Damage modeling

[Saxman]

Wiley's got the right of it: Add hit boxes for components IE fuel lines, control lines, additional engine components (superchargers, turbochargers, cylinder heads, magnetos, gear boxes, however detailed you want to make it), oil coolers, etc.

That takes the randomness away.

[BnZs]

In your example above, hitting cable will cause a flap to get stuck. But flaps already get stuck. If you are hoping the damage model will include internals depicting the cables so that flaps will get stuck only when cables get hit, then I propose that would only be worth it if an attacker could effectively aim for a cable with a reasonable probability of hitting it. Otherwise making the cable damage random is effectively the same thing.

Vink, I've been playing since 2006 and it takes a more elite stick than me to actually aim and reliably hit any target other than the whole plane. What I'm saying is that for most players the damage is already effectively semi-random.

On another thread I proposed that more realistic damage modeling would raise the efficacy of large banks of machine guns that tend to make lots more smaller holes over a wider area vs. cannons shooting fewer rounds that put their damage onto a smaller area. The simpler damage model tends to favor that approach highly. With a more complex damage model two 20MMs would still saw structures off easier than six .50s or eight .303s, but at least approaches involving a larger number of smaller BBs would have a decent chance of doing *something* to debilitate the enemy airplane, instead of poking a lot of holes through it over a wide area to no effect whatsoever. I don't think this approach would make 6 .50s or 8 .303s better or even as good as 2-4 cannons, it will just narrow the edge that cannon birds have.

[The Fugitive]

How would a more detailed DM diminish fun?  I would really enjoy a gradual DM versus the all-or-nothing we have now.

Wiley.

Your only one subscription,what of the other oh lets say 100 or so that will be bent out of shape because as far as they can see there is no rhyme or reason for the damage they took. Your going to be able to explain to some geek/gamer that couldn't care less if this was a WWII fighter/bomber, or some modern day fighter/bomber Why a certain cable cut will give a certain type of damage and make the plane fly a different way?

Then there are going to be those that "think" they know what they are doing and will inevitably be all over HTC because "I hit such and such a spot and he could still dive and turn with me!!!"

Making a game that is difficult to learn and get good at already, even harder doesn't bod well for keeping subscriptions.

[BnZs]

Making a game that is difficult to learn and get good at already, even harder doesn't bod well for keeping subscriptions.

Changing the damage model wouldn't make the game any harder. Everyone would still have the same vulnerable spots and the same opportunity to hit them.

Also, if you could make machine guns especially the American .50s more effective (while staying within the bounds of realism), it would probably make a large percentage of players and potential players happier.

[Wiley]

Your only one subscription,what of the other oh lets say 100 or so that will be bent out of shape because as far as they can see there is no rhyme or reason for the damage they took. Your going to be able to explain to some geek/gamer that couldn't care less if this was a WWII fighter/bomber, or some modern day fighter/bomber Why a certain cable cut will give a certain type of damage and make the plane fly a different way?

Considering the way people slobber all over other games with more detailed damage models, what makes you think the other 99 guys don't want it?  I can't recall ever having seen in print someone expressing the sentiment, "I sure wish the damage modeling in this game was simpler."  Regardless of whether it was a flight sim or driving game.

Then there are going to be those that "think" they know what they are doing and will inevitably be all over HTC because "I hit such and such a spot and he could still dive and turn with me!!!"

Making a game that is difficult to learn and get good at already, even harder doesn't bod well for keeping subscriptions.

Same guys are already whining because planes don't disappear in a puff of smoke if they go over their maximum speed.  I'm sure the game would survive it.

Wiley.

[The Fugitive]

Changing the damage model wouldn't make the game any harder. Everyone would still have the same vulnerable spots and the same opportunity to hit them.

Also, if you could make machine guns especially the American .50s more effective (while staying within the bounds of realism), it would probably make a large percentage of players and potential players happier.

It won't make the game any harder, but it WILL increase the frustration level, which in most people takes away the fun.

Considering the way people slobber all over other games with more detailed damage models, what makes you think the other 99 guys don't want it?  I can't recall ever having seen in print someone expressing the sentiment, "I sure wish the damage modeling in this game was simpler."  Regardless of whether it was a flight sim or driving game.

Same guys are already whining because planes don't disappear in a puff of smoke if they go over their maximum speed.  I'm sure the game would survive it.

Wiley.

oh you mean that 1 percent of the player who visit the BBS?  

Again, the people here are a very small part of the very small group of players who plays this game.

Also, I think they want the graphics of the damage to show, like fabric of your ailerons fluttering in the wing, cockpit bouncing around when you have a cylinder or two shot out, wind noise when you have holes in the canopy. That kind of stuff. 

[Wildcatdad]

  To wiley and BnZs. you guys put my thought out there better than I could. I like the idea of an internal hit box(es) for the plane. It doesn't have to be complicated, but I feel like internal damage would be more realistic and a good addition to the game.
 

[Wiley]

oh you mean that 1 percent of the player who visit the BBS?  

Yup.  Honestly, have you ever seen anyone on any form of communication for a game say, "The damage in this game is too detailed."

