Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: Kweassa on March 03, 2003, 08:16:52 AM
-
Ok. This might be a big suggestion! But it would be interesting if AH2 modelled the 'hit quality' of shots fired.. whether if it is a stray AP ping on the surface which bounces off, or a deep penetration.. or whether the cannon shells explode on the surface of contact, or bury into a certain depth, doing maximum damage.
Even some of the most recent sims who claim to have modelled such aspect, have some distinct problems and quirks(such as IL-2.. sometimes the enemy plane survives 3~4 MK108 hits with almost no visible damage!!), so it might be something pretty difficult to model. But it would be really great if AH2 can successfully implement such features. :)
-
would this help stop spray and pray dweebs from taking my wing off with a few stray pings?
-
It would help if they model bullet cinetic. All bullets lost cinetic energy, at AH seems no. Dweebs can shoot you down near 1000 yds or 1500 yds when you are very high.
At IL2 it is better modeled that and you can't do too much damage people that is over 400 or more meters.
-
kinetic
-
It also depends on what you're being hit with; a 20mm explosive shell, as long as it hits hard enough to set off the bursting charge, doesn't care whether it hits at 900fps or 10 fps; it's going to do the same amount of blast damage either way.
-
I've been trying to squeeze information about the damage model out of Skuzzy every time I see him, but to no avail :confused: In my mind, the damage model is all that's wrong with the gameplay (note: gameplay does not include graphics) in the AH we have now.
-
RatPanat,
AH does model kinetic engery of the bullets. This is very clear when you notice how many 50 cal hits it takes to kill you at 1000 yards as opposed to 250 yards.
Actually, I've never been killed by 50 cal hits at 1000 yards. 50 call hits out there seem like minor annoyances.
-
Originally posted by Shiva
It also depends on what you're being hit with; a 20mm explosive shell, as long as it hits hard enough to set off the bursting charge, doesn't care whether it hits at 900fps or 10 fps; it's going to do the same amount of blast damage either way.
This is not true is the HE round does not have enough energy to penetrate the structure prior to detonation. The HE component will do MUCH more damage exploding inside the structure than outside.
F.
-
Karnak is correct, AH does model kinetic energy of rounds, both in the actual drop in velocity and the resultant effect that has on damage.
Back to the topic of this thread: A single .50 could pass through an aircraft leaving 2 half inch holes that would be fairly inconsequential and that a metalsmith could repair in an hour. It could also cause catastrophic results. This difference between the two could be the result of less than 1/2" of bullet placement. Some planes of the same type withstood tremendous amounts of hits while others went down with very few hits. That's just reality.
The inherent paradox of damage modeling in simulation is that the more realistic you make it, the greater the number of possible results. The greater number of possible results, the less the consistency. The less the consistency, the less the people think the damage model is realistic. It's a crazy circle.
Bendover's (and I'm not picking on you, I understand where you're coming from) response typifies most people's view on it. The famous last words of Union General John Sedgwick are purported to be "They couldn't hit an elephant from this distance," just before he was shot dead by a Confederate sniper. The difference between that and simulation - in real life it's chance, irony, a cruel twist of fate. In simulation people call it B.S when that happens to them.
But I digress, we are making a lot of improvements in this area for AH2 and I'm really looking forward to it.
-
Pyro is picking on me?
boo-hu-hu-hu-hu-hu-hu-hu :( :( :( :( :( :(
-
Originally posted by Karnak
RatPanat,
AH does model kinetic engery of the bullets. This is very clear when you notice how many 50 cal hits it takes to kill you at 1000 yards as opposed to 250 yards.
Actually, I've never been killed by 50 cal hits at 1000 yards. 50 call hits out there seem like minor annoyances.
Karnek :D
Do you know what is it convergence??? ok max convergence here is 650 if you shoot someone at 1000 yds you are shooting his wings with a open trajectory low damage. Try with a p38 with nose guns (only 4 nose guns). At 1000yds you would have a close dispersion big damage because no kinetic modeled or very very poor modeled (thanx).
I can said you i kill a no damaged 190 (o yes 190) at 1000-1300 at 27k with a p38 shooting with only .50. He was running with autopilot thinkink he can't catch my D9 now. I've destroyed a couple of lancaster wings at more 1000 yds at 20k+.
At 1000yds any real pilot at WWII would open fire he knew he barely can hit enemy and with a very low damage if he does.
-
Originally posted by Pyro
Karnak is correct, AH does model kinetic energy of rounds, both in the actual drop in velocity and the resultant effect that has on damage.
Back to the topic of this thread: A single .50 could pass through an aircraft leaving 2 half inch holes that would be fairly inconsequential and that a metalsmith could repair in an hour. It could also cause catastrophic results. This difference between the two could be the result of less than 1/2" of bullet placement. Some planes of the same type withstood tremendous amounts of hits while others went down with very few hits. That's just reality.
The inherent paradox of damage modeling in simulation is that the more realistic you make it, the greater the number of possible results. The greater number of possible results, the less the consistency. The less the consistency, the less the people think the damage model is realistic. It's a crazy circle.
