PDA

View Full Version : The way that ships sink



Huxley_S
05-26-2004, 03:02 PM
Are there going to be any improvements to the way that ships (and planes) sink in PF? i.e. people jumping off into rafts and lifeboats, keels and prows raised in the air before sinking below the waves... that kind of thing?

http://www.baseclass.modulweb.dk/69giap/fileadmin/Image_Archive/badges/69giap_badge_huxli.jpg (http://www.baseclass.modulweb.dk/69giap)

FB Music and Campaigns @
http://www.onemorewild.org/huxley

Huxley_S
05-26-2004, 03:02 PM
Are there going to be any improvements to the way that ships (and planes) sink in PF? i.e. people jumping off into rafts and lifeboats, keels and prows raised in the air before sinking below the waves... that kind of thing?

http://www.baseclass.modulweb.dk/69giap/fileadmin/Image_Archive/badges/69giap_badge_huxli.jpg (http://www.baseclass.modulweb.dk/69giap)

FB Music and Campaigns @
http://www.onemorewild.org/huxley

Riceball88
05-26-2004, 03:12 PM
I doubt that you'll see people jumping off, but it might sink more realistically http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Kitakami
05-26-2004, 03:43 PM
They should also sink a lot more slowly than they seem to do in FB.

It should normally take several hours for capital ships to sink in game time, unless we are talking about a magazine/fuel explosion or multiple torpedo hits in short timespan, in which case it could be over in minutes.

Smaller ships *might* go down quicker. Especially Japanese DDs, while very powerful ships otherwise, had a bad habit of sinking with all hands.

[This message was edited by Kitakami on Wed May 26 2004 at 03:24 PM.]

actionhank1786
05-26-2004, 05:03 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Kitakami:
They should also sink a _lot_ more slowly than they seem to do in FB.

It should normally take several hours for capital ships to sink in game time, unless we are talking about a magazine/fuel explosion or multiple torpedo hits in short timespan, in which case it could be over in minutes.

Smaller ships *might* go down quicker. Especially Japanese DDs, while very powerful ships otherwise, had a bad habit of sinking with all hands.

[This message was edited by Kitakami on Wed May 26 2004 at 03:24 PM.]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Im pretty sure this was done, so that people would know right away if a ship sinks or not, plus it takes it out of the picture saving frame rates, and who wants to loiter for hours watching a ship slowly lower into the water?
~Aaron

Tater-SW-
05-26-2004, 05:36 PM
Aaron, a few points:

1. People shouldn;t know right away if a ship is sunk. Many ships were claimed sunk that weren't (the IJN claimed many more CVs sunk than they actually did---in one battle they claimed 11 sunk and they hit none (it's telling that we actually had more than 11 in the one area)).

2. Regarding FR, if your FR is helped by having the ship gone, you must've been in big trouble attacking it while it was there, and had AI shooting at you. The FR can;t be that much of an issue compared to the steaming ship with AAA (and smoke from the stack(s)).

3. Loiter for hours? Yeah, you're right, hours is probably too long, but it could be more than the 1-2 minutes it takes now. Make it 15+ minutes. Frankly you should get creidt for a sinking that didn't happen under you eyes, or another friendly. That goes for plane kills, too, I'd like to see credit only if they blow up or bail within a couple kilometers of a friendly unit.

tater

heywooood
05-26-2004, 05:50 PM
these appear to be the two sides of the same coin we keep seeing over and over.

Aaron wants to see the results of his attacks instantly (shoot-hit-kill) like in the video game genre. Alot more people do than would ever admit it because it makes the game more playable.

tater says - gimme more realistic action, things that are NOT guaranteed - things that are presumed instead of seen for oneself all the time. (As in the real fog of war type stuff.) I guess I should say that I fall into this latter catagory just sos you know.

This is the line that 1c and Luthier must walk with almost every detail, be it equipment (ships planes etc) or maps/environmets or action reaction physics related.

Good thing we are all so easy going about what we want. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/35.gif

Tater-SW-
05-26-2004, 06:16 PM
Spot on heywood.

Here's a solution that we can all agree on.

Make it a property to set in the FMB, or in your config file. Done. Everyone gets what they want. Default settings can be instant action for the twitch crowd.

tater

Zeus-cat
05-26-2004, 06:18 PM
I would like to see a better allocation of points for sinking a ship. Hitting a ship with a torpedo or bomb gets you nothing, unless you happen to be the one that sinks the ship. Example, 10 people drop a torpedo and all 10 get hits on the Tirpitz. The first 9 get nothing in the way of points, but the final person gets 700 points for sinking the ship. Not very fair IMO.

