Author Topic: Lethality in Main Arean vs new Mission Arena  (Read 664 times)

Offline Yeager

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10167
Lethality in Main Arean vs new Mission Arena
« on: December 23, 2002, 12:08:56 PM »
From time to time I wonder about the lethality settings in the MA.

I know that lethality is a setting that can be adjusted in multiple ways per arena.  I also know that lethality overall is one of the key adjustables of gameplay.  Too little and everyone is disgruntled because they cant seem to kill anything.  Too much and everyone becomes indignant with regards to the level of of perceived skill required to suceed.

Im of the opinion that AH has the lethality in the MA set way too high.  (A recent heavy bomber escort mission that ended as a sad pathetic joke reaffirmed my opinion on this topic).

I hope that the mission arena is a little bit, actually, quite a bit more challenging and believable in this regard.  Leave the MA like it is, just give the proffessional killers, history aficionados and aircraft connoisseurs a place to dwell amongst equals

All the fat and balding suicide pukes, pimply faced fuzz scrotuls and simple ego maimed CH 1 smack talkers (wife beaters) will leave the good stuff alone to the real deals.  

We, they, know who is who. Do you?
« Last Edit: December 23, 2002, 12:13:22 PM by Yeager »
"If someone flips you the bird and you don't know it, does it still count?" - SLIMpkns

Offline Hornet

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 469
Lethality in Main Arean vs new Mission Arena
« Reply #1 on: December 23, 2002, 12:23:04 PM »
Any sort of support for your argument that the MA lethality is innaccurate other than your anecdote?

Perhaps upping buff tuff would be a nice gameplay addition in the mission arena, but nerfing guns in general so that fighters can make multiple mistakes and still continue on as mission effective seems to be going in the wrong direction. The goal of not getting shot in the first place seems like a pretty historical objective to me.
Hornet

Offline Revvin

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1724
      • http://www.ch-hangar.com
Lethality in Main Arean vs new Mission Arena
« Reply #2 on: December 23, 2002, 12:52:40 PM »
Agreed Yeager

Offline Toad

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 18415
Re: Lethality in Main Arean vs new Mission Arena
« Reply #3 on: December 23, 2002, 12:56:25 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Yeager
... just give the proffessional killers, history aficionados and aircraft connoisseurs a place to dwell amongst equals

...We, they, know who is who. Do you?


They call it the CT, don't they?

3 points for the trailing elitism though.....

BTW, I hear IL2 may have the kind of gunnery/leath your looking for. Just a thought.
« Last Edit: December 23, 2002, 01:01:04 PM by Toad »
If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude than the animated contest of freedom, go from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen!

Offline HFMudd

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 609
Lethality in Main Arean vs new Mission Arena
« Reply #4 on: December 23, 2002, 01:13:32 PM »
Damage realism... I really doubt that you can get there by tweaking the lethality ratings in AH.  There are simply too few components that can take damage.  Even if AH had a detailed component based damage model I'm not sure how one would go about deciding if it was realistic or not.

I have to believe that coding a "realistic" damage model is both quite subjective and quite difficult.

Not that I wouldn't like to see it done of course...

Offline Hristo

  • Parolee
  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1150
Lethality in Main Arean vs new Mission Arena
« Reply #5 on: December 23, 2002, 03:20:45 PM »
Compared to Il-2, in AH ACM and gunnery is practicall non existant. The recipee is to spray and pray from several hundred yards (YMMV).

Even a single cannon round will do damage most likely and gamey hit sprites visible through instrument panel are here to make it even easier.

Just as one recieves a shock when trying Il-2 gunnery after AH, it is the same when trying ACM with enemy on your 6 in AH after Il-2.

Offline Wotan

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7201
Lethality in Main Arean vs new Mission Arena
« Reply #6 on: December 23, 2002, 03:41:45 PM »
I agree with Hiristo. I cant remeber the last time I was killed in ah inside 600 yards. I havent played in the last couple of weeks though.