Bendover's (and I'm not picking on you, I understand where you're coming from) response typifies most people's view on it. The famous last words of Union General John Sedgwick are purported to be "They couldn't hit an elephant from this distance," just before he was shot dead by a Confederate sniper. The difference between that and simulation - in real life it's chance, irony, a cruel twist of fate. In simulation people call it B.S when that happens to them.
But I digress, we are making a lot of improvements in this area for AH2 and I'm really looking forward to it.
Are you saying me that when i check six and i see a F6F shooting my poor plane at 1300 yds (i know with my delay and his delay and big speed probably it will be at 900) and he hit my P38 with a couple or more bullets and i lose my wing (no damaged before of course) or elevators or ailerons or .... that i m dreaming???
AH 1000yds + speed + spray tactic = VERY USUAL KILL OR DAMAGE
RL 1000yds + speed + spray tactic = REALLY REALLY REALLY GOOD LUCK KILL OR DAMAGE
Or is it implemented that bullets cut cables at AH?
-
No thats not what he saying.
The problem isnt that a 50 cal can hit you and hurt and kill you at 900yrds. Thats not in question, or are you questioning that?
The problem that for whatever intangible reason it would seem that hits at that range are fairly easy.
But you can easily check bullet drop and dispersion using the dot target command.
What Pyro is saying is that the more complex the DM the more inconsistancies there will be. Then inevitably there will be more "whining".
Now narrowing down the intagibles to bring the "effective kill" range down to what we all read about ww2 a2a gunnery is difficult.
We have aids like icons and range counters, ammo counters and easily visible tracers. Also this is a game and your real life isnt on the line. You arent cold, you dont feel the effects of flying the plane. The hits sprits in game are easily visible at range etc.........
Not mention the amount of experience all of us have by playing the game everyday. Also the DM isnt as complicated as it was in rl.
Theres more to gunnery then just ballistics.
The question becomes do you want real life "physics" or real life "results". I mean ht could just make the bullets vanish at 400 yrds and the we wouldnt have to worry about 900yrd kills.
As I said you can check bullet drop and dispersion using the dot target command. Bullets do drop considerably at longer ranges.
-
I've only had 1 1000+ kill... that was RAM's runstang at d1.1 with a YakT.. of course there was alotta drop on the shot and he was really nice and level +)
Musta been d1.3 on his FE if not more..
SKurj
-
P.A.T.C.D.R
People Against The Current Damage Randomizer
:p :p
-
lol @ freeze's sig
-
Thanks for your reply Pyro!
Looking forward to the changes of AH2.. :)
ps) I know you guys are busy, but getting answers from the developers are always satisfying and delightful :) :) :)
-
Originally posted by Karnak
RatPanat,
AH does model kinetic engery of the bullets. This is very clear when you notice how many 50 cal hits it takes to kill you at 1000 yards as opposed to 250 yards.
Actually, I've never been killed by 50 cal hits at 1000 yards. 50 call hits out there seem like minor annoyances.
I have. I have lost wings from being hit at 1000yds. I've lost engines from being hit 2000yds from gunner in a bomber. I have heard hit register from 2500yds out from gunners. The fatherest out i've heard shots from a fighter is 1200yds.
I'm on cable with a 60ms ping to MA, or else I would think it's a lag problem. Then again it still might be.
-
A round should penetrate/ricochet/explode on contact/proximity based on it`s type, velocity, angle of impact and type of surface hit.
Then it should damage the interior parts that ARE THERE, ie a wing fuel tank, nothing at all if you`re lucky, tear up a control surface etc. Internal ricochets would be over the top I guess.
HE rounds should produce shrapnel and blasts that damage stuff.
There should be degradatory damage, control surfaces that get more and more inefficient with holes, damage to the steering system; engines with shot-out cylinders; bullet holes in canopies; leaking hydraulic fluid where applicable; instruments showing wrong/no more readings........
Pretty pretty please.
-
Originally posted by RatPenat
At 1000yds any real pilot at WWII would open fire he knew he barely can hit enemy and with a very low damage if he does.
er would you like to quote a pilot or reference that says this?
I agree there are many pilots who say you get in close or you will miss but they are speaking about in general, not about the top marksmen. They got in close because most pilots , green and experienced could not deflect shoot too well.The obvious reasoning tells them to teach pilots to get in close, not to waste ammo etc.Its different when your life depends onyour ammo load.They didnt fire at huge distances often because 90% of pilots didnt have the skill.
To take this to mean it should be impossible to damage at 1000 yards is rediculous. Its quite clearly stated that the effective range of B17s 50 cals were 1000 yards. This was said by allied and axis forces alike. By effective range these pilots mean you can be shot down in this distance right?. There are also accounts by pilots like johnny johnson(RAF top ace) and many others of them taking long range shots and hitting forcing the enemies to dive out and run with damage.As for effective range in the LW :
Heres a quote from 'Luftwaffe fighter force:View from the cockpit' by Adolf Galland et al, David S Isby ISBN 1-85367-327-7
'MG 17 77.9mm 200 metres effective range
MG 131 13mm 400 meters effective range
MG 151 15mm 600 meters effective range
MG 151/20 20mm 400 meters effective range
MGFF 20mm 400 meters effective range
MK 103 3cm 800 meters effective range
MK 108 3cm 400 meters effective range
BK 5 5cm 800 meters effective range'
As you can see the longest effective range here is easily up to a 1000 yards.Maybe some are shorter but most of these weapons have a far lower velocity than the .50 cal and so it would be acceptable to assume the 50 cal would be effective to at least the same 800 meters.Definately not as damaging as the 3cm rounds but they can take down an aircraft if they hit the right area.
