PDA

View Full Version : Poll: Should PF feature damage models on ships?



Copperhead310th
04-18-2004, 02:07 PM

Copperhead310th
04-18-2004, 02:07 PM

Bobsqueek
04-18-2004, 02:13 PM
the new models (that came in FB and beyond) already have a DM

but do you mean a more detailed one?

CWoS FB forum. More Cheese, Less Whine. (http://www.acompletewasteofspace.com/forum/viewforum.php?f=25)

clint-ruin
04-18-2004, 02:21 PM
I'd look at the Tripitz model for what can be done in FB. Pretty decent so far in terms of shutting up AA positions and showing the ship aflame. What would be good is if critical hits [ie magazine going up] were added, or if there was some way to slow a ship down to make it easier to hit subsequently, etc. Don't know if the FB engine is capable of such things at the moment but I guess we'll see what ends up being in there.

http://users.bigpond.net.au/gwen/fb/leninkoba.jpg

Copperhead310th
04-18-2004, 02:33 PM
Well yeah that's what i ment a more deatailed DM for the ships. At least enough to knock out the guns.

http://imageshack.us/files/copper%20sig%20with%20rank.jpg
310th FS & 380th BG website (http://www.310thVFS.com)

faustnik
04-18-2004, 02:37 PM
Being able to take out the guns would be a great upgrade!

http://pages.sbcglobal.net/mdegnan/_images/FaustSig
www.7Jg77.com (http://www.7jg77.com)
CWoS FB forum. More Cheese, Less Whine. (http://www.acompletewasteofspace.com/forum/viewforum.php?f=25)

necrobaron
04-18-2004, 02:39 PM
Well, I've noticed that there are men manning the AA on the Lex in the lastest Dev.Update. Unless they are there purely for looks, I would think that this means you can now shoot them and disable their respective gun positions.

"Not all who wander are lost."

clint-ruin
04-18-2004, 02:54 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by faustnik:
Being able to take out the guns would be a great upgrade!
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

As I said... take a look at what can be done to the Tripitz. Go drop some ordnance on the thing and see if you can notice the small AA guns surrounding the point of impact bursting into flames and ceasing to shoot at anything. Even the Marat / Aurora etc can have their large guns knocked out.

http://users.bigpond.net.au/gwen/fb/leninkoba.jpg

faustnik
04-18-2004, 03:36 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by clint-ruin:


As I said... take a look at what can be done to the Tripitz. Go drop some ordnance on the thing and see if you can notice the small AA guns surrounding the point of impact bursting into flames and ceasing to shoot at anything. Even the Marat / Aurora etc can have their large guns knocked out.


<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I'll grab a Sturmo and check it out! http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

http://pages.sbcglobal.net/mdegnan/_images/FaustSig
www.7Jg77.com (http://www.7jg77.com)
CWoS FB forum. More Cheese, Less Whine. (http://www.acompletewasteofspace.com/forum/viewforum.php?f=25)

Fennec_P
04-18-2004, 06:32 PM
Ditto on the ability to kill gunners with machine gun fire. It would look silly to nail them in the head and nothing happens...

It is already possible in FB to disable AAA with cannons, but it requires so many hits, or such a big cannon, that its impractical. All that is needed is to reduce the durability of the gunners to a point that they can be killed by MGs.

http://members.shaw.ca/fennec/urban.jpg

Bearcat99
04-18-2004, 08:35 PM
I agree on this one... I have taken out sub AAA with rockets and they keep shooting.... we know if that were a real gun it would have been at the veryleast taken out till someone else can man the station. That would be good too.. to have the Ship DM set so that even if you pepper it good with MG fire it at least goes down for a few minutes.. like it would on a real ship..as it is now these things just keep right on firing.

<UL TYPE=SQUARE>http://www.jodavidsmeyer.com/combat/bookstore/tuskegeebondposter.jpg (http://tuskegeeairmen.org/airmen/who.html)[/list]<UL TYPE=SQUARE>vflyer@comcast.net [/list]<UL TYPE=SQUARE>99thPursuit Squadron IL2 Forgotten Battles (http://www.geocities.com/rt_bearcat)[/list]
UDQMG (http://www.uberdemon.com/index2.html) | HYPERLOBBY (http://hyperfighter.jinak.cz/) | IL2 Manager (http://www.checksix-fr.com/bibliotheque/detail_fichier.php?ID=1353) | MUDMOVERS (http://www.mudmovers.com/)

heywooood
04-18-2004, 08:52 PM
Because many of the major engagements in the Pacific were air attacks against ships and carriers it would make sense for the ships damage models to be improved or enhanced.