Again, the people here are a very small part of the very small group of players who plays this game.

Yup.  See above though.

Also, I think they want the graphics of the damage to show, like fabric of your ailerons fluttering in the wing, cockpit bouncing around when you have a cylinder or two shot out, wind noise when you have holes in the canopy. That kind of stuff. 

Of course, the two would go hand in hand.

Wiley.

[The Fugitive]

Yup.  Honestly, have you ever seen anyone on any form of communication for a game say, "The damage in this game is too detailed."

Yup.  See above though.

Of course, the two would go hand in hand.

Wiley.

Nope, but of the hundreds I see all day saturday I almost never see anyone say they wish Aces High had a more detailed damage model either.

Basing wishes on posts on the message boards is foolish as it represents a very small percentage of the players. Most of the players playing the game couldn't care less about the BBS because they can't win the game any faster posting on it. Adding more damage detail that effect the flight model would also not interest them as they can't win the game any faster with it.

As it is now people ask for the silliest things because they would think its "cool". Most would have either no effect on the game, or a negative effect to the game. While having the game as "realistic" as it can be would be interesting for a certain point of view, I really doubt it would be good for business. Most people come into this game to "win" and haven't a clue how to fly and fight and don't care, they can still get to the "win" they are looking for. Adding what to them is going to be random damage effects will slow their trip to the "win" and so.... for them.... why bother to play?

Too many people are leaving the game as it is, lets add something to make 20-40 people happy and frustrate the rest. Sounds like an idea business plan to me.   

[Wildcatdad]

Nope, but of the hundreds I see all day saturday I almost never see anyone say they wish Aces High had a more detailed damage model either.

Basing wishes on posts on the message boards is foolish as it represents a very small percentage of the players. Most of the players playing the game couldn't care less about the BBS because they can't win the game any faster posting on it. Adding more damage detail that effect the flight model would also not interest them as they can't win the game any faster with it.

As it is now people ask for the silliest things because they would think its "cool". Most would have either no effect on the game, or a negative effect to the game. While having the game as "realistic" as it can be would be interesting for a certain point of view, I really doubt it would be good for business. Most people come into this game to "win" and haven't a clue how to fly and fight and don't care, they can still get to the "win" they are looking for. Adding what to them is going to be random damage effects will slow their trip to the "win" and so.... for them.... why bother to play?

Too many people are leaving the game as it is, lets add something to make 20-40 people happy and frustrate the rest. Sounds like an idea business plan to me.   

The wish isn't based on BBS messages, its based on the fact that I think this is something that will better the game. And, no offense, but you seem to be the only one frustrated by this.

[The Fugitive]

The wish isn't based on BBS messages, its based on the fact that I think this is something that will better the game. And, no offense, but you seem to be the only one frustrated by this.

Well I'm glad you spoke up we can all rest easy knowing that you approve so it MUST be the way to go.

I'm not in the least bit frustrated by any upgrade/updates. I have a sick computer that is no where near its limit. This game is the only hobby I spend any money on so when it does come time to upgrade, I just build a new box with the best thats available. I don't say this to brag, just to let you know how little an impact upgrades have on me.

I'm playing "Devils Advocate" here. Looking at this from a business side.... which to those at HTC it is..... doing things to alienate your player base isn't the way to make money. At this point in time the majority of players play this game to win the map. Anything that slows that down is going to alienate those players. 8-10 years ago the majority of players were into the "history" and sim qualities of the game. Additions like these would have been right up their ally. Not today. Today the players are wrapped up in fast action, and pretty graphics. Realism takes a back seat to what the majority of players seem to be looking for. If HTC wants to keep the game growing, eye candy a quick action is whats going to do it. At least until the history buffs start making a come back.

[Wildcatdad]

I need to apologize, I believe I misread your replies. After rereading the previous replies, I realize what you were trying to say, and I was a bit of an idiot in my replies. On another note, I don't understand how this would make it harder to win or impact the game negatively. 

[Wiley]

Nope, but of the hundreds I see all day saturday I almost never see anyone say they wish Aces High had a more detailed damage model either.

Basing wishes on posts on the message boards is foolish as it represents a very small percentage of the players. Most of the players playing the game couldn't care less about the BBS because they can't win the game any faster posting on it. Adding more damage detail that effect the flight model would also not interest them as they can't win the game any faster with it.

Forum posts are nothing to do with it.  People are clamoring for more better graphics.  More better DM goes hand in hand with it.

As it is now people ask for the silliest things because they would think its "cool". Most would have either no effect on the game, or a negative effect to the game. While having the game as "realistic" as it can be would be interesting for a certain point of view, I really doubt it would be good for business. Most people come into this game to "win" and haven't a clue how to fly and fight and don't care, they can still get to the "win" they are looking for. Adding what to them is going to be random damage effects will slow their trip to the "win" and so.... for them.... why bother to play?

Too many people are leaving the game as it is, lets add something to make 20-40 people happy and frustrate the rest. Sounds like an idea business plan to me.   

Other than your say-so, I have never seen anything to indicate anyone would be frustrated by more detail in the DM.  Like I say, show me one game, any genre where the players have stopped playing it because the damage was too detailed.