In ah any hit on what ever surface, at what ever angle can cause damage.

I was just in il2 and fired a mk 108 30mm round into the wing of an il2 and the round seemed to penetrate the wing and exit without detonating. Ded 6 shots in il2 eat the most ammo. I always look for plane form shots.

Under and up, or slight oblique angles are most effective. Also a breaking enemy offers a great opportunity to get deadly hits. He exposes his eng cockpit etc.

I cant wait to see what 6 50s on the jugs do in il2. I bet I dont see them d800 spray and pray shots like I do in ah.

Ofcourse no icons adds to the effect. Also the 1 size fits all hit sprits in ah makes hit detection much easier. Never has any Flight game come close to  "when you think you close enough, get closer".

This type of gunnery opens up a whole new level of acm that best fits with those ww2 pilot stories.

I dont think however that playing with the lethality settings in ah would change it much. they play with 80% lethality over in wbs. They also have buff toughness increased. While you do get a better type of fight there it doesnt really fix anything.

Offline J_A_B

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3012
Lethality in Main Arean vs new Mission Arena
« Reply #7 on: December 23, 2002, 04:23:30 PM »
"I cant wait to see what 6 50s on the jugs do in il2. I bet I dont see them d800 spray and pray shots like I do in ah. "

Yeah, this is the game in which the P-51 can barely break 400 MPH.  I wouldn't exactly call IL2's flight modeling "unbiased".   It's like looking at the world through a soviet-propaganda filter.


As for AH lethality, the major problems seems to be the bomber formations, in which all 3 bombers still seem to take less damage than one pre-1.1 bomber did.   This seems more like an issue with bombers than a global problem with weapon firepower.

J_A_B

Offline Wotan

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7201
Lethality in Main Arean vs new Mission Arena
« Reply #8 on: December 23, 2002, 04:25:35 PM »
really so you've flown il2s p51?

Offline Kweassa

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6425
Lethality in Main Arean vs new Mission Arena
« Reply #9 on: December 23, 2002, 05:16:38 PM »
JAB, that's like saying all the rest of the world is looking things through pro-USA propaganda filter. Game producers choose in data that they believe to be most believable to them according to their own reasons, and if that's "not exactly unbiased", then we might as call AH "not exactly unbiased", too.

 The point is that catastrophical structural damages in AH happen so often, from so far out.

Offline J_A_B

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3012
Lethality in Main Arean vs new Mission Arena
« Reply #10 on: December 23, 2002, 05:52:11 PM »
"really so you've flown il2s p51"

I doubt Oleg and Co. are lying.  It's possible that they might decide to do things differently but I doubt it.  In any case, it's merely an illustration that NO game can be used as a benchmark for "how things should be" because all game developers have their biases and opinions.  I put no more faith in IL2 than I do in AH or AW...which is to say, virtually none.

Anyway.....

"The point is that catastrophical structural damages in AH happen so often, from so far out."

There are several causes for this, none of which have anything to do with the power of the bullets.

1.  The AH damage model isn't up to the task of modeling the effect of "peppering" something with bullets from long range--no parts can be "damaged".  Either the part works fine, or is destroyed.  You can pepper an outer wing with 10 .50 rounds in different places and it'll fall off when it should only make 10 little holes; you can hit a wing spar with a 20mm shell and nothing will happen.  

2.  Pilots in AH fire at greater distances than real pilots will because there's not much to lose by doing so--being out of ammo in AH is at worst a minor inconvienience; being out of ammo in reality means you might end up helpless in a hostile environment.   In order to make game shooters as disciplined as real shooters, you must make shooting unrealistically difficult to compensate for the nonexistant fear of dying.     This is further complicated because a real pilot is sitting inside a cramped, smelly, loud, vibrating airplane cockpit while we are in the comfort of our living rooms.  We have far fewer "irritants" and so it's easier to perform the task at hand (shooting).  

