Author Topic: Damage modeling (Read 1610 times)

1epic1 · « **on:** July 22, 2006, 04:47:29 AM »

this is the greatest flying game ever...but the damage modeling is questionable...i mean its realistic but for 1 thing...as far as i know they WILL NOT go down unless A.) something falls off or B.) oil,gas,radiator, ect... well in other simulators like combat flight simulator and pacific fighters and also IL2, if you hit the wing on a aircraft the wing is damaged, doesnt always falls off, but if they try to turn or pull up, the plane would want to lean to the side of the damaged wing. The wing is damaged but doesnt always fall off...why isnt that in here but is in all these other simulators?

I mean ive shot at planes with 5-10 rounds of 20mm and even though the wing doesnt fall off, the plane should surely feel the effects of the damage to the wing

bagrat · « **Reply #1 on:** July 22, 2006, 05:01:07 AM »

AH kinda does take that into effect, just not into full detail. Ailerons, flaps or even half a wing gettin knocked off effect flight.

I suppose you are asking that shouldn't a single or few bullet holes in a wing effect flight though?

1epic1 · « **Reply #2 on:** July 22, 2006, 05:04:22 AM »

i mean think....4 -6 20mm shots into the wing doesnt always make parts fly off, but shouldnt the plane feel the effects of those hits? lets say the plane got hit in the right wing with 4 20mm rounds, in most simulators the plane would then tend to bank to the right cause of the damage sustained.

but in AH that doesnt happen, the plane keeps flying normaly like nothing ever hit him, unless somthing flys off

Kazaa · « **Reply #3 on:** July 22, 2006, 05:32:49 AM »

I would agree on this !

Kev367th · « **Reply #4 on:** July 22, 2006, 05:42:12 AM »

Considering all the other changes that have happended, I've been disappointed that the damage model still appears to be all or nothing.

It seems to be the only part of the game that is seriously lagging way behind all other aspects.

I'm sure they'll get around to improving it sometime.

Major Biggles · « **Reply #5 on:** July 22, 2006, 05:47:14 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Kev367th
Considering all the other changes that have happended, I've been disappointed that the damage model still appears to be all or nothing.

It seems to be the only part of the game that is seriously lagging way behind all other aspects.

I'm sure they'll get around to improving it sometime.

totally in agreement here.

DM is something that needs a good update after CT, or even before it if there's time, seeing as it is about the most important thing in a combat flight sim

1epic1 · « **Reply #6 on:** July 22, 2006, 05:53:22 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Kev367th
Considering all the other changes that have happended, I've been disappointed that the damage model still appears to be all or nothing.

It seems to be the only part of the game that is seriously lagging way behind all other aspects.

I'm sure they'll get around to improving it sometime.

exactly

OOZ662 · « **Reply #7 on:** July 22, 2006, 07:21:04 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Major Biggles
DM is something that needs a good update after CT, or even before it if there's time, seeing as it is about the most important thing in a combat flight sim

It's been years; there's always more time at this point.

stegor · « **Reply #8 on:** July 22, 2006, 09:12:22 AM »

and not to say the damage on engine.
A damaged engine stops totally or it continues giving its power even in a heavy damage and black trail... should a damaged engine chokes, spits and lost his power or not??

Its a long long debate, but most of the people, here ask for more planes, b29, jets, more p47 and p51 versions instead of improving what we already have

pluck · « **Reply #9 on:** July 22, 2006, 09:31:46 AM »

i don't mind the damage model. doesn't seem that often that i get behind someone and don't put enough lead into them that they don't lose parts they need. i don't fly 20mm birds to often, but i find it hard to believe that 4-5 direct hits on a wing from that caliber would not cause at least an aileron to fly off. then again i could be wrong, and i guess packet loss/lag may also play a factor. in the past i've experienced people hammering me with smaller mg rounds, causing not as much damage, then listening to them gripe about it....as if they hit me with all cannon rounds.

too many other things to worry about, if HT, changes focus to damage model, everyone will whine about not working on CT. If they make damage model too sensitive, many will whine about that instead.

At the same time, if you want a more realistic damage model where a few pings may drastically alter your your planes performance, why not also model random mechanical problems with engine and other parts for the sake of realism. Who knows how accurate the modeling for those other games are, besides just pure conjecture.

also, how would damage models affect gameplay. if you can affect planes ability to fly more easily, would people become more timid and only b/z. damage model is important to game, but imho takes a back seat to flight model and considerations as to how it will affect gameplay/fun factor.

mojo7 · « **Reply #10 on:** July 22, 2006, 09:52:17 AM »

Chuck Norris poops light sabers.

Saxman · « **Reply #11 on:** July 22, 2006, 09:56:32 AM »

Fuel lines, oil tank, lines and cooler, control lines, radio (haha! Imagine that, losing your radio and vox dies)

Yoshimbo · « **Reply #12 on:** July 22, 2006, 11:16:09 AM »

losing the radio and therefore the vox would be awesome!

Kermit de frog · « **Reply #13 on:** July 22, 2006, 11:46:04 AM »

Some people lose vox all the time.

I tell them "...think of it as the enemy jamming your communications."

Chalenge · « **Reply #14 on:** July 22, 2006, 01:48:29 PM »

I dont know about random stuff I think that would suck but I would like to see la7s for instance with holes in thier engines slow down at least a little. How realistic is it to have any plane chase around for ten minutes all the while leaking oil and outrunning everything else?