Wiley.

[Tinkles]

Well I'm glad you spoke up we can all rest easy knowing that you approve so it MUST be the way to go.

I'm not in the least bit frustrated by any upgrade/updates. I have a sick computer that is no where near its limit. This game is the only hobby I spend any money on so when it does come time to upgrade, I just build a new box with the best thats available. I don't say this to brag, just to let you know how little an impact upgrades have on me.

I'm playing "Devils Advocate" here. Looking at this from a business side.... which to those at HTC it is..... doing things to alienate your player base isn't the way to make money. At this point in time the majority of players play this game to win the map. Anything that slows that down is going to alienate those players. 8-10 years ago the majority of players were into the "history" and sim qualities of the game. Additions like these would have been right up their ally. Not today. Today the players are wrapped up in fast action, and pretty graphics. Realism takes a back seat to what the majority of players seem to be looking for. If HTC wants to keep the game growing, eye candy a quick action is whats going to do it. At least until the history buffs start making a come back.

So you would rather have your plane be lifted by flaps that are no longer there? Or things that would normally be damaged be sheered off instead?

I don't think anyone would be upset if we had graduated damage or any improvements in the DM.  It's no different than the more challenging flight model between AH and WT.  If HTC really thought it was an issue, or didn't know where anyone stood on it. They would probably have a vote on it.

#1 if you want it
#2 if you don't
#3 if you don't care.

I don't want a DM that is stupid-elaborate.. like if you are pilot wounded your controls are dulled by 25% or more, if you black out and come back then it takes a few seconds for you to recover before you can manuver again.  Although.. that does sound appealing to me. ... But anyways, I think that the 'all or nothing' damage model we have concerning things like flaps, ailerons, rudder etc, could be changed.  And, if HTC was concerned on the issue, then they would have a vote on it.

Meaning no D.A.'s are needed 

[The Fugitive]

I need to apologize, I believe I misread your replies. After rereading the previous replies, I realize what you were trying to say, and I was a bit of an idiot in my replies. On another note, I don't understand how this would make it harder to win or impact the game negatively. 

Look at the players we have playing now, landing gear is too much trouble to land, heck I'd bet most don't even bother to RTB. Creating a more accurate damage model would increase the frustration of players who are just trying to get the job done as quick as possible.

Forum posts are nothing to do with it.  People are clamoring for more better graphics.  More better DM goes hand in hand with it.

The forum is the only place I see anything about a damage model change. A damage model and graphics have little to do with each other. People would enjoy more eye candy, but would they enjoy it as much if the planes were that much more difficult to fly? How many players do you think take the time to limp home in a plane with half a wing? Very few I'd say...though I do, even killed 999000 in a goon with my pony while I had only half a wing 

At least now when I lose a control surface now I see it gone, how would you explain to a rookie/gamer that the last hit he took cut the cable to that aileron so thats why his roll rate now sucks.

Other than your say-so, I have never seen anything to indicate anyone would be frustrated by more detail in the DM.  Like I say, show me one game, any genre where the players have stopped playing it because the damage was too detailed.

Wiley.

...and other than you say so and a few other here on the board I have never seen anything to indicate anyone would be frustrated by lack of detail in the DM. I don't play other games so I can give you an "instance" and wh would that matter, we are talking about THIS game.

So you would rather have your plane be lifted by flaps that are no longer there? Or things that would normally be damaged be sheered off instead?

I don't think anyone would be upset if we had graduated damage or any improvements in the DM.  It's no different than the more challenging flight model between AH and WT.  If HTC really thought it was an issue, or didn't know where anyone stood on it. They would probably have a vote on it.

#1 if you want it
#2 if you don't
#3 if you don't care.

I don't want a DM that is stupid-elaborate.. like if you are pilot wounded your controls are dulled by 25% or more, if you black out and come back then it takes a few seconds for you to recover before you can manuver again.  Although.. that does sound appealing to me. ... But anyways, I think that the 'all or nothing' damage model we have concerning things like flaps, ailerons, rudder etc, could be changed.  And, if HTC was concerned on the issue, then they would have a vote on it.

Meaning no D.A.'s are needed 

If I have an aileron shot off I can see that and know that my plane is going to react accordingly. If a cable is shot out no its not so easy..... or are you tied to the text "damage list" that you can gamily bring up?

Vote on it? LOL!!!! This is HTC's playground not a democracy. We pay for admission that is all, we really don't have a say as to what goes in or not. What "you" want may not be what the majority wants and that is where HTC has to make their decisions. I think there are very few who play that would look forward to a more detailed damage model as it would get in the way of the "fun" they have playing the game. As they are the majority, I think that is how things will go.

As an example, I and others hate divebombing Lancs. To me a heavy bomber was built and designed to get to an operating alt well above 10k and level bomb targets using the site provided. However the majority of players get their giggles divebombing towns and camped spawns. While I, and a number of other players would "wish" something was done to stop this. However, I KNOW this is a game and it is in the best interest of HTC to keep as many people happy as they can and so retain as many subscriptions as possible. I think the change in damage model being discussed here falls into the same category.