Damage modelling Vs Weapons strength

[Bullethead]

I think multi damage layers and penetration damage is starting to come into FPS shooters now? - according to my kids. RoF might have this dunno.

AFAIK, the 1st flightsim to have bullets actually penetrate stuff was the short-lived MMO Warbirds 2, made by other folks after HiTech and Pyro went off to start Aces High. They made this a big selling point, for all the good it did them. I myself develop naval sims and we have shells that can penetrate ships and bounce around inside before exploding, or even go clear through. So it can be done. It's just not common yet.

 

[Rick Rawlings]

Damn you Brits\Europeans with you early morning parties! Late again as usual!

Siggi: Planes (player, at least) do break up. I have died a few times do to structual damage in a Nieuport. I haven't tried anything stronger than an N11 or N17, but those, at least, will definitely crash due to structual damage from pulling out of a dive, just as you described. Personally, I have never seen an enemy craft come apart, but I don't really aim for anything other than the pilot/engine.

Winder: having said that, with a mid 30% hit percentage, it still seems a bit tough to drop people. I won't get a chance to do the test, but based on what Siggi said, Strong seems a good way to go, maybe with a small random chance to simulate a lucky burst that very rarely drops a plane on one burst. Reading reports form back in the Red Baron days, there was the story of how Voss observed Richtofen do several passes on a two seater without bringing it down and then there is the story where Fonk shot down three planes in ten seconds or so. That would not be possible under the current conditions. While I am no Fonk, I just last evening had an Albatross hanging in mid-air at the top of his climb and was pummeling him with my Lewis gun in the cockpit/engine region. He did not go down, despite the fact that I had hit the same plane several other times. He had still not gone down several minutes later when I was killed by his wingman deciding to try to land on my upper wing. :faint:

I totally agree that we are better pilots at this point than the real aces were, but I think the damage should still be upped a tad. If you could solve this and then have the enemy break off the fight a little more easily (they seemed to do this better before 1.2), I would say you had pretty well nailed it. Then just introduce bombers, zeppelins, full kills for all balloons, easy squadron transfers, leave of absence, ace challenges, animated aerodromes that play out in first person... oh, sorry, just dreaming for P5

But always keep formost in your mind that you guys have done a fantastic job with immersion and believability. The other day my flight of N17's were tangling with a flight of 5 Albatrosses. An unfair number (4) decided to take on me, while my two wingmen were off on the side having a party with the other. After a few minutes of getting kicked around I wondered when help would arrive. Then I remembered the "h" key and, almost as if by magic, my wingmen remembered that there was originally 3 in the flight. 30 seconds later the cavalry arrived and evened up the odds. Priceless! So good show and take a much needed break!

RR

 

[Winder]

AFAIK, the 1st flightsim to have bullets actually penetrate stuff was the short-lived MMO Warbirds 2, made by other folks after HiTech and Pyro went off to start Aces High. They made this a big selling point, for all the good it did them. I myself develop naval sims and we have shells that can penetrate ships and bounce around inside before exploding, or even go clear through. So it can be done. It's just not common yet.

Interesting I was not aware of that sim.

Sure I know it can be done - we discussed modifying OFF for this. Instead I rearranged the DM boxes as a reasonable work around on time spent.


Cheers

WM


PS what sim are you working on?

 

[Winder]

Damn you Brits\Europeans with you early morning parties! Late again as usual!

Siggi: Planes (player, at least) do break up. I have died a few times do to structual damage in a Nieuport. I haven't tried anything stronger than an N11 or N17, but those, at least, will definitely crash due to structual damage from pulling out of a dive, just as you described. Personally, I have never seen an enemy craft come apart, but I don't really aim for anything other than the pilot/engine.

