Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: Wilbus on February 03, 2002, 06:52:10 AM
-
Don't mean to rack down on AH's dammage modelling but I have to say, it is getting a bit old. We've had more or less the same dammage modelling since the first day of the beta, with some tweaks here and there, especially for the ground veichles.
With the time, things have to improve IMO, getting rid of the (very old) DM where a 20mm in the aileron completely blows it away (not that it shouldn't) and 3x20mm hits in teh wings does NOTHING to the plane but a 4:th blows teh whole wing away.
I can't say how much I loved this type of modelling back in the old WB days in version 1.9 and so, had been flying Red Baron and Aces over Europe adn the WB modelling was a welcome new thing, was still good when AH got out.
Think it is time for more advanced modelling, if the servers can handle it that is. What I am askign is not a visual 100% correct modelling, I have no need to see the 3x50 cal holes in the wing of the of the Yak infront of me like you do in IL2, I just want the type of DM.
I wanna be able to put 2x20mm in a wing of a fighter and see his performance go down, I wanna be able to hit his elevator and see him turn slightly worse instead of just blowing half the thing away with a certain # of 13mm.
-
Just an addition there wilbus. How about a smoking engine losing power? This always has bothered me but maybe I'm wayyy off base.
RazorDD
-
Not sure just an oil leak would make the eninge lose power, I am pretty sure that all yet get from a hit is no just an oil leak, but you'll lose other things aswell, thus the engine doesn't put out full power, so that would be great IMO :)
What I want is a way more advanced DM in all aspects and on every surface of the plane, maybe you get a whole in the fuselage, doesn't affect the plane much, get the same hole in the elevator and you're in trouble.
-
Allso, attack a Buff or any other plane in AH now, (buff case) out 10x20mm in his left wing, 10 in his right and 10 in his fuselage (might be a bit too much) and he can keep on flying as if nothing had happaned unless you hit ailerons and elevators. In real life the buff would most likey go down because he'd lost so much of the plane that it just won't stay up.
-
how about the abilaty to blow your own tail off??? did this in il-2 when i first got the demo.
btw, i shot off half my H stab, but the il-2 i was in could still do some pretty good moves (can't remember if i had relax realisum on or off)
-
I honestly think overtemping the engine with WEP should blow it.
Although, that would probably hurt me the most. :D
-
Amen, Wilbus!
I posted similiar propostion in the Gameplay forum, not much attention given to it, but I am all for it.
Especially the engine part, if the engine takes a hit bad enough to cause the black smoke and the "Engine Oil" damage message, odds are you have some other stuff damaged as well, be it the ignition leads, fuel system, turbo/supercharger system, etc., and you should not have full power available. Radial engines due to the layout of the components are more durable and take more damage, but that's just life. Hit a Pony, Spit, or other liquid-cooled engine and the temp ought to shoot up unless you reduce power, where the radial will run a bit hotter, but not critically so. Hits in the P47 fuselage ought to damage the turbo and it's ducting, reducing available boost. Things like this would add to the "immersion level" I would think.
Hits to the wings and other control surfaces ought to detract from performance too, just as you stated.
-
What Kronos said..I agree.!
-
I whole-heartedly agree.
...
-
All planes that I know off can r4un wep for 10-20 minutes with not damage. The R2800 was tested for 4 hours with full boost with no ill affects. some planes that used nitrous could be have their engines destroyed if out of adjustment. It was much worse to get a radiator hit in an inline engine. Also, inline engines carry about half as much oil but I think this is modeled.
On another note... Water cooled engines should die pretty quickly if hit in the block with any armour piercing bullet. A fifty API would shatter the water jacket. Water cooled engines were very fragile compared to radials as each cylinder on a radial was independent where damage to one cyl on a water cooled or inline motor would kill the entire motor. Fuel injected radials were of course very vulnerable. any hit to a cyl would cause high pressure fuel to spray all over the hot engine. 190's were very scary to get hit in the engine. Galland bailed from one as son as he seen smoke.
and yeah... I suppose a radial would lose peak power with one or more cylinders shot off but Pratt's came home that way and th4 pilot never even knew it till he landed.
lazs
-
I agree 100% this in one of the only areas that I feel is lacking in AH .I would like to see much more variables in damage modeling especially performance maybe engine hits on ignition systems (engine misfires),prop controls(prop pitch problems) surging of engine,oil spray on windscreen (limiting visability) Fires cockpit (that can be put out with key commands) Engine fires that can be extinguished (with proper commands) All in all I think it would be more fun to try to get that damaged crate home (instead of that wing just falling off) and would also give slower planes a chance to catch that crippled fast plane, After all that was reality in war.
