Damage Modelling

[pervert]

Hi damage modeling in this game is laughable, it appears the 190d is a giant radiator any kind of ping and its a rad hit seriously this must be some sort of bad joke. I think I've signed up for a Radiator Damage Simulator or a Pilot Wound Simulator. Seriously this can't be right can it? Feels like a huge waste of my time. Can someone attempt to explain the logic behind the cliche damage.

[Pigslilspaz]

easiest way to prevent it is not get shot 

[Ardy123]

Its ironic, because the WW1 airplanes have much better damage modeling, with the fabric that gets cut up, etc... It would be nice to see the damage model in the WW1 arena make it to the WW2 arena. As it stands, the only change I have seen make it to the WW2 arena, is the ability to loose half your horiz stab, where as before you would always loose the whole thing.

[JHerne]

I remember hearing someone mention that the WWI damage model was a test-bed for implementation into WW2 at some point.

So...unless I've taken too many shots to the head, I think its something that will be improved upon.

J

[pervert]

Thing is how it stands if you want to win its perfectly reasonable to hose someone down on the merge because theres a good chance it will give you

A. A rad hit (about 2 mins till engine dies) or
B. A pilot wound (looking at a black screen for most of the time)

So say it takes me 10 minutes to get to the fight I get sprayed pwed or rad hit X 10 in one sitting, what I'm actually doing is flying to a fight complete waste of time on my part. As is getting nailed in one shot from CV ack about 10 miles away just as I pop over 3k again my flight has been a huge waste of time.

Also on both counts me chasing someone or getting a kill because one of these things happening is also a huge waste of time that could be better spent with some action.   

[BrownBaron]

Thing is how it stands if you want to win its perfectly reasonable to hose someone down on the merge because theres a good chance it will give you

A. A rad hit (about 2 mins till engine dies) or
B. A pilot wound (looking at a black screen for most of the time)

So say it takes me 10 minutes to get to the fight I get sprayed pwed or rad hit X 10 in one sitting, what I'm actually doing is flying to a fight complete waste of time on my part. As is getting nailed in one shot from CV ack about 10 miles away just as I pop over 3k again my flight has been a huge waste of time.

Also on both counts me chasing someone or getting a kill because one of these things happening is also a huge waste of time that could be better spent with some action.   

The forward section of nearly all Luft craft is supremely delicate. The best way to avoid getting such crippleing damage is to not get hit.

[SmokinLoon]

STOP GOING FOR THE HEAD ON ATTACK!!!!   

Yes, I too remember reading that the WWI damage model is a test bed, or at least was a test bed for a improved damage system to be implemented in the WWII arenas.   

[Saxman]

Question is, how long are they going to be "testing" before they implement?

[Krusty]

Define test bed?

Define new level of damage for WW2?

You will not get WW1 type "holes in the skin" (you know, the kind that IL2 goes WAY overboard on? IMO that's ridiculous and I'm not going to be missing it) on WW2 planes. This is from Skuzzy in response to whether or not we skinners need to worry about redoing skins this way (it is more complicated). The answer was you won't see that in the WW2 planes and don't need to worry about skinning it.


However, more parts, we will see. We ARE seeing. Rip an I-16s wings off. Notice a lot of inner structure? Not all that long ago, when a wing was gone it was simply missing, never rendered. It was a pleasant jump when that changed to a stub of a wing with a 2D bitmap inside. Then we started getting little frameworks (flaps, ailerons, elevators), and now we get full inner structure showing on new planes like I-16s when you lose a wing.

Did you know you can blow the landing gear doors off of a B-25C? Without affecting the gear? What about the most visible recent change: Individually-destructible H-stabs?

We have come a long way and continue to improve. HTCs comments at the time of the WW1 damage discussion were (I believe) related to the NUMBER of parts that could be damaged, as in a wing with 3 parts would instead have 10 parts, but not that the DAMAGE would change... Just how the game shows it and how it might affect your gunnery tactics (needing to concentrate fire more than spraying away).


The changes you are asking for are being implemented. They simply aren't being recognized.

[Saxman]

You will not get WW1 type "holes in the skin" (you know, the kind that IL2 goes WAY overboard on? IMO that's ridiculous and I'm not going to be missing it) on WW2 planes. This is from Skuzzy in response to whether or not we skinners need to worry about redoing skins this way (it is more complicated). The answer was you won't see that in the WW2 planes and don't need to worry about skinning it.