3.  In order to get kills in AH you must remove something important from an airplane (like a wing).  Real pilots would almost always bail out after something such as engine failure; this is not the case in AH.  Trying to make a highly "realistic" damage model in AH could very well end up with dogfights turning into fights of engineless gliders trying to shoot each other down before crashing.   This actually happened in another game I used to play--just think of the absurdidity of fighters pinging out each other's engines at 20K and glide-fighting each other down to the deck!   Therefore, any change to the damage model must be evaluated for both positive AND negative impact on the game--if you make wings and such tougher to remove, then you must somehow force virtual pilots to behave in a more "real" manner....you have to make them incapable of fighting once something like the engine gets shot out.


It's not simply a matter of "make the bullets do less damage".  The issue is far more complicated than that.

J_A_B

Offline Wilbus

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4472
Lethality in Main Arean vs new Mission Arena
« Reply #11 on: December 23, 2002, 05:53:53 PM »
Quote
Compared to Il-2, in AH ACM and gunnery is practicall non existant. The recipee is to spray and pray from several hundred yards


Hear Hear!

I've screamed out for a long time now for a good and up-to-date dammage and gunnery modell in AH, it is the ONE thing that AH REALLY lacks, specially compared to newer games like IL2 (where the Dammage modell and gunnery modell seam very realistic).

What has to be done to AH can't be changed by raising or lowering the lethality in the arenas, it needs a whole new dammage system without the "hit here and that exact part falls off".

Didn't know Il2 had a P51 yet, does it?
Rasmus "Wilbus" Mattsson

Liberating Livestock since 1998, recently returned from a 5 year Sheep-care training camp.

Offline J_A_B

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3012
Lethality in Main Arean vs new Mission Arena
« Reply #12 on: December 23, 2002, 06:10:09 PM »
"Didn't know Il2 had a P51 yet, does it?"

They're working on it for FB I believe, and Oleg and Co. has always been very up front as to how it will perform.   Really though that's not the point of this thread so lets not get distracted.

I agree with you I think the "problem" (if you want to call it that) with the AH damage model cannot be rectified by a mere change in bullet lethality.  I would say that there's more reasons for that than you hit upon though, some of which CANNOT be modeled in a computer simulation.

J_A_B

Offline Yeager

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10167
Lethality in Main Arean vs new Mission Arena
« Reply #13 on: December 23, 2002, 06:13:06 PM »
Yes on the bomber formations and the wierd predictable and easy manner in which they are taken apart.  There is still something not quite right about it.  Yes on wotans comments.

I know a SF weapons specialist who plays both AH and IL2 and he also states unequivicolly that IL2 gunnery lethality has the behavior most believable between the two, by a wide margin.

Im just saying that I understand the way in which AH Main Arena handles lethality.  Both as a result of design limitations (multiple munitions types modeled in every round rather than spread throughout the link exmp -two AP, twe HE, one Incendiary and on and on) and a desirable effect on gameplay (simple fun loving  people need relatively simple fun lethality to get a decent return on time invested to remain interested in the game).  IL2 is too difficult in the lethality department to maintain the broad appeal associated with mass markets.

Also that I would like the mission arena to be more difficult than the current main arena.  Just want more difficulty is all.  How much?  Lets say 10 to 15% more difficult.
"If someone flips you the bird and you don't know it, does it still count?" - SLIMpkns

Offline Wotan

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7201
Lethality in Main Arean vs new Mission Arena
« Reply #14 on: December 23, 2002, 06:28:09 PM »
No il2 doesnt have a p51 yet and its officially not slated as a flyable plane for Forgotten Battles.

Its to be ai. Unless a cockpit is ready.

I dont think Oleg said that if they intoduce a flyable p51 it wont fly over 400 mph but he sighted some documents that showed the 51 tested in those documents couldnt get over 400 and had major heating problems.

Good Gunnery makes for a Great game.