Jump to content

New damage model


bart
 Share

Recommended Posts

Do you think jammed canopies could be added to the damage models of the WW2 aircraft? (If they are not already planned) I know it's not extremely needed just it'd be one more little feature to add to make it that much better of a simulator. But anyways, the news of a new damage model is still very exciting.


Edited by ShadowFrost
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 228
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Do we have a timeline for the map? Some of us paid good money for Normandy.

 

Regardless of the accuracy of the flight models, when are we going to hear about the map, the missions, the 'game'?

 

Vapourware was never so better represented.

 

http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=163427

More news to the front

My Rig: AMD Ryzen 7 1800X Eight-Core  3.60 GHz / Crosshair VI Hero / Corsair H115i / 48 GB DDR4 RAM Vergance RGB Pro / GTX-1080 8 GB RAM / HD 1Tb / SSD 2Tb/2x1Tb / Warthog / 2 MDF / TFPR / Track Ir V / Logitech G633

DCS: Roadmap (unofficial): https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=116893

DCS: List of Vacant models: https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?p=4076891#post4076891

Silver_Dragon Youtube

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • ED Team
Do we have a timeline for the map? Some of us paid good money for Normandy.

 

Regardless of the accuracy of the flight models, when are we going to hear about the map, the missions, the 'game'?

 

Vapourware was never so better represented.

 

We have had a steady flow on WWII aircraft, as steady as the complexity of DCS will allow. The map is very far along, and the tech to release it isnt finalized as we can see with the Nevada version still in alpha. SO even if it was ready today, we couldnt have it in our release version. And I will be honest, as a backer of the kickstarter, I can safely say, not many of us paid much if anything for the Normandy map, but I dont want to get into that again, I know where that will go.

 

Vaporware isnt really a legitimate in this case, your concept of development time could still be skewed by the unrealistic times given by the now defunct RRG, or you are just being grouchy, either way. You underestimated the time and effort that is needed to take DCS and build a reasonable representation of 1944 out of what we have right now.

 

It's hard for me to impress upon everyone the time and effort that go into these aircraft and maps. I really wish I could do it better. Obviously for some, I am not getting that across.

64Sig.png
Forum RulesMy YouTube • My Discord - NineLine#0440• **How to Report a Bug**

1146563203_makefg(6).png.82dab0a01be3a361522f3fff75916ba4.png  80141746_makefg(1).png.6fa028f2fe35222644e87c786da1fabb.png  28661714_makefg(2).png.b3816386a8f83b0cceab6cb43ae2477e.png  389390805_makefg(3).png.bca83a238dd2aaf235ea3ce2873b55bc.png  216757889_makefg(4).png.35cb826069cdae5c1a164a94deaff377.png  1359338181_makefg(5).png.e6135dea01fa097e5d841ee5fb3c2dc5.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • ED Team
Do you think jammed canopies could be added to the damage models of the WW2 aircraft? (If they are not already planned) I know it's not extremely needed just it'd be one more little feature to add to make it that much better of a simulator. But anyways, the news of a new damage model is still very exciting.

 

Is there any good info on how often that was an issue, or which aircraft were more prone to it?

64Sig.png
Forum RulesMy YouTube • My Discord - NineLine#0440• **How to Report a Bug**

1146563203_makefg(6).png.82dab0a01be3a361522f3fff75916ba4.png  80141746_makefg(1).png.6fa028f2fe35222644e87c786da1fabb.png  28661714_makefg(2).png.b3816386a8f83b0cceab6cb43ae2477e.png  389390805_makefg(3).png.bca83a238dd2aaf235ea3ce2873b55bc.png  216757889_makefg(4).png.35cb826069cdae5c1a164a94deaff377.png  1359338181_makefg(5).png.e6135dea01fa097e5d841ee5fb3c2dc5.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is there any good info on how often that was an issue, or which aircraft were more prone to it?