And By the way HTC your doing a great Job and this isnt to be critical of whats been done so far,and I know suggesting and codeing are worlds apart...:) thanks
-
The one thing that has always irked me is a wing is either 100%, 50% or gone at the root. I realize that much of the damage we "see" is just a crude graphical representation, but I bet a more gradual damage model would increase the games fun.
A wing with a bunch of bullet holes would have increased drag and lost lift (but not nearly as much as the current half wing). Perhaps something as simple as a total hits count for left wing/right wing/fusalauge and tail could be used to cause extra drag without catestrophic failures. Reducing the top speed by up to 20% or something. As it stands now most planes are as good as dead once any noticable damage is done to the wing. I duno...let the HT experts see if its worth it.
The engine damage model however, would be great IMHO. Sure some engines may be pretty much all or nothing, but there are many WWII accounts of planes returning home with entire cylinders missing. An oil leak doesnt reduce power on its own...but an oil leak caused by a piston flopping in the breeze sure might!
-
What I want is to get rid of the "lose that part and you have 20% loss of performance" I want the planes to interact with the bullets, depending on where they hit and from what angle and distance, give different results without shoointg a big part off. Like IL2.
-
Just change damage model on n1k,spit, and my favortie, la7. Make it so one 303 ping blows the plane to poop :D
-
Well guys, you gotta know what you're asking for.
Right now, HTC has a binary setup damage model: a thing is either on or off, and it is that based on the amount of damage it has suffered. Over a specific amount, and off it goes.
To rework the damage modelling is a science in itself. You'd have to calculate *exactly* where a round impacts, and then construct algorithms for finding out how it'd damage the plane, depending on angle (which would be new) and velocity (already in the game).
It'd require redoing the weapons too, or at least adjusting them.
On the other hand, it'd be a GREAT addition, and perhaps those pesky 20mm AP rounds would be less effective if they hit the wing or some non critical area of the plane -go right through.
Would love to see engine or aileron or anything else decrease in performance when hit instead of just falling off, but, it'll take time off the usual iterations in AH - it'd probably require a whole iteration in itself, and it would lead to a good number of more calculations being made, reducing performance (lesser concern).
I suspect HTC will work on this when they feel the strat and planeset is doing ok. The damage model we have now works, and there are more urgent issues.
Most notably rockets and more bombs for 190F8!1 :D :D
-
If you ask me if I want a new 190D11, Ta152C, submarines, spacecrafts, etc, or just a fine tuning of what we already have (damage model, flight model, gunnery model, graphic effects, etc), I'll choose the second with no doubt.
As an example, there you have the IL2. It was a stunning success after its initial launch even all we knew it had a extremely limited plane set.
IMO, we have a more than acceptable planeset, and again, IMO, improving other sides of the game would be a more efficient marketing move, and damage model is a primary key side of the game.
-
Would be cool to see this kind of detail
(http://www.brauncomustangs.org/JPEGs/p51-damage.jpg)
Modified pic. Used on the 412th FS page for Damage Control Training.
See the whole site at http://www.brauncomustangs.org
-
Originally posted by StSanta
Well guys, you gotta know what you're asking for.
Right now, HTC has a binary setup damage model: a thing is either on or off, and it is that based on the amount of damage it has suffered. Over a specific amount, and off it goes.
To rework the damage modelling is a science in itself. You'd have to calculate *exactly* where a round impacts, and then construct algorithms for finding out how it'd damage the plane, depending on angle (which would be new) and velocity (already in the game).
It'd require redoing the weapons too, or at least adjusting them.
On the other hand, it'd be a GREAT addition, and perhaps those pesky 20mm AP rounds would be less effective if they hit the wing or some non critical area of the plane -go right through.
Would love to see engine or aileron or anything else decrease in performance when hit instead of just falling off, but, it'll take time off the usual iterations in AH - it'd probably require a whole iteration in itself, and it would lead to a good number of more calculations being made, reducing performance (lesser concern).
I suspect HTC will work on this when they feel the strat and planeset is doing ok. The damage model we have now works, and there are more urgent issues.
Most notably rockets and more bombs for 190F8!1 :D :D
Well said StSanta, my thoughts as well.