HOWEVER, I do agree that maybe sometimes it does seem the damage you receive seems to exceed the damage possible from such distances in AH but like pyro says those lucky shots are modeled and are not garenteed every time. 'Lucky shots' at distance can take you out of the fight.
-
Please read about the following questions and think about them next time you fly AH:
-How often are you shot down in AH?
-How often are you killed "fair and square", from close range, by multiple hits?
-How often do you receive pings from long range?
-How often do these hits result in damage?
-How often do these hits result in a "no prior damage" death?
-Compare to question #1, what percentage do these "long range lucky ping deaths" represent?
And same things vice versa: how often do you get a lucky kill? Better yet, how often do you think "wow this is porked" after scoring such a kill?
If you are a good pilot, I would imagine you get shot down rarely in a fair fight. After all, if you're good, you just dont let the enemy get too close on your six. In that case, a larger percentage of your deaths would result from these long range lucky shots. Its statistics, really?
Camo
-
Will we still be able to see hit sprites under the cowl?
-
Originally posted by hazed-
er would you like to quote a pilot or reference that says this?
I agree there are many pilots who say you get in close or you will miss but they are speaking about in general, not about the top marksmen. They got in close because most pilots , green and experienced could not deflect shoot too well.The obvious reasoning tells them to teach pilots to get in close, not to waste ammo etc.Its different when your life depends onyour ammo load.They didnt fire at huge distances often because 90% of pilots didnt have the skill.
To take this to mean it should be impossible to damage at 1000 yards is rediculous. Its quite clearly stated that the effective range of B17s 50 cals were 1000 yards. This was said by allied and axis forces alike. By effective range these pilots mean you can be shot down in this distance right?. There are also accounts by pilots like johnny johnson(RAF top ace) and many others of them taking long range shots and hitting forcing the enemies to dive out and run with damage.As for effective range in the LW :
Heres a quote from 'Luftwaffe fighter force:View from the cockpit' by Adolf Galland et al, David S Isby ISBN 1-85367-327-7
'MG 17 77.9mm 200 metres effective range
MG 131 13mm 400 meters effective range
MG 151 15mm 600 meters effective range
MG 151/20 20mm 400 meters effective range
MGFF 20mm 400 meters effective range
MK 103 3cm 800 meters effective range
MK 108 3cm 400 meters effective range
BK 5 5cm 800 meters effective range'
As you can see the longest effective range here is easily up to a 1000 yards.Maybe some are shorter but most of these weapons have a far lower velocity than the .50 cal and so it would be acceptable to assume the 50 cal would be effective to at least the same 800 meters.Definately not as damaging as the 3cm rounds but they can take down an aircraft if they hit the right area.
HOWEVER, I do agree that maybe sometimes it does seem the damage you receive seems to exceed the damage possible from such distances in AH but like pyro says those lucky shots are modeled and are not garenteed every time. 'Lucky shots' at distance can take you out of the fight.
Just i would say LOL. I would have to find a real history from a b17 gunner. They can't shoot anything at less 400yds. Hartman, Rall, Saburo, etc shoot at 9km or maybe 9.5km with AIMs and kill enemy of course.
-
Leave real life out of this. There are way to many factors NOT included in AH that were at work in real life. Turbulance, wind, and the fact that wings bend during ACMs. The issue isn't whether the rounds are capable of doing damage at distance, but rather the ease of directing them. All you math majors out there compute this: 1 bullet fired and a second fired at 3 degrees difference. At 1000 yds what is the distance of the dispersion?
-
Originally posted by BenDover
would this help stop spray and pray dweebs from taking my wing off with a few stray pings?
C'mon Bend..yer killin me here. That's my only hope of gettin most of my kills now.;)
-
Originally posted by JB42
Leave real life out of this. There are way to many factors NOT included in AH that were at work in real life. Turbulance, wind, and the fact that wings bend during ACMs.
I looked into doing ballistics calculations for work one time and you would not BELIEVE the factors that go into predicting what path a bullet will follow. Calculating artillery especially is a pain because you have to take into account the coriolis effect from the earth spinning!
Not to mention that a difference of mere millimeters or fractions of degrees of angle in where or how a bullet hits can have a huge impact on the damage done.
So any simulation model that's done in real-time for a game is going to be a compromise and a rough approximation of probabilities.
And "effective" range for weapons is a rough measure of how likely you are to hit with that weapon in ideal conditions, not while attached to a vibrating airframe being slung around the sky...
-
Greg Stelmack....you used to work for redstorm right with your brother Garry right?
-
Originally posted by Gman
Greg Stelmack....you used to work for redstorm right with your brother Garry right?
"used to" is not the proper term :D