Winder: having said that, with a mid 30% hit percentage, it still seems a bit tough to drop people. I won't get a chance to do the test, but based on what Siggi said, Strong seems a good way to go, maybe with a small random chance to simulate a lucky burst that very rarely drops a plane on one burst. Reading reports form back in the Red Baron days, there was the story of how Voss observed Richtofen do several passes on a two seater without bringing it down and then there is the story where Fonk shot down three planes in ten seconds or so. That would not be possible under the current conditions. While I am no Fonk, I just last evening had an Albatross hanging in mid-air at the top of his climb and was pummeling him with my Lewis gun in the cockpit/engine region. He did not go down, despite the fact that I had hit the same plane several other times. He had still not gone down several minutes later when I was killed by his wingman deciding to try to land on my upper wing. :faint:

I totally agree that we are better pilots at this point than the real aces were, but I think the damage should still be upped a tad. If you could solve this and then have the enemy break off the fight a little more easily (they seemed to do this better before 1.2), I would say you had pretty well nailed it. Then just introduce bombers, zeppelins, full kills for all balloons, easy squadron transfers, leave of absence, ace challenges, animated aerodromes that play out in first person... oh, sorry, just dreaming for P5

But always keep formost in your mind that you guys have done a fantastic job with immersion and believability. The other day my flight of N17's were tangling with a flight of 5 Albatrosses. An unfair number (4) decided to take on me, while my two wingmen were off on the side having a party with the other. After a few minutes of getting kicked around I wondered when help would arrive. Then I remembered the "h" key and, almost as if by magic, my wingmen remembered that there was originally 3 in the flight. 30 seconds later the cavalry arrived and evened up the odds. Priceless! So good show and take a much needed break!

RR

Thanks Rick have no fear- I am not dropping anyone.
I will factor any DM mods with the Poll results in mind thats why I put these things up its a clearer way than debating for threads on end and getting no where.

I too want N11 wings to shed off etc but to make DM scalable is not an easy quick fix solution - we will see.

I am sure I can come up with something as I have a few ideas but lets let the Poll run some time - so please do the test!

WM

 

[Siggi]

Well it serves to prove my point that the DM principles works and that's all.
Yes I chose a slow target as its easiest to hit and time is precious.

But really I just dont understand your 180 degree turn on this - you ask about damage scaling in another thread - I respond with a poll - you tell me I am not asking the correct poll - this is about DM?? and now you say all you want is more visible bits falling off?

You have wasted my time. I thought you were being serious lol.

WM

I don't remember mentioning "damage scaling". That appears to be a term you applied in order to interpret what you think I meant.

GIVEN the current level of bullet damage, under "Normal" in the workshop, and "Normal" grouping, I would expect to see wings come off etc to the same general degree as engine fires starting.

I wasn't expressing an opinion that planes should die more easily, just asking for the way they die to show a more realistic variety.

You have tied the two issues together, I saw them as entirely seperate.

Eg, aircraft die just fine, but the WAY they die leaves a bit to be desired.

So, I put 100 rounds into that plane, the pilot dies, plane goes down in a long glide and crashes miles away. Fine.

Put 100 rounds into another plane, it gets away. Fine.

Put 100 rounds into another plane, engine sets alight, long glide, crashes. Fine.

Put 100 rounds into another plane, pilot dies, planes cavorts into the ground out of control. Fine.

Put 100 rounds into another plane, engine sets alight, plane cavorts into the ground out of control. Fine.

Put 100 rounds into another plane, plane spins, hits ground. Fine.

Pilot injured, crashes, force-lands, fine.

But so far not a single plane losing a wing. Or wings. Or tail. Odd. Not fine. You say it happens, so do others, of course I believe it. But clearly not enough.

A player is also unable to damage his own plane, even with the best possible attempt to do it deliberately. You say it used to be possible in P1, but you got rid of it because people complained?! Did you not think to tell them to go **** themselves and play Crimson bloody Skies? Because I would have! "Here you go chaps, lots of paddle-bashing Rambo arcade fliers out there, here's a bit on nth-degree reality for a change!"

Yep, I'd buy that for £53. Oh, I did! Er...but you nerfed it for the ones who complained it was TOO realistic? Argh...another group of devs fell for it! The console-whoring paddle-bashers got their poison in yet again! "Mwaa...it's too real! Give us another arcade rendition, the twenty we already got ain't enough! Feed US!!! More!"

My belief is absolutely BEGGARED that you actually had wing-shedding Nupes and Dr1s in P1 and took them out because people complained! Put 'em back in and I'll give you another £53!

Ahem.

Fact of the matter is the sim's so good in many other regards that it can survive that kind of mangling. But I was just tootling along on the assumption that stuff was already in and fully functioning. Didn't occur to me to think otherwise. Yes, you might imagine my shock when I took the Camel for a terminal dive a couple of hours ago and found otherwise. And there I've been, defending the sim to the hilt when people on other forums were taking the piss.

