PDA

View Full Version : Some Damage models related issues...



Luftcaca
06-01-2004, 02:56 PM
ok ive played much since AEP and the last patch came out here are a few things Ive noticed about damage modeling so far:

- of all the "common" planes in the game, the 109's are by far the most vulnerable, and Im not talking about performances, only the amount of damage they can take. I know the 109 never was known as a tough plane, but was it REALLY that weak? or maybe its ok in the game and the other planes can just take too much? right now only one 20mm shot and you have half-a-plane going down on fire.

- DB60x DM vs M-105 DM

these were two liquid cooled V12 engines
the Daimler-Benz is VERY easy to damage, many oil leaks, catches on fire easily...yanno. and when it has an oil leaking, a few minutes only and it fails. on the other hand, the M-105 almost never leaks oil, it can sustain more damage, and in the rare case it leaks oil, it can go on for many minutes b4 the first signs of engine failure. is this accurate?

*Sometimes when I fly a Yak for instance, ONE hit of a turret and my engine loose like 75% of its power, no oil leaking, no apparant damage on the plane (thats a detail)For some reason, every time I shoot down an AI Yak, it never does that. ???

- the Lagge3 after the new patch

I think the DM was corrected (less resistant) but still something bothers me. lets establish a comparison between the 190 and the Lagg3. Both were tough planes that can take much damage b4 going down. The thing is, the 190 can resist like...lets say 3 bursts of ennemy fire b4 going down, but EVIDENT signs of damage will appear after the 1ST burst, like a few holes in a wing or an oil leak....something like that. For the Lagg3, it will also go down after 3 bursts, but there will be no signs of damage after the first burst and almost nothing also after the second burst. After the third burst though it will prolly go down in flammes with one wing torn appart or something like this. Why is that? I think the lagg should show more signs of damage evidence after it gets hit. Btw last night I emptied ALL MY IAR80 MG's ammo on a Lagg3, most of the bullets HIT the plane from LESS thatn 200m. Almost no damage, only 2 or 3 minor holes in the tail section. Cmon...

P-39 and P-63

those birds are TOUGH
Very hard to chop a wing or chop em in half. but heh, whats the big fuzz if only by looking at em they will catch on fire???
Right now its possible to take down 12 Airacobras with a single IAR80 ans still have ammo left! (I did it) but a LAgg3 can absord ALL THE BULLETS from the same plane without showing damage?? Odd...

What do you gents think about that?
Maybe you also have other examples of weird damage modelling?

Go on!

ps: Love the new patch, the ennemy AI is greatly improved! AI Ennemy fighters = dangerous now! http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

http://www.ifrance.com/boussourir/luftcaca.jpg

Formerly ''known'' as Gunther Aeroburst

Luftcaca
06-01-2004, 02:56 PM
ok ive played much since AEP and the last patch came out here are a few things Ive noticed about damage modeling so far:

- of all the "common" planes in the game, the 109's are by far the most vulnerable, and Im not talking about performances, only the amount of damage they can take. I know the 109 never was known as a tough plane, but was it REALLY that weak? or maybe its ok in the game and the other planes can just take too much? right now only one 20mm shot and you have half-a-plane going down on fire.

- DB60x DM vs M-105 DM

these were two liquid cooled V12 engines
the Daimler-Benz is VERY easy to damage, many oil leaks, catches on fire easily...yanno. and when it has an oil leaking, a few minutes only and it fails. on the other hand, the M-105 almost never leaks oil, it can sustain more damage, and in the rare case it leaks oil, it can go on for many minutes b4 the first signs of engine failure. is this accurate?

*Sometimes when I fly a Yak for instance, ONE hit of a turret and my engine loose like 75% of its power, no oil leaking, no apparant damage on the plane (thats a detail)For some reason, every time I shoot down an AI Yak, it never does that. ???

- the Lagge3 after the new patch

I think the DM was corrected (less resistant) but still something bothers me. lets establish a comparison between the 190 and the Lagg3. Both were tough planes that can take much damage b4 going down. The thing is, the 190 can resist like...lets say 3 bursts of ennemy fire b4 going down, but EVIDENT signs of damage will appear after the 1ST burst, like a few holes in a wing or an oil leak....something like that. For the Lagg3, it will also go down after 3 bursts, but there will be no signs of damage after the first burst and almost nothing also after the second burst. After the third burst though it will prolly go down in flammes with one wing torn appart or something like this. Why is that? I think the lagg should show more signs of damage evidence after it gets hit. Btw last night I emptied ALL MY IAR80 MG's ammo on a Lagg3, most of the bullets HIT the plane from LESS thatn 200m. Almost no damage, only 2 or 3 minor holes in the tail section. Cmon...