Zeus-cat

Tater-SW-
05-26-2004, 06:29 PM
I don't think single crews ever got credit for a sinking unless it was obvious that they were the only sucessful attack.

If more than one plane bombs a ship and it sinks, they should all get partial credit. Strafing would depend on the damage model. I guess you'd have to give partial credit for any strafing with a halfway decent Dm for ships (even DDs could get hurt from strafing).

tater

Ankanor
05-27-2004, 05:00 AM
Well, I am sure that ships should sink much slower. A real life example: the heavy cruisers Cornwall and Dorsetshire were attacked by 52 Vals off Ceylon. With a remarkable accuracy, 49 hits were confirmed. One Val was shot down in the attack. Both ships went under the waves in short 17 minutes. So, lets see, 49 250kg armor-pircing bombs and the ships are sunk after 17 minutes http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/blink.gif Pardon me, but the 1 minute sinking we have right now is not realistic. If you want instant success, go play Racific warriors! http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/mockface.gif

O, how I want to hold you,
To feel your breath
And hear your laughter in my ears.
To look into your eyes
And see myself in there.
Caress you with my lips.
To hold your hands in mine
And find the hidden smile in your dimple
That makes you irresistible
And stops the breathing in my chest.
To be with you when you are weeping,
To wipe away the tears and take away the sorrow.
To watch you while you are sleeping
Like there is no tomorrow.

And with a tender kiss to wake you up.

Essen,23.02.2004 20:53

Huxley_S
05-27-2004, 08:22 AM
Well perhaps in a similar way to when you see the guys bailing out of a bomber you know it's going down, the appearance of life rafts around a smoking ship would indicate that it was on it's way to the bottom.

http://www.baseclass.modulweb.dk/69giap/fileadmin/Image_Archive/badges/69giap_badge_huxli.jpg (http://www.baseclass.modulweb.dk/69giap)

FB Music and Campaigns @
http://www.onemorewild.org/huxley

Huxley_S
05-27-2004, 08:27 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>I would like to see a better allocation of points for sinking a ship.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Definitely... i.e. everyone who scored a hit should get the same points. This will encourage cooperative rather than competitive play. The points should also reflect the difficulty of destroying the target, i.e. lots of points for capital ships.

http://www.baseclass.modulweb.dk/69giap/fileadmin/Image_Archive/badges/69giap_badge_huxli.jpg (http://www.baseclass.modulweb.dk/69giap)

FB Music and Campaigns @
http://www.onemorewild.org/huxley

Tater-SW-
05-27-2004, 08:51 AM
Abandon ship is a great idea, but more often than not it shouldn't happen so fast.

Look at ships that actually recieved major damage, they took a long time to sink. Yorktown would've made it if the sub hadn't finished her. Bunker Hill and the Ben Franklin were bonfires and made it. The list is long.

Damage that triggers fires, or some other cutoff could be considered "major damage" and get points for the attacking aircraft, even without a sinking. That could be used to alter future missions (major damage = X months in drydock or something).

I'd rather fly away from a harbor full of burning ships than look back and see nothing since they all sank in a few seconds.

tater

McCallaway
05-27-2004, 09:24 AM
I think Luthier said the damages on ships were re-worked. Let's hope they manage to give us something realistic AND fun.

Actually (I'm dreaming here) what would be very cool would be to have the details of all the damages taken by all planes/ship after a mission. Something like :

Cruiser : 2 torps, 3 bombs, fire in the machines rooms put out after a two hours fight.

DD : 1 torp, ignited ammunition, blowed an sunk.

Me : 12 .50 bullets in the right wing.


I'm still waiting for the possibility to have a detailled look at my plane after the mission, something like the arming screen but with the visual damages on the model.

abduffs
05-27-2004, 01:08 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Tater-SW-:
Spot on heywood.

Here's a solution that we can all agree on.

Make it a property to set in the FMB, or in your config file. Done. Everyone gets what they want. Default settings can be instant action for the twitch crowd.

tater<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Well Done Tater!, that's the one for me abduffs

Charlie901
05-28-2004, 12:30 AM
How about meeting in the middle and having ships sink 2x slower than in IL2.

