More defined damage modeling

[Flipperk]

I remember tons of times when i could unload an entire belt of MGs into the wings of enemy fighters and be POed because nothing would happen to them...nothing except the cool bullet hole art on the wing to look at. In all of the simulators i have played, even with minimum damage, if your wings (or anything on the plane) is shot up it effects the planes aerodynamics, stress capability, lift, and speed. IE: You fire 50 rounds of MGs into a P-51Ds right wing and the wing does not fall off, In AHII nothing but bullet hole art is present, in other simulators when the P-51D tries to pull up the right wing has lost some lift capability due to the damage from the gun fire and the P-51D would then try to roll right because of it.

This more defined damage modeling would greatly change the rules of dogfighting in this game, for a more realistic dogfighting experience and hopefully promoting flying planes with MGs instead of Cannon gods like the FW-190s.

This probably the most realistic flight sim i have played but however the damage modeling on here needs a well overdue OVERHAUL.

Blow off the dust on that program....

[Cajunn]

+1, tired of the one ping pilot wounds with no visible damage to the cockpit.

[AWwrgwy]

+1, tired of the one ping pilot wounds with no visible damage to the cockpit.

I came through the floor and shot you in the ....


wrongway

[Lye-El]

I came through the floor and shot you in the ....


wrongway

   Probably exactly what happened. 

[trigger2]

I came through the floor and shot you in the ....


wrongway

Erm... how'd you make that one up to his wife ack?

+1 on the original idea.

[Yossarian]

I agree that updated damage modelling would be nice, but this thread shows how complicated it can get:
http://flightgear.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=4822

[Nemisis]

I agree with you, we need an overhaul, but the problem is not as bad as you make it sound, I have shot up plenty of bombers and some fighters and when I shoot up the wing then most are actualy quite badly affected, I saw several roll over then the pilot lost control and some more where the plane kept pulling left when the pilot was limping home before the pilot corected. maby it's just that I hit the flaps and ailerons, but still, it's not like absolutly nothing happens.    Just saying.

[Yossarian]

I agree that updated damage modelling would be nice, but this thread shows how complicated it can get:

http://flightgear.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=4822

[mensa180]

I'm curious whether or not it's possible to model each individual bullet hole from each round that strikes your plane instead of a generic look that happens when you get hit in X area X amount of times.

Mostly because I would like to write with MGs "80th" into my opponents wings .

[Flipperk]

I agree that updated damage modelling would be nice, but this thread shows how complicated it can get:

http://flightgear.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=4822

it can get complicated yes, but however working a little bit at a time and adding to it over time will simplify the process...IE start with just wings and horizontal stab damage...1 50cal round = .02% loss in lift capability or something like that...if it hits 100% then the wing falls off or if enough rounds hit a critical structure point

while(Y=0,Y<=100,Y);
{


     if(Y=100)
           {
                  wing.falloff(Graphics);
                 
           }
      else
           {
                    Y=Y+ 0.02
           }

}



                   

[Ruah]

either the collective IQ here is going up, or its going waay down. . .I can't tell though 

[Flipperk]

I agree with you, we need an overhaul, but the problem is not as bad as you make it sound, I have shot up plenty of bombers and some fighters and when I shoot up the wing then most are actualy quite badly affected, I saw several roll over then the pilot lost control and some more where the plane kept pulling left when the pilot was limping home before the pilot corected. maby it's just that I hit the flaps and ailerons, but still, it's not like absolutly nothing happens.    Just saying.

right, but thats ONLY IF something falls off...if nothing falls off (with the current damage modeling) the plane is not effected

[Strip]

I would love to see things like.....

control cables (or rods)

independent radiators with manual isolation valves on equiped planes

impacting ordnance with bullets

hydrualic damage

more realistic fire and oil damage

more realistic PW's

damaged engine noise

I could go on forever but if I had that.....well Id be in heaven. Although I try not to find myself getting damaged!

<S> STRIP

[opposum]

While we are at it, I would like to see the tanks damage model updated. I am tired of just seeing a flash and no apperent damage other than smoke and the tracks, make a freaken hole in the turrent atleast , and for ricochets show a ding in the armor, and update the flash from the round impact, all the current hits are just a flash and nothing else the tanks damage model needs a little more eye candy in it,

just sayin.......



opposum

[Nemisis]

either the collective IQ here is going up, or its going waay down. . .I can't tell though 

I agree, most likely none of you have any idea how hard writing computer code and getting things to work right is, even with pre-made programs like power point. Here is a test, make a brick wall on power point with the animation thing, then make a gun, next make it look like the gun is firing, you know, muzzle flash, recoil, etc., then add sound affects, and finally make some bullet holes in the wall.......and make it work in the right order, it is possible, I have done it before. And opposum, try making a cannon, a dent in the wall, a hole, sparks for the ricochets, and maby for good measure, make it in a slowed down version so you can actually see the shell flying through the air; and remember you didn't even have to write the code or anything.