P-39 and P-63

those birds are TOUGH
Very hard to chop a wing or chop em in half. but heh, whats the big fuzz if only by looking at em they will catch on fire???
Right now its possible to take down 12 Airacobras with a single IAR80 ans still have ammo left! (I did it) but a LAgg3 can absord ALL THE BULLETS from the same plane without showing damage?? Odd...

What do you gents think about that?
Maybe you also have other examples of weird damage modelling?

Go on!

ps: Love the new patch, the ennemy AI is greatly improved! AI Ennemy fighters = dangerous now! http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

http://www.ifrance.com/boussourir/luftcaca.jpg

Formerly ''known'' as Gunther Aeroburst

Brain32
06-02-2004, 11:58 AM
That's not all, there are more planes with incorrect DM. Yesterday I shot P63 with two 20mm in the left wing, I saw explosion and pieces flew arond me, but he (AI) not only survived he managed to get on my six very quickly and cut of my wing(FW190A9) with his gun!!! I don't know how things are online, but offline there are still some irritating issues.
But in most, the new patch brought many improvments and I am sure Oleg and other developers will fix this issues.

Luftcaca
06-02-2004, 12:06 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Brain32:
That's not all, there are more planes with incorrect DM. Yesterday I shot P63 with two 20mm in the left wing, I saw explosion and pieces flew arond me

-(well its a miracle it didnt catch on fire right away!!!)-


, but he (AI) not only survived he managed to get on my six very quickly and cut of my wing(FW190A9) with his gun!!! I don't know how things are online, but offline there are still some irritating issues.

-(gotta be careful now the new AI is more dangerous)-

But in most, the new patch brought many improvments and I am sure Oleg and other developers will fix this issues.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

WORD! http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

http://www.ifrance.com/boussourir/luftcaca.jpg

Formerly ''known'' as Gunther Aeroburst

Hunde_3.JG51
06-02-2004, 01:11 PM
I've been saying for awhile that the P-63 has issues so yes, I agree. The P-63C's engine is VERY fragile, but taking a wing off or causing any significant structural damage/failure with guns/cannons less than 30mm is difficult to impossible.

As for the Lagg I sent a track to Oleg after AEP showing the Lagg taking numerous small caliber hits from 12 gun Hurricane and showing no damage, not even smoke. Only did limited stuff with latest patch but initial impression are that something is still off. Engine DM seems correct but the struture still seems off. But I would have to test further.

I think the P-47 is another one that could use tweaking. It is very resistant to 20mm cannon rounds but gets chewed up pretty good with machine guns. I have put so many cannon rounds into P-47 at times that it left me shaking my head. Still, I would rather have what we have now than the Jug's previos DM (after AEP) where it would start smoking after one hit. I sent a track to Oleg where the same Hurricane as above killed the P-47 with only a few rounds from about 250-300m.

Anyway, I agree that there are still some DM issues but we are much better off than we were after AEP release. The P-63C and Lagg-3 are two that come to mind that really need looking at, especially the P-63 (make the engine tougher, make the wings and fuesalage vulnerable to 20mm and below).

http://www.militaryartshop.com/prints/bailey/warwolf.jpg

Formerly Kyrule2
http://www.jg51.com/

Luftcaca
06-02-2004, 01:20 PM
way to go Kyrule!

if Oleg replies to you I'd like you to post his answer in that thread so everyone might know, ok?

Regards

http://www.ifrance.com/boussourir/luftcaca.jpg

Formerly ''known'' as Gunther Aeroburst

LuftKuhMist
06-02-2004, 05:05 PM
I have red not too long ago (from a Fin ace) that the Klimov M105 on the Lagg3 was very easy to take out. I never did take one out.