Anyway, I worked myself up into a bit of a rant there, as I am wont to do.

Please chaps, make it the best it can be...as a full real item, not as a game balanced interpretation. So long as you provide optional scalability NOBODY is a loser, but so long as you put the full-real out of reach of even optional choice...where does that leave it?

 

[Winder]

Here is your post http://www.sim-outhouse.com/sohforums/showthread.php?t=12179:

*******************************************************

I've been thinking about how I've yet to see a plane I'm attacking break up in mid-air. Then hearing about it is actually possible in the game, just very unlikely/rare. Then hearing about Fortiesboy's mods which make it more likely.

So I'm assuming if it's made more likely for the AI it'll be more likely to happen to the player. And maybe that's why the planes have been made out of concrete, as it were?

But...IF the AI's maximun range to open fire is made more realistic, and IF one then gets an AI on one's tail and takes a good burst...shouldn't one expect to die right there and then?

And in that case, if one gets a good close-range burst into an AI, shouldn't one expect to see it fold up more often than not?

Are we trading realism for personal survivability?

"Ok, I have to stick to this AI like glue, because they need at least half a mag usually before they properly go down and I can make a clean claim. Which means I may have to tolerate his wingie on my tail, giving me a good pasting too...but that's ok, my plane is just as tough as the AI's..."

Trade that for...

"Get on his tail, go for one good close burst, then get the hell out of dodge before I take one good close burst that'll fold me up like a piece of paper..."

I don't want the planes to be unrealistically frail, but neither do I want them to be unrealistically robust (as appears to be the case currently). I just want them to be as realistic as possible, and for that to cut both ways.

And for it to be (another) workshop option, so players can choose to have it as they like it.

Plane Strength:
Weak.
Normal (realistic).
Strong (as current).

What does everyone else think? Planes too strong currently? Or just right?

******************************************************

Hence this Poll - one can test lower DM factorss by simply increasing weapons effectiveness in workshops... as explained above...

And yes please give us another 50 quid and we will offer the 'sortareal' (tm) DM packs for download!

WM

 

[Rick Rawlings]

A player is also unable to damage his own plane, even with the best possible attempt to do it deliberately. You say it used to be possible in P1, but you got rid of it because people complained?! Did you not think to tell them to go **** themselves and play Crimson bloody Skies? Because I would have! "Here you go chaps, lots of paddle-bashing Rambo arcade fliers out there, here's a bit on nth-degree reality for a change!"

This part at least is not true. Nieuports, at least, will crash due to airframe damage during high-g maneuvers, whether hit by enemy fire prior or not. The flight ends almost immediately, so I have not been able to determine visually what this looks like from the outside, i.e. whether the wings are missing or not...

 

[Siggi]

Here is your post http://www.sim-outhouse.com/sohforums/showthread.php?t=12179:

*******************************************************

I've been thinking about how I've yet to see a plane I'm attacking break up in mid-air. Then hearing about it is actually possible in the game, just very unlikely/rare. Then hearing about Fortiesboy's mods which make it more likely.

So I'm assuming if it's made more likely for the AI it'll be more likely to happen to the player. And maybe that's why the planes have been made out of concrete, as it were?

But...IF the AI's maximun range to open fire is made more realistic, and IF one then gets an AI on one's tail and takes a good burst...shouldn't one expect to die right there and then?

And in that case, if one gets a good close-range burst into an AI, shouldn't one expect to see it fold up more often than not?

Are we trading realism for personal survivability?

"Ok, I have to stick to this AI like glue, because they need at least half a mag usually before they properly go down and I can make a clean claim. Which means I may have to tolerate his wingie on my tail, giving me a good pasting too...but that's ok, my plane is just as tough as the AI's..."

Trade that for...

"Get on his tail, go for one good close burst, then get the hell out of dodge before I take one good close burst that'll fold me up like a piece of paper..."

I don't want the planes to be unrealistically frail, but neither do I want them to be unrealistically robust (as appears to be the case currently). I just want them to be as realistic as possible, and for that to cut both ways.

And for it to be (another) workshop option, so players can choose to have it as they like it.

Plane Strength:
Weak.
Normal (realistic).
Strong (as current).