I would love to see the above ideas implemented, but I think that it would be VERY expensive in manpower resources. The big questions are; how long would it take?
A month?
A year?
At what point is it worth it?
Personally, one thing that I would like to see, that I don't think would be too expensive, would be better visuals of broken parts, particularly missing wing-tips. I would like to see jagged-twisted-paint-chipped-spar-sticken-out broken wings in stead of straight sawed-off lines. Even if it visually broke the same way each time, it would be cool-worthy.
But then again, 50ish planes times 2 wings each, Yikes, that might take quite a bit (too much) of resources as well.
eskimo
-
Well, if HTC gets going now we'll probarly have it in a year :)
If they don't get going we might never have it ;)
Nice pic Midnight, I WANT improved DM and I KNOW WHAT I AM ASKING FOR! :D
I don't mind if it takes 6 months or a year, to wait a long time is better then to wait for ever.
-
Midnight.. thats what your squads pony's looked like about 24 hours ago after me and squaddie kappa killed 6 of em.. By ourselves:D.. Film anyone? :D
-
Well, new planes and new damage model does not limit each others. Artists do the planes mostly and damage model is programming stuff. It doesn't help building new damge model by keeping artists rested.
-
Damage model should also add flaps, ailerons etc. jammed to a certain position because of a bullet hit..
Another thing that needs revision is gunners on buffs. As it is now, it's pretty much impossible to take out the rear gunner on a b17 for example.. You can spray the tail and top of the buff with cannons and still see them shooting back. Often the whole tail section drops when you score enough hits to kill the gunner. In war it was a common tactic to single out the gunners of a buff first to get enough time to start picking engines out.
Buff crews need to be more vulnerable IMO even if it means the buff hardness goes up.
-
Although I'm very much in for WIlbuz's suggestion, I agree with Santa.
I'm also concerned how a very eleborated damage model will do takeing into account net lag. Damage info packages will become much larger causing extra lag with current net speeds.
Maybe HT can say something about the feasability (and possibilities) of improving the current damage model.
-
Originally posted by Apar
Although I'm very much in for WIlbuz's suggestion, I agree with Santa.
I'm also concerned how a very eleborated damage model will do takeing into account net lag. Damage info packages will become much larger causing extra lag with current net speeds.
Maybe HT can say something about the feasability (and possibilities) of improving the current damage model.
As far as I understand how it works network lag should not be an issue.
I think something shall be done with dammage model simply because its not in a line with overal AH quality. For examply you still can strife CV with .50 only, and panzers get sometime 10+ hits/penetration without any visable dammage.
Fariz
-
Dont care either way, but i tend to go with what has been right, HTC.
Just stop knockin out my Dora radiator from the 6, the 9, the 6.5, the 6.75, or (add anyangle here) shot.
They got deflection modeled on steel ailerons that always ricochets and hits my steam dispenser.
Stop it already or I'll sound like a LW dipshit.
-
I don't know how it is exactly programmed Fariz.
But my guess is that a more eleborated damage model requires not only more complex calculations but also more input/output parameters and exchange of those parameters between FE and BE.
-
Exchanging those parameters between FE and BE is not necessary Apar.
If you hit me, my FE will calculate and elaborate an accurate damage that will be shown to my with a lot of detail, in the other end, you will see a simplifyed damage similar to what we actually have.
For example, you hit me three times in the right aileron, my FE calculates the damage and the result is just three big holes and the aileron stuck in the up possition. The aileron is not ripped off and from your FE you will not see any visual damage in my plane, but you'll notice that I'm starting to roll to one side and that I have no aileron control at all.
Other example, again you hit me three times in the right aileron, this time I see two big holes and the other half of the aileron is just gone. The aileron effectivity is halved and what you see in your FE is my plane loosing the entire aileron aileron.
If bandwith is the problem, a system like that would work fine.
-
Bandwith wise the enemy damagelevel updates could be divided to multiple variations with a set of default damagelevels.
For example system tells your enemy has damage nr1 - he has flap damaged. Damage nr 121 could be half flap missing and generally damaged right wing.. etc. So the enemy would not see actual bulletholes in the exact places where he hit but would get a far more accurate graphic information than what he gets now with wingtip or whole wing missing. It's just a matter of adding more variations to the possible damage graphics we have.
Or maybe I'm full of BS and have no idea how this thing works in AH - which is quite possible :)