I like the ideas presented in this thread so far.. ships/carriers "listing" and oil slicks if possible would be great too. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Texas LongHorn
04-18-2004, 09:15 PM
Well guys, not to complain or anything, but the existing damage model on the mighty Tirpitz is virtually nonexistent. I hit the Big T with a Mistel directly abaft the main funnel and forward of turret "Caesar." The only real damage was one of the twin 105mm AA guns knocked out. In reality I suspect a single hit of a 3500kg charge Mistel would have severly damaged or outrank sunk the Tirpitz. In the first image you can see the hit on the deck right about where the seaplane catapult was located-
&lt;img src=http://img49.photobucket.com/albums/v149/msdavis/Tirpitz_Mistel_Hit.jpg&gt;
In the next image the Tirpitz is completely engulfed amid the enormous blast wave of the huge shaped charge I like to call the MiniNuke-
&lt;img src=http://img49.photobucket.com/albums/v149/msdavis/Tirpitz_Blast_Wave.jpg&gt;
In the final image the Tirpitz can be seen sailing serenely along with the only visable damage a knocked out twin 105mm AA mount! Interestingly the blast damage to the water shows the designers figured its use to ground targets and didn't plan on a goofball like me seeing what a Mistel would do to the Tirpitz &lt;ggg.&gt; LongHorn
&lt;img src=http://img49.photobucket.com/albums/v149/msdavis/Tirpitz_Minor_Damage.jpg&gt;

http://img49.photobucket.com/albums/v149/msdavis/My_Sig_Image2.jpg

Texas LongHorn
04-18-2004, 09:25 PM
Whoops, lets try that again. The jpegs images have been severely reduced in size and quality but you can get the idea without killing those among us without broadband
Here's the Tirpitz hit by the Mistel-
http://img49.photobucket.com/albums/v149/msdavis/Tirpitz_Mistel_Hit.jpg
In the next image you can just barely make out the top of the bridge and foremast amidst the huge blast wave from 3500kg of Mistel shaped charge-
http://img49.photobucket.com/albums/v149/msdavis/Tirpitz_Blast_Wave.jpg
Now that's one tough Battlewagon...
http://img49.photobucket.com/albums/v149/msdavis/Tirpitz_Minor_Damage.jpg
I suspect the damage model needs a little work &lt;ggg.&gt; All the best, LongHorn

http://img49.photobucket.com/albums/v149/msdavis/My_Sig_Image2.jpg

Fennec_P
04-18-2004, 10:20 PM
Maybe you could fill a shoebox with the remains of everyone that was above deck at the time...

http://members.shaw.ca/fennec/urban.jpg

Copperhead310th
04-18-2004, 11:16 PM
http://img49.photobucket.com/albums/v149/msdavis/Tirpitz_Minor_Damage.jpg

OOOOPS! BUG!!!!

Look at the water behind the ship. Notice anything out of place there?

http://imageshack.us/files/copper%20sig%20with%20rank.jpg
310th FS & 380th BG website (http://www.310thVFS.com)

deathhamster
04-19-2004, 09:13 AM
hi guys how abut having the optio to have the gun posts unmanned. I tried a simulated air attack pearl harbour style on kronstadt naval base in the gulf of finland map with stukas representing Vals and IL-2T torp bombers covered by zeros using the new tipitz model for the american battleships.

problem was as soon as my aircraft came within range they got taken apart by all the flak. in real life most of the gun crews were ashore or in their bunks when the japs attacked and so there was hardly any flak which was part of the reason why the japs had such light casualties. It would be cool if you could chose to have a gun post manned or unmanned
http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

one can dream though

deathhamster
04-19-2004, 09:14 AM
hi guys how abut having the optio to have the gun posts unmanned. I tried a simulated air attack pearl harbour style on kronstadt naval base in the gulf of finland map with stukas representing Vals and IL-2T torp bombers covered by zeros using the new tipitz model for the american battleships.