Thus letting you know that a ship is done for without loitering around for an hour or so.

Tater-SW-
05-28-2004, 07:31 AM
Charlie,

the solution IMHO is the same as many issues in this game---give us control of it in the FMB.

There are tons of things that are turned on or off, or have some set time value, even if it's a pain to add it to the FMB's GUI, then give us a config file we can make sense of. Give mission builders control!

tater

Slater_51st
05-29-2004, 04:40 AM
S! I know this may be a pipe dream, and it maybe not possible, but what the hey.

Why not give ships more "dynamic" damage models. Ok, what do I mean? Why not be able to destroy gun turrets, knock out AA guns, destroy fire control stations(reduce accuracy of guns), destroy radar turrets, disable the rudder(see Bismark, 1 "lucky" torpedo strike crippling her), forcing her to reduce speed by damage to engine area etc. I know it'd be impossible to make ship damage models as complex as the a/c damage models, but still, it'd be very cool.

These, in my opinion, would make naval battles far more realistic. Of course, warships(Cruisers, battleships, aircraft carriers) would be much tougher targets then transports, frieghters, surfaced submarines and the like. Having ships just sink after taking a certain number of hits to an area is, in my opinion, rather sad(granted, it may be the best possible right now). Having wounded ships spew oil, list, slow down, explode magnificently when magazines go up, or having them loose steering and go aimlessly in circles would greatly increase the whole immersion factor. And, btw, some ships sunk faster then others. HMS Barham, hit by 3 torpedoes rolled over and blew up inside of 5 minutes. HMS Royal Oak hit by 2 torpedoes sunk in 15. Granted these are exceptions(both by submarines as well, but similar results by aircraft seem feasible to me at least), but it could happen http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

If it was online, a certain number of points could be added to the score everyone on the team, rather then just to one pilot. After all, getting rid of the ship isn't just the torpedo or dive bomber pilot's responsibility, he's gotta have fighters to help etc etc.

Ok, so, I just finished watching Midway, which is somewhat responsible for this post http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-wink.gif Anyways, just what I think would be cool
Ok, I'm done ranting now http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

S! Slater

_51st_Slater at Hyperlobby
Oblt_A_Wolf at il2skins.com

Tater-SW-
05-29-2004, 08:31 AM
I uderstand why things like tanks have simple damage models, there are tons of tanks sometimes compared to aircraft.

Ships are totally different, most scenarios in game, there will be many more aircraft than ships. If ships had a DM that was 1/10 as complicated as a bomber in game it would do nothing to FR and improve the ship DM by orders of magnitude.

tater

heywooood
05-29-2004, 08:56 AM
I believe I saw a post from Luthier regarding ships' DM and that they would be enhanced greatly over what they are in FB. Things like gun positions and stacks and whatnot all being made vulnerable to attack, however the rudder displacement would likely not be modeled in as that was too much code to adjust.

Tater-SW-
05-29-2004, 07:05 PM
Il-2/FB has progressive fires already, the ships need FIRE. MOre than any other addition, probably.

tater

BPLIzard
05-30-2004, 12:53 AM
I like the way the ship sinks in CFS2. First it'll emit a thick black smoke. Damage it further and there will be an oil slick before it finally sinks

http://img48.photobucket.com/albums/v147/BPLizard/Lizard/BlitzPig.jpg (http://www.blitzpigs.com)

SPLASH_1
05-30-2004, 06:46 AM
/infopop/emoticons\icon_redface.gif
http://history.acusd.edu/cdr2/WW2Pics/32042.GIF


http://www.skyknights.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/jolly.jpg

[This message was edited by SPLASH_1 on Sun May 30 2004 at 06:05 AM.]

[This message was edited by SPLASH_1 on Sun May 30 2004 at 06:29 AM.]

[This message was edited by SPLASH_1 on Sun May 30 2004 at 06:31 AM.]

[This message was edited by SPLASH_1 on Sun May 30 2004 at 06:41 AM.]

Mohican2000
05-30-2004, 07:32 AM
What about this? HMS Barham


http://www.eastlineweb.com/~steve23/image/barh2nd.jpg

SPLASH_1
05-30-2004, 07:35 AM
http://www.eastlineweb.com/~steve23/image/barh4th.jpg

ouch this would be good dont get too close though

http://www.skyknights.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/jolly.jpg