What does everyone else think? Planes too strong currently? Or just right?

******************************************************

Hence this Poll - one can test lower DM factorss by simply increasing weapons effectiveness in workshops... as explained above...

And yes please give us another 50 quid and we will offer the 'sortareal' (tm) DM packs for download!

WM

Hmm...you're right, I don't know how I lost track of that train of thought. Got mixed up in all the digressing I suppose. I seem to have gone from wanting the planes to break up AND die more easily to accepting some sort of compromise where they die the same as they do now BUT with more variety in the manner. Looks like I proposed that compromise to myself in some kind of self-inflicted mind-****.

My apologies.

But hey, you're right, the sales-spiel DID say "historically accurate" as opposed to "hyper realistic", and I bought the game on that basis (as did everyone else). So...full-real FM/DM pack for £xx amount of "The Queen's Stoiling" (Mike Strutter)? Yeah, could it possibly be worth your while financially...

Hey...:gossip:...you know what the RoF guys are going to be saying...:gossip:...doncha? Hmm...?

 

[Siggi]

This part at least is not true. Nieuports, at least, will crash due to airframe damage during high-g maneuvers, whether hit by enemy fire prior or not. The flight ends almost immediately, so I have not been able to determine visually what this looks like from the outside, i.e. whether the wings are missing or not...

I dived one vertical from 10,000ft, full throttle. The stick/FFB seemed to 'give' under full-forward pressure (needed, to keep the nose down), then there wasn't much with which to pull it out of the dive. I cleared the ground by about 50ft. There wasn't even any shake going on, much less creaking, grey-out or structural failure. I then engaged in combat with the six DIIs and did the lot of them. And it has a snazzy little mirror!

I can do a video if anyone likes. Maybe my install IS porked.

 

[Rick Rawlings]

I dived one vertical from 10,000ft, full throttle. The stick/FFB seemed to 'give' under full-forward pressure (needed, to keep the nose down), then there wasn't much with which to pull it out of the dive. I cleared the ground by about 50ft. There wasn't even any shake going on, much less creaking, grey-out or structural failure. I then engaged in combat with the six DIIs and did the lot of them. And it has a snazzy little mirror!

I can do a video if anyone likes. Maybe my install IS porked.

I dunno, I've been surprised by it before, particularly in a sharp turn near the ground, it killed me! As for shooting down the Albatrosses, did you switch your gun strength back, I run out of ammo by the fourth plane!

RR

 

[Siggi]

I dunno, I've been surprised by it before, particularly in a sharp turn near the ground, it killed me! As for shooting down the Albatrosses, did you switch your gun strength back, I run out of ammo by the fourth plane!

RR

No, I hadn't as it happened, they are still on Strong. Oops...!

 

[Venator]

I'll try to keep it brief.

I've pulled the wings off N11's and N17's in evasive maneuvers when I really and honestly wasn't going all that fast. In game I won't even think about diving to attack on low planes. FOR ME, the Nieuports come apart just a wee bit too easily. Others maybe not enough. Overall, I find there to be perhaps a bit too much drag in the FM... But defer to others who have really flown a biplane.

As far as gun strength goes, I voted Strong, but I would not make 'Normal" any harder. Those who like it play it there. AI take a h_LL of a lot of bullets before I see them compromised, whereas I take a few hits (AT LONG RANGE I might add!) and my plane handles like crap immediately.

Does the AI fly at an easier level of the Flight Model? I know that is the case in some sims, and would explain my observation above.

Thanks for listening! Your invitation to comment appreciated!!!

 

[womenfly2]

Guys I have put this up as an honestly as I can - many devs will not post Polls like this for very good reasons... so Siggi try not to get personal - there is no winning this nor is it a contest.

Craft do break up - aim for the wing roots...if they are not doing this in your build then hey I dunno maybe something is broken but whatever the outcome if you want to see them fall apart more often in sim then there is only one way to do it - with DM mods and hence the poll.

I see posts in this thread and evidence in vids and on my rig that prove craft break up so look at your side first?
We are as always constantly evaluating our efforts.

Or contact us in support if you think the sim is broken.
I have nothing further to add or say other than I will look back regularly to see how the votes go.

HTH

WM

..... thanks for asking us. You really do not have to, this I know well.

Sometimes WM, went you post threads like this, I think you like being punished ...