Lagg3 seems too resistant for some reason. What I don't get is that IL2 team actually model engine weak spots. (model like polygonal models)

http://www.ifrance.com/boussourir/MOMS.gif http://www.ifrance.com/boussourir/grab0004.jpg

Hunde_3.JG51
06-02-2004, 06:44 PM
Luftcaca, I sent the tracks to Oleg before latest patch and I think the P-47 DM and possibly Lagg's was changed. Lagg still seems to need work though IMO. As for the P-63 I don't think anything was done and I encourage others to e-mail Oleg about the lack of a DM. As I said the engine should be tougher and the wings/fuesalage should not be impervious to 20mm rounds. As someone else posted in another thread I can hit the P-63's wings with 20mm rounds and the engine will smoke http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/52.gif. It's a shame, Gibbage did an awesome job on the P-63 but it's DM is very poor at the moment.

http://www.militaryartshop.com/prints/bailey/warwolf.jpg

Formerly Kyrule2
http://www.jg51.com/

Giganoni
06-02-2004, 07:59 PM
The P-39 is tough? Those planes flame easy, smoke easy, and go down easy, at least the N does. I was doing a PTO QMB with A6M5s and I-185 82s (As J2M3s) vs P-39s, P-51bs and P-40ms. Most of my kills were coming off the P-39s, I smoked one so that it wasn't going to bother me, then I flamed one with a short burst of all weapons..and then I seperated the body and tail of another 39 with a cannon shot or two. You just have to have good deflection. I was almost perpendicular to the one I flamed and therefore my armaments did more damage. I think maybe the Lagg is tough if your not exploiting its weak spots perhaps.

http://img74.photobucket.com/albums/v225/giganoni/IL2/giganoni2.jpg

Luftcaca
06-02-2004, 11:37 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Giganoni:
The P-39 is tough? Those planes flame easy, smoke easy, and go down easy, at least the N does. I was doing a PTO QMB with A6M5s and I-185 82s (As J2M3s) vs P-39s, P-51bs and P-40ms. Most of my kills were coming off the P-39s, I smoked one so that it wasn't going to bother me, then I flamed one with a short burst of all weapons..and then I seperated the body and tail of another 39 with a cannon shot or two. You just have to have good deflection. I was almost perpendicular to the one I flamed and therefore my armaments did more damage. I think maybe the Lagg is tough if your not exploiting its weak spots perhaps.

http://img74.photobucket.com/albums/v225/giganoni/IL2/giganoni2.jpg <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


yes thats what we keep saying, the P-39 is TOO TOUGH except for the engine that catches on fire too easily, WAAAAAAAAAAAYYYYYYYYY too easily.

I mean, I SHOULDNT be able to take down 12 of em flying a IAR80 isnt it? As I said I did it, so theres something wrong about the DM.AS Kyrule said, hit the P-39 (or P-63) in the wing with 20mm, the wing will be ok (maybe a lil damaged) but the engine will catch on fire cuz of the shrapnels. Go figure...

on a different note tho, Ive realised that the IAR could leak oil 4ever before having an engine failure...anyone else noticed that?

http://www.ifrance.com/boussourir/luftcaca.jpg

Formerly ''known'' as Gunther Aeroburst

VulgarOne
06-03-2004, 01:08 AM
I get the gist of what you guys are saying, as I have also experienced some inconsistencies as well. If the wing was developed to be strong, remember the p63 was designed after experience with the p39. Therefore the wing may be rather strong and somewhat resistant to 20mm fire, it had to be strengthened to carry bombs and withstand a higher power engine and speeds. Most if not all aircraft by that time had 20mm or larger, other than most US aircraft. US aircraft were built to counter enemy aircraft, they had to be strong to withstand even minimal hits. They sure as hell knew what weapons they were up against.

The engine in most if not all planes are lightly protected, remember the covering panels had to be removed for engine maintenance. Also on the p39 and p63 the engine is in the rear of the plane. No pilot armor to stop rounds. I doubt they put armor in the tail of the aircraft as a tail heavy plane is dangerous, and with the engine in the rear they had to worry about a rear cg. I will have to dig out my old schematic on the p39 to see if any armor was placed to protect the engine from the rear.

When trying to pull lead, if not leading enough, the tail and engine is the first thing you will hit, it is understandable that the engine would be hit easily, and is lightly armored. If directly behind well you know what you hit first, and the wings are thin. So setting the engine on fire would be easier than removing a wing . Specially with a smaller caliber high rate of fire machinegun.

