Discussion : Gradual Damage vs. Current model

[Knite]

Hello all,

As technology for both computers and the game changes, I was wondering about our current damage model...
Is there any thought/desire to change it? What are some gameplay aspects of changing the damage model, and would this be an improvement or detriment to the fun of the game?

Here's what I propose :
Currently (and correct me if I'm wrong), it appears that our damage model has damage "zones" that have a specified number of hit points. Once those hit points are expended (and I believe there is somewhat of a randomization factor), the part is "broken" and destroyed.

What I am thinking of, and recommending discussion of, is a degredation (sp?) of functionality of the parts, as well as a random % of failure (that increases with current damage sustained. I.e. if there is a current "hitpoint" total of 100hp for a part, at 100hp, part failure is 100% chance of failure. Perhaps at 25% damage, there's only a 10% chance of total failure).
Examples :
-Your plane gets hit in the nose of your 51. The oil blows (as it would now) and your engine is now down to about 85% effectiveness due to direct lead and/or shrapnel damage.
-You fire a burst into the left wing of an opposing spitfire. The spit is still flyable, does not lose the wing, but lift on that wing has been dropped by 10%, with another 5% reduction in roll rate due to that aerilon being damaged as well.
-You hit B24J in the tail with your ShVak cannon. It blows the Left rudder right off and the vert stabilizer is down to 75% effectiveness.

I believe that this would :
A) Introduce some perceived realism - I say perceived because I am not nearly the expert on things as many of you out there. IS this more realistic?
B) Alter gameplay. For better, or for worse I do not know. It would absolutely make taking damage a much more dangerous prospect just to get a shot, as you'd no longer want to risk getting shot up yourself just to get a snapshot (and hopefully reducing HOs), but at the same time would this increase timidness of other people to engage?

I know this idea would likely require much "COAD" to make work, but I love the concept at face value, only if it makes gameplay more interesting and is realistic. If neither or true, I'd say this was a poor idea. ;-)
Thoughts?

[fudgums]

Facepalm

[Knite]

Facepalm

Not intending offense, but care to explain?
I didn't think I said anything THAT dumb. Could be wrong though. 

[Motherland]

Hopefully this is one of those 'systems in the game engine' that HTC recognizes as being 'in need of overhaul' according to the development update they posted a year back.

We had our convention this past weekend which gave us the chance to speak with players in person and talk about the future of AH.  We’ve been thinking about how we were going to move forward and came to some conclusions that we decided to announce at the convention.

The main news is that we have decided to put Combat Tour on an indefinite hold.  The reason for this is that we have decided that it is better to steer our development in a way that allows us to implement our CT developments first as part of the regular game.

The way we’ve been going has been like trying to fight a two front war with only one army.  It’s stretched us too thin and has hurt our overall level of productivity.  It also has handcuffed us in a lot of our development decisions by forcing us to indefinitely postpone a lot of other things.

Our biggest obstacle with CT is in breathing life into it to make it fun and immersive.     While a basic structure is there, there’s a ton of detail work to be done to reach that end goal.  Without it, it just has too much of a cardboard cutout feel that’s not going to engage players and hold their attention for long.

What this all means for now is that we are going to focus on core game development.  We’re going to pull the CT AI mission system and redevelop it for use by CM’s in scenarios and special events.  We’re working on new terrain upgrades in both the technology and the art used.  We want to implement a character animation system.  We want to bring back the old 8 player H2H but expand it both in the number of players and with additional gameplay capabilities.  There’s a lot of systems in the game engine that are dated and in need of overhaul.

In hindsight, this is how we should have approached it from the start.  This will keep us heading in the right direction while getting improvements out to our current players and speeding up our development.  It’s really a chance to reboot our process to get back to our old development cycle that saw things moving at a faster pace.

[fudgums]

Maybe a full facepalm wasn't needed, probably only a half facepalm.

I think it would be a huge change in the game. Kinda like the terrain update but larger. Meaning in the time HTC has to put it into it.

[Rino]

     I'd see alot more "You stole my kill!" in the future were this implemented.

[Nemisis]

Not intending offense, but care to explain?
I didn't think I said anything THAT dumb. Could be wrong though. 

You didn't say anything dumb. Some people are afraid of change, thats all. I agree with motherland, and would love to see this implemented into the game. I feel this would help escort flyers, and outnumberd groups starting with an E advantage. The could make several passes before their E level is slightly greater than, or matches that of their opponets. Having reduced the efectivness of their opponets' planes, the outnumbered group now faces close to even odds.

[fudgums]

You didn't say anything dumb. Some people are afraid of change, thats all.

Maybe if you read my second post.....

[Nemisis]

Maybe if you read my second post.....

Ooops, sorry, posted while I was writing mine.

[Spikes]

    I'd see alot more "You stole my kill!" in the future were this implemented.

Can't be worse than it is now...

Plane 1: *Flies by an enemy con, doesn't fire*
Plane 2: *Kills enemy con*
Plane 1: You still my kill, Plane 2!

[Nemisis]

Agreed spikes. I would love to see this, as it would get planes with only Mg's more use.

[Knite]

Agreed spikes. I would love to see this, as it would get planes with only Mg's more use.

That's an interesting gameplay side effect I didn't even think of. Increase effectiveness of all aircraft, not just cannon birds.

As far as the kill stealing argument, that happens now. Whether it takes 20hp or 100hp to blow of a wing, kill steals still happen if the person originally firing upon the target only does 95% possible of damage.
That brings up another point though... in the case of the "catastrophic failure" I mentioned earlier, would it be desired/possible the game remember THEN who "killed" the aircraft, and not wait until hitting the ground or on bail out, then only recording it if the plane does not make it back to base or ditches? This might actually LOWER the amount of kill stealing as there'd no longer be the race to do tons of damage to a falling aircraft as there sometimes is now.

[Anaxogoras]

Facepalm

I'm going to give you a facepalm for an inappropriate facepalm.

Updating the damage model would be a big improvement for AH.  Il-2 serves as a good example that could be improved upon.

[Flipperk]

That's an interesting gameplay side effect I didn't even think of. Increase effectiveness of all aircraft, not just cannon birds.

As far as the kill stealing argument, that happens now. Whether it takes 20hp or 100hp to blow of a wing, kill steals still happen if the person originally firing upon the target only does 95% possible of damage.
That brings up another point though... in the case of the "catastrophic failure" I mentioned earlier, would it be desired/possible the game remember THEN who "killed" the aircraft, and not wait until hitting the ground or on bail out, then only recording it if the plane does not make it back to base or ditches? This might actually LOWER the amount of kill stealing as there'd no longer be the race to do tons of damage to a falling aircraft as there sometimes is now.

Knite im going to go off on a limb and say you have played WWII Online,

If anything from the flight model of WW2OL, the damage model they have is the reason why I fly. Its amazing, and even if some of the flight model is a bit off, the damage modeling is just a work of art.

Their modeling goes off the first person to cause catastrophic failure is awarded the kill. The only debate or down side is WHAT is a catastrophic damage? IE:

Plane A shoots planes C engine and it dies *Catastrophic damage*
Plane B shoots planes C left wing and it pops off *Also Catastrophic damage*

Plane A is awarded the kill because he was the first to cause the damage, but plane C was the one made a safe get away impossible.

Either way, anything is better than the current damage model.

WW2OL has an IL2 feel to it with the damage modeling. Every bullet has some effect on the planes lift capabilities, aerodynamics, and ect.  even if nothing falls off a mouth full of .50cals into the wing has a HUGE effect on how the plane handles

[Flipperk]

Also see this post i made awhile back about this topic:

http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,264652.15.html