so close to the wall that your cycle is shredding it (or getting shredded). It doesn't make any sense that you should be able to turn against something you are already grinding!

Exhibit B: Cycle length.


Cycles should never be able to turn into an area smaller than the length of the bike. You should explode instead. I understand that bikes in the game have zero width, but I am also the kind of person who thinks that setting (CYCLE_WIDTH) should be utilized more. Now that I think of it, I might convert one of my servers to include that setting.

Exhibit C: It's not canon.
We all know this is what happened in TRON...


...Not this...

[orion]

My cousin is looking for a boyfriend....























jk..

[XzL.Smart]

Stop trying to impose rules on gametypes you guys don't like.

[sinewav]

Stop trying to impose rules on gametypes you guys don't like.

I couldn't impose a rule even if I tried.

[F0RC3]

I thought the pictures were quite comical. However I like it the way it is right now. It gives the person who is trapped more ability to escape. In general i wouldn't like the change because it gives more leniency to people trapped and to those who lag and end up behind someone, with the addition that i don't think that it would be as fun.

[Gaz]

I agree, so u are trying to get rid of double binding? but people can just single bind really fast. and u cant do anything about that one honestly.

[sinewav]

I agree, so u are trying to get rid of double binding? but people can just single bind really fast. and u cant do anything about that one honestly.

I'm not trying to get rid of anything. I just wanted to point out, in a visual way, how stupid it is that you are allowed to 180 against a wall when you are already against it.

[Phytotron]

Gaz, it's not doublebinding that makes that possible, though it obviously makes it easier and more successful in servers with obscenely low CYCLE_DELAY. (That said, I for one would like to see doublebinding prohibited, or alternatively, CYCLE_DELAY 0.1 hardcoded.) And, yes, something can be done about turns against walls. I've done about it in my servers. It's called CYCLE_RUBBER_DELAY and CYCLE_RUBBER_DELAY_BONUS, and it's quite effective. Improves the game 100%.


For the record, the "Grind EVERYTHING! And 180 some more!" was meant to be sarcastic, and meant, in part, to refer precisely to 180 grinding (and the way everyone played in the 0.2.7.1 era). No server should ever allow turning against a wall already being grind-ed, to also include adjusts. Ideally, the game itself shouldn't ever allow, that, but, alas.

Half of those default instachats I contributed are sarcastic, half are sincere, and the other half are both.

[Flow]

I just wanted to point out, in a visual way, how stupid it is that you are allowed to 180 against a wall when you are already against it.

I see where you are coming from, but I don't think people play video games for the realism of them. I think people play mostly for fun, and personally I think it is enjoyable to be able to do that and I bet I'm not the only one.

[orion]

I just wanted to point out, in a visual way, how stupid it is that you are allowed to 180 against a wall when you are already against it.

I see where you are coming from, but I don't think people play video games for the realism of them. I think people play mostly for fun, and personally I think it is enjoyable to be able to do that and I bet I'm not the only one.

Yooou got it! if you wanna play really tron just download GL-tron, bye. BOOOOST!

[sinewav]

if you wanna play really tron just download GL-tron, bye. BOOOOST!

Way ahead of you kid. I've been playing glTron since 2002.

I see where you are coming from, but I don't think people play video games for the realism of them.

Yeah, I know.

[K-Yo]

some physics are implied

What do you mean? it's really subjective, every one is free to decide which physics they have more fun with. Every fictive world have some parts taken from our world to make sure humans (I mean you all guys) can understand it and, in the case of arma, evolve in it.
There are different kind of rules:

- taken from real world: acceleration is continuous
- non real and not changeable: 2D movement
- non real and changeable: cycle width

which rules are changeable and which are not depend on many factors, including the good will of programmers.

Saying "this rule sucks because it makes no sense in real world" is an argument that is as good for the cycle width as for the death zone, in the movie, there is no death zone, and in real life, when you enter a flying red circle, you don't die so often.

Coming back to the implied physics (sorry for the unorganized post, I'm a lazy guy), maybe the error is to have the leaning of the bike not depending on the cycle_width parameter, I agree there is a logic problem here, unless the games physics make it so that cycle bikes tend to be scared of walls (they are living creatures, we all know that) and they want to get away from them, but WE, the drivers, control where the wheels go. The only way they can get further is to lean.

To prove my point, once we are slingshotting (my word corrector should know this famous word) the light cycle stands straight, it's the best way to be as far as possible from both of the walls pressuring it.

CQFD

[Goodygumdrops]

All you have to do is realize that there is no cycle, and then you will see that it is you who 180s.

[sinewav]

Good points K-Yo. There is only one thing I want to clear up.

Saying "this rule sucks because it makes no sense in real world"...

I'm saying this rules sucks because it makes no sense in the game. As I pointed out above, cycles already respond when too close to the wall, implying they are both physical objects with density. A cycle shouldn't be able to do a maneuver that requires negation or a change in that density. It's a continuity problem.

All you have to do is realize that there is no cycle, and then you will see that it is you who 180s.

Oh, very Zen. I like that!

[Goodygumdrops]

All you have to do is realize that there is no cycle, and then you will see that it is you who 180s.

Oh, very Zen. I like that!

Haven't you ever seen The Matrix?