When was this? My understanding was that surface damage WOULD be implemented in WWII after the WWI arenas were first introduced and announced as a test bed.

[Void]

2 40mm Hit a P-51's cockpit. Still alive.(pretty sure there will be human matter everywhere)
and a 30mm in the engine block don't blow a plane away.



Everythings okay.

[Ardy123]

Well krusty, your certainly opinionated and possibly trolling, to bad you fail to read carefully. If you chose to read what I wrote you would have noticed that I acknowledged this change..

What about the most visible recent change: Individually-destructible H-stabs?

...change I have seen make it to the WW2 arena, is the ability to loose half your horiz stab, where as before you would always loose the whole thing.

but as I'm sure with many things based on your reactions on the BBS, you react before fully analyzing... oh well.

As for damage model, I would expect increase in destructible parts, not just new graphics. The WW1 arena has lots of new damageable sections on the aircraft that the WW2 models don't have. For example, today, for the WW2 model, you either loose half or the whole wing on one side, this could be expanded into 3 sections instead of 2 for each side. You could also add features like landing gear hydraulic lines being hit causing all the gears to fail to go up (unless they had separate hydraulic systems for each gear). In the case of Pervert's comment about radiators, some planes had multiple radiators with shut-off valves, so that if one was hit, the plane could be flown with possibly reduced power for a period of time, this could be modeled as well.

The majority of items you mentioned were more related to graphic improvements and not CHANGES to the damage model but rather changes to the graphics representing the damage.

[Krusty]

Ardy, the only troll-like thing in this thread is your opening comment.

And, apparently YOU are the one that did not bother to read before spouting off: I specifically mentioned increasing the number of parts that can be damaged (the example I gave was a wing with more than 3 parts -- YES, there are 3 parts currently not counting ailerons/flaps) as one of the things that has been discussed, and probably is coming.

You seem to want to separate graphics from actual damage. They are tied together. You think the WW1 "wing chunks" effect would be the same if you didn't SEE it? No.. folks would be griping about hidden loss of lift, which is a bit more realistic than giant chunks gone from the wing, but the plane otherwise perfectly flyable. Eh? Graphcis are tied to the damage, in that development of either is a step forward. Either path of improvement only creates a richer and more fulfilling damage model.


Saxman: A while back when the first WW1 skins were being created.

It's a sticky in the skins thread, a few posts down:
http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,286581.0.html

[Ardy123]

Ardy, the only troll-like thing in this thread is your opening comment.

And, apparently YOU are the one that did not bother to read before spouting off: I specifically mentioned increasing the number of parts that can be damaged (the example I gave was a wing with more than 3 parts -- YES, there are 3 parts currently not counting ailerons/flaps) as one of the things that has been discussed, and probably is coming.

You seem to want to separate graphics from actual damage. They are tied together. You think the WW1 "wing chunks" effect would be the same if you didn't SEE it? No.. folks would be griping about hidden loss of lift, which is a bit more realistic than giant chunks gone from the wing, but the plane otherwise perfectly flyable. Eh? Graphcis are tied to the damage, in that development of either is a step forward. Either path of improvement only creates a richer and more fulfilling damage model.


Saxman: A while back when the first WW1 skins were being created.

It's a sticky in the skins thread, a few posts down:
http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,286581.0.html

whatever crusty... your trying to pick fights again... not worth anyone's time...

Pervert, often models in games have 'hit boxes' or 3d volumetric boxes that if a bullet (in this case) intersect with, cause a 'hit'. It would be interesting to see what the shape of the hit box is for the 190d9s radiator. It may be that the hit box is a significant portion of the front of the plane, next to the engine's hit box, although I have no idea how HTC has implemented it and I am hypothesizing now.

[Ghosth]

Was brought up at the AH Con Q & A session.

From the sound of it reworked Damage Model will come, but they are having some issues.
Apparently what you can do in a WWI Arena with 10 to ? people in it is a lot harder to do in say a TT arena with 500 or more in it. But the impression I got, was that the problem was more on the graphic side of things.

Also HT mentioned that the DM is not something that they want to do 30 times. Better for gameplay and people learning the new DM if they can release it all at once.