 

 

It was indeed a rare occurrence for an aircraft to have a jammed canopy sustained through battle damage but it did indeed happen. From references and articles I've read it tend to be canopies you slide or roll backwards to open (not limited to those though). Take for instance Robert S Johnson flying a P-47 and got hit by several rounds that twisted the metal of his fuselage preventing him from exiting the aircraft. He was then continuously fired upon by a fw190 which gives credit to the durability of the aircraft. For the question of how often, I don't have exact numbers but it was very small amounts. Another case involves a German pilot Adolf Galland whose 109 canopy was jammed when he got jumped by a pair of spitfires. Another incident was when Alan Deere (flying a Spitfire) was shot by a 109 and his canopy jammed and he was only able to open it after landing in a field. There was another instance (from the book "A Higher Call") where a German pilot shot a Yak that caught fire and the pilot could not escape because of the jammed canopy so the German pilot put the pilot out of his misery. But unfortunately I think all data on this subject would probably be skewed lower then the amount that actually occurred because of when a pilot found out their canopy was jammed in flight it was normally when the pilot was trying to get out because their aircraft was no longer in flying condition. Anyways, it would be very cool to have but I'm no programmer so I wouldn't know if the work required would be worth the result.


Edited by ShadowFrost
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Isn't it common to open a door/canopy before you crash land so that in the event of fuselage crumpling the doors/canopies won't jam? That would make it interesting if you belly in and forget to crack the canopy and then you can't get out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Isn't it common to open a door/canopy before you crash land so that in the event of fuselage crumpling the doors/canopies won't jam? That would make it interesting if you belly in and forget to crack the canopy and then you can't get out.

 

Yes, there are normally procedures for each aircraft to open the canopy before a ditch. Even common practice for navy aircraft on all takeoffs and landings was to keep the canopy open. I was referencing the damage sustained from bullets and etc. during the flight that prevented them from bailing out because of their jammed canopies. There were the very few cases of lucky individuals whose aircraft held up well enough for them to make a survivable crash landing or either land at an airbase when such damage occurred.

 

The crumpling on the P-47 was from damage sustained by 20mm rounds from the 190.


Edited by ShadowFrost
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It was indeed a rare occurrence for an aircraft to have a jammed canopy sustained through battle damage but it did indeed happen. From references and articles I've read it tend to be canopies you slide or roll backwards to open (not limited to those though). Take for instance Robert S Johnson flying a P-47 and got hit by several rounds that twisted the metal of his fuselage preventing him from exiting the aircraft. He was then continuously fired upon by a fw190 which gives credit to the durability of the aircraft. For the question of how often, I don't have exact numbers but it was very small amounts. Another case involves a German pilot Adolf Galland whose 109 canopy was jammed when he got jumped by a pair of spitfires. Another incident was when Alan Deere (flying a Spitfire) was shot by a 109 and his canopy jammed and he was only able to open it after landing in a field. There was another instance (from the book "A Higher Call") where a German pilot shot a Yak that caught fire and the pilot could not escape because of the jammed canopy so the German pilot put the pilot out of his misery. But unfortunately I think all data on this subject would probably be skewed lower then the amount that actually occurred because of when a pilot found out their canopy was jammed in flight it was normally when the pilot was trying to get out because their aircraft was no longer in flying condition. Anyways, it would be very cool to have but I'm no programmer so I wouldn't know if the work required would be worth the result.

You know, all these examples reminded me of one shot down by 352nd pilot Sanford Moats. Who has hit both wing roots of a Fw190A which made the wings fold above the 190's cockpit, like in some carrier aircraft, and the pilot fell to his death. I hope some day DM like that will be possible :P


Edited by Solty

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]In 21st century there is only war and ponies.

 

My experience: Jane's attack squadron, IL2 for couple of years, War Thunder and DCS.

My channel:

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCyAXX9rAX_Sqdc0IKJuv6dA

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Isn't it really a non-issue though if there is no gameplay outside of the cockpit? And furthermore, you can repair the most severe damage in just a few minutes while parked anywhere near an airfield.

 

EDIT: On second thought, it may force you to land a plane that you would otherwise bail out of. It would be nice if there was some additional motivation to preserve a pilots life in-game... most just respawn.


Edited by Merlin-27

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

[Dogs of War] WWII COMBAT SERVER | P-51D - FW190-D9 - Me109-K4

Visit Our Website & Forum to Get More Info & Team Speak Access

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some of my fondest HL memories are of limping home, trailing smoke and hoping for a cleared runway, due to alert pilots on the ground

 

Those were the days!

And also, didn't matter the havoc we caused, how many planes shot down, if you didn't land properly, no points! :lol::lol:

Intel 4790k @ 4.6ghz / Asus Maximus VII Hero / 16gb Corsair Dominator Platinum / GTX780 Superclocked TI 3gb / Corsair H80i / Windows 10 X64

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's up to the mission designers and server operators to provide that motivation. With my WWII campaign, saving the aircraft is an important aspect for success.