LOL!!!!
WF2

 

[griphos]

I posted this in another thread, but just day before yesterday I flew a Spad XIII too hard and died from structural failure. I didn't do an external view quickly enough, so I don't know exactly what happened, but something cracked and I lost all control authority and augured in. No EA had shot me at that point.

 

[Siggi]

I'm starting to think maybe something's porked in my install. I just had a 1 vs 6 AlbIIIs, me in a Nupe17. I collided with an Alb's tail and lost the tip of my lower right wing, such that the v-strut was just hanging in the air. "Great" I thought, "now I'll be able to break the bugger." Well, I couldn't. I chucked that plane around as hard as I could, pulled tight turns (hard with the plane as damaged as it was) and it held up. That was after a dive from about 1000ft to build up some good speed.

How can the game be running perfectly, and all the settings are correct, but one component (stress) is non-functional. Is that possible?

Can somebody else please dive a Nupe17 from a good height, vertically down at full throttle, and tell me what happens before/after they pull up as hard as they can?

 

[Winder]

..... thanks for asking us. You really do not have to, this I know well.

Sometimes WM, went you post threads like this, I think you like being punished ...

LOL!!!!
WF2

Lol yes and no - I see these things coming - starts slowly and builds I see FM/DM threads quite a few now (as expected this phase is no different to others) and the only way is to ask openly - as we can change stuff but want to do it on a majority basis.


When there were threads about poor FPS I did the same - 75% said they were happy....

Let the numbers tell it - no need for lengthy debates.

WM

 

[griphos]

Can somebody else please dive a Nupe17 from a good height, vertically down at full throttle, and tell me what happens before/after they pull up as hard as they can?

Okay, I just had to try this, since I'm one of the ones who says I've seen structural failures.

SO...QC, enlisted Sgt. Test Pilot, in a Nupe 17, and started at 10,000. Put her in a vertical dive at full power. She was the devil to pull out, and there were warnings I'd overstressed my aircraft, but nothing failed. I threw her around the sky. She was fine.

So, started again in Spad XIII, the one that I think folded on me the other night. Again, I reached ridiculous speeds (almost 250) and she held together. Still didn't roll very well :-}. So I threw here about and then crack and she started spiraling in. So I jumped outside the plane to look and couldn't see any damage. But you know what I did see? An EA, apparently one that just shot at me without me noticing. Little bugger must have followed me in the vertical dive. So, inconclusive.

Started again, this time a Nupe 11 (the one with the pitiful little excuse of a bottom wing). Reached 200. Warnings. Even slower to pull out of the dive, but once out, she was fine. Threw her around. Just fine.

Okay, so now I don't know anymore. Maybe the Spad XIII folded up on me the other night from a quick burst of enemy fire I didn't even know was around me. It couldn't have been more than a handful of bullets.

I think it's time for Sgt. Test Pilot to do some extensive flying without enemies in a number of planes and see what happens.

 

[Rick Rawlings]

I'm starting to think maybe something's porked in my install. I just had a 1 vs 6 AlbIIIs, me in a Nupe17. I collided with an Alb's tail and lost the tip of my lower right wing, such that the v-strut was just hanging in the air. "Great" I thought, "now I'll be able to break the bugger." Well, I couldn't. I chucked that plane around as hard as I could, pulled tight turns (hard with the plane as damaged as it was) and it held up. That was after a dive from about 1000ft to build up some good speed.

How can the game be running perfectly, and all the settings are correct, but one component (stress) is non-functional. Is that possible?

Can somebody else please dive a Nupe17 from a good height, vertically down at full throttle, and tell me what happens before/after they pull up as hard as they can?

It won't do it in a dive, probably because of compressability simulation left over from CFS3, you can barely pull out at all! Just to check and make sure I wasn't crazy, I pulled some hard turns near the ground. I'm sure they still need to be more fragile, but it IS possible

 

[Smokey]

I cannot break the Neup 17 even from 15000.

 

[Winder]

It won't do it in a dive, probably because of compressability simulation left over from CFS3, you can barely pull out at all! Just to check and make sure I wasn't crazy, I pulled some hard turns near the ground. I'm sure they still need to be more fragile, but it IS possible

Thanks - yes they will be more fragile in 1.3 - we are doing it now...

:amen:

WM