problem was as soon as my aircraft came within range they got taken apart by all the flak. in real life most of the gun crews were ashore or in their bunks when the japs attacked and so there was hardly any flak which was part of the reason why the japs had such light casualties. It would be cool if you could chose to have a gun post manned or unmanned
http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

one can dream though

DONB3397
04-19-2004, 09:47 AM
Good topic. In PF, with ships involved in a high percentage of missions/battles, damage modeling could be critical. There probably should be several levels for damage, for instance, before a battleship or carrier sinks.

1) AAA station damage to suppress flak.
2) Hull damage below the waterline, causing listing, etc.
3) Carrier decking damage, making enemy takeoffs/landings impossible.
4) Steering gear damage, causing course alteration.

I could add more. The possibilites are exciting. But the problems could be huge. It could be a big drain on CPU/card resources to provide multi-level damage modeling. FPS could sink faster than the ships.

http://us.f2.yahoofs.com/bc/3fe77b7e_1812a/bc/Images/Sig---1.jpg?BChYYgABajWiLZQo
There is no 'way' of winning;
There is only Winning!

xenios
04-19-2004, 01:04 PM
Luthier has already said that they are working on a way to simulate the surprise attack on Pearl Harbor, with many of the guns silent initially. So that's taken care of.

I'm glad everyone agrees how useful it would be to allow strafing AA on ships. Some of the smaller craft probably should be a little more vulnerable (hullwise) to MGs, rockets and cannons--I now they can be sunk, but sometimes they absorb too much damage first. I'm thinking of the newest sub, which can survive 10 HVAR hits. No way in real life.

Another feature I would like to see is prop, rudder and engine damage for ships from torpedo hits. A lot of ships were immoblized or left puttering in circles from torpedoes.

It would also be nice if you could earn partial points for nonfatal hits on big ships. If your bomb took out a battleship turret, maybe you could points for knocking 3 artillery pieces.

ulfr1066
04-19-2004, 01:11 PM
There are definately some big issues with the models of ships across the board that will need to be addressed in the game. While supressing AA stations is great, I think the overall damage model of the ships has to be fairly reworked for a ship focused sim. If you watch the .trk from the developers showing the Marat go down, you notice that the capital ships have a series of the standard fire plume from a burning aircraft, instead of a massive conflaguration. Torpedos in FB also have a dubious lack of punch. I have hit several subs with a torp and yet to have one sink. Even the anemic torpedoes carried by aircraft would have a high chance of ripping the small baltic subs to shreds. Further, ships now react to damage in a very limited way, ploughing on while aflame untill they halt and sink. Also the ships give very little effort in evading enemy action before the attack. While tanks can be seen changing formation as you dive upon them, ships just keep riding their preordained rail.

Large fire plumes and oil slicks should be what the developers concentrate on first, along with ship behavior. Given these items have long been present in naval sims, and even to some degree CFS2 and one would hope they wouldnt stress the frame rates too much. I'd rather turn the graphics down, than be dive bombing Jimmy Doolittle's target drones. Further as toward increasing the damage models in regards to AA onboard ships, given Luthier's prior sarcastic remarks toward adding animations to crewmembers, I am unsure how much past that already in game we will see. Global damage to the ship is one thing, but having swarms of tiny little damagable entities onboard probably would be too much for all but the sturdiest of rigs. (Though I do argue that truck convoys at least have drivers that footbail, so why not see a bunch of airdales running like mad?).

[This message was edited by ulfr1066 on Mon April 19 2004 at 12:34 PM.]

owlwatcher
04-19-2004, 03:53 PM
The damage to the ship itself could ride out in PF the way it is. I know it is poor now, but I think it is abit to much for this game to upgrade to better damage features.
I would like to see manned gun stations that can be disabled by machine gun fire by means of killing the gun crews. Say 4 men to a gun and each man worth 25% of effective fire.
What is given must be taken away.
The ships need some kinda under attack movement control to counter the plane attacks.
The carrier themselves would almost need a game to themselves with all they have to be able to do.