 

Yes, definitely something to consider. DoW had a mulltiplayer map where you gave points to the opposing team if you respawn, while your campaign, I understand, has resource management consequences when respawning. The more WWII servers we have in the future using these sought of mechanisms, the better.

 

I for one love the challenge of getting a damaged aircraft home and always choose to repair instead of respawn. This new damage model will really enhance that experience. :thumbup:


Edited by Andrei Dragovic

"Lawyer by Profession, Pilot by Heart...and self-confessed Harrier tragic"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't see any difference between taking a new plane and repairing. You are on the field, so you proved you survived. As long as you are on the field, you should get no deaths if you leave your plane.

 

What if someone flies a Mustang gets hit but limps back and wants to change to a spitfire? He has to loose to do so?

 

To me, every landing on your field that you survive, should be no consequence to your score. Every landing on a field in a middle of nowhere is a death.


Edited by Solty

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]In 21st century there is only war and ponies.

 

My experience: Jane's attack squadron, IL2 for couple of years, War Thunder and DCS.

My channel:

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCyAXX9rAX_Sqdc0IKJuv6dA

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't see any difference between taking a new plane and repairing. You are on the field, so you proved you survived. As long as you are on the field, you should get no deaths if you leave your plane.

 

What if someone flies a Mustang gets hit but limps back and wants to change to a spitfire? He has to loose to do so?

 

To me, every landing on your field that you survive, should be no consequence to your score. Every landing on a field in a middle of nowhere is a death.

No that is where you load up Arma and play evade and escape back to your own lines.

Sons of Dogs, Come Eat Flesh

Clan Cameron

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For my campaign, a kill is only registered for the opposing side if the a/c is actually destroyed or lands to far away from friendly territory (25 miles from home airfield basically). Kills can also be shared with other pilots. If a pilot damages another a/c, it is logged as a "probable" until it is confirmed destroyed. So, if a pilot gets damaged and is able to land his a/c within the appropriate recovery area, he saves his a/c, the pilot that caused the damage will still get credit with a "Probable", but the a/c is still in play needing repair before it can be flown again.

 

Respawns are only allowed in the 1st 10 minutes of play to allow for disconnects, ground loops or any other initial issues with getting in the air. But after that, its 1 life only, no landing to repair/respawn/replane. Needing to save the a/c and also to keep flying encourages pilots to be more careful in their choices (usually... heheh).

 

All good stuff, but realized we are getting off target on the thread.

 

Definitely looking forward to the new damage model.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's up to the mission designers and server operators to provide that motivation. With my WWII campaign, saving the aircraft is an important aspect for success.

 

While I respect what you are trying to say...

 

Do you think most random clients care that much about "mission success"? I was speaking of an integral aspect that would regulate some of the many abuses that work against intended mission designs. Something that encourages the individual pilot while not penalizing the entire coalition. I'm also interested in making the job of the volunteer server host & mission creator less tedious. Do you kick a client that repeatedly respawns in your WWII campaign? What if he's a new player trying to learn the ropes but feels he doesn't have time to repair? The team pays for this? I would still like to see more, at least in an optional state, that controls such situations. Adjustable respawn timer?

 

This discussion probably belongs in the Multiplayer section but my point was in reference to the damage model.

 

EDIT: Saw the new posts and understand, Shahdoh. 1 life is a cool idea but the feedback I see suggests that most people wouldn't enjoy spending their time watching their teammates fly while they sit on the ground with a broken governor or bullet in their head from an AI that fired one shot from 3 miles away. (maybe there is no AI) If that is working out well, then I applaud you but it's hard to accept that as the only way to deal with respawn concerns. I'd like to have some more flexibility. From what I have seen, most people don't even want to wait for a repair.


Edited by Merlin-27
New Info

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

[Dogs of War] WWII COMBAT SERVER | P-51D - FW190-D9 - Me109-K4

Visit Our Website & Forum to Get More Info & Team Speak Access

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nods, and I am not saying the 1 life is the only way to do it. It's just 1 option I have chosen for this type of campaign. This also obviously does not work for the 24/7 server. Server side options to restrict respawn times, team switching and the like would be a great feature and help those that can not do it via lua scripting.

 

Again, still falls back on the server/mission designer in how they want to motivate the player in which options (whether provided by ED as options or lua scripting) they choose to implement, that fits what they are trying to accomplish with that mission.

 

EDIT: and no, I have no AI fighters in the mission, though the bomber defense can ruin a pilot's day

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...