The US used .50 cal. Machine guns rather than larger caliber cannons. Simply a different way of achieving a goal. Idea was that most pilots could not shoot worth a dam, also takes a lot longer to teach someone how to kill with a few rounds. Therefore the thinking was that throwing out a lot of lead even though not as powerful, will be more advantageous because any hits diminishes performance of the machine. Also damaging the aircraft and not necessarily destroying it, puts it out of commission., or allowed one to finish it off. By being able to fire at a longer distance with a large amount of rounds puts the adversary at a disadvantage. Specifically when proper tactics and teamwork are employed. The kill ratios of the American aircraft in the PTO speaks for itself. Just because you are using a smaller caliber machinegun does not mean it is less effective. The whole idea behind the US army going to the 5.56mm m16 rather than using larger caliber small arms for the infantry soldier is the same ideology.

Just some food for thought, I am not saying you are wrong, but take a close look. Do remember that you have more time shooting than any of the pilots in ww2. Also you were fighting AI. AI only does so much, it is not as unpredictable or creative as a human opponent, and certainly does not incorporate teamwork any where near what online pilots do. Therefore with practice you should be able to kill them all, as they always do the same thing. If your not killing them all, you are doing something wrong.

Try playing online on a full real server and see what you can do. I am positive that you will not see the same results, as online and offline is like day and night. Offline play cannot come close to some real aspects afforded by online play.

Vulgar

Tipo_Man
06-03-2004, 01:28 AM
The most important point is M-105 against DB-601(605) durability comparison...

LaGG-3 is the best bomber interceptor simply due to its invulnerable engine(even after the patch). The funny part is that La-5 (which was basically the same airframe whith much more durable M-82 engine) is actually much more vulnerable from defensive fire...
Pe-2 is tougher than B-17... I've never managed to set its engines on fire! If somebody has ever done this please post a picure!

This problem has been brought here several times but obviosly Oleg refuses to admit it or change something...All he said was that M-105 was about 30% tougher than DB-601. He didn't mention why but French pilots during battle of France found ther Hispano engines more vulnerable than the engine on Bf-109E... and M-105 was an evolution (I'm not saying copy) of Hispano engine.

This is really annoying especially when other planes have so detailed damage modelling...

Hunde_3.JG51
06-03-2004, 02:07 AM
Just to clarify on my end, I know there is a problem with P-63C DM, but I have not tested against P-39.

http://www.militaryartshop.com/prints/bailey/warwolf.jpg

Formerly Kyrule2
http://www.jg51.com/

Luftcaca
06-03-2004, 10:32 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Tipo_Man:
The most important point is M-105 against DB-601(605) durability comparison...

LaGG-3 is the best bomber interceptor simply due to its invulnerable engine(even after the patch). The funny part is that La-5 (which was basically the same airframe whith much more durable M-82 engine) is actually much more vulnerable from defensive fire...
Pe-2 is tougher than B-17... I've never managed to set its engines on fire! If somebody has ever done this please post a picure!

This problem has been brought here several times but obviosly Oleg refuses to admit it or change something...All he said was that M-105 was about 30% tougher than DB-601. He didn't mention why but French pilots during battle of France found ther Hispano engines more vulnerable than the engine on Bf-109E... and M-105 was an evolution (I'm not saying copy) of Hispano engine.

This is really annoying especially when other planes have so detailed damage modelling...<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


I agree, 100%

http://www.ifrance.com/boussourir/luftcaca.jpg

Formerly ''known'' as Gunther Aeroburst

CaptainGelo
06-03-2004, 12:51 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Tipo_Man:
The most important point is M-105 against DB-601(605) durability comparison...

LaGG-3 is the best bomber interceptor simply due to its invulnerable engine(even after the patch). The funny part is that La-5 (which was basically the same airframe whith much more durable M-82 engine) is actually much more vulnerable from defensive fire...
Pe-2 is tougher than B-17... I've never managed to set its engines on fire! If somebody has ever done this please post a picure!

This problem has been brought here several times but obviosly Oleg refuses to admit it or change something...All he said was that M-105 was about 30% tougher than DB-601. He didn't mention why but French pilots during battle of France found ther Hispano engines more vulnerable than the engine on Bf-109E... and M-105 was an evolution (I'm not saying copy) of Hispano engine.

This is really annoying especially when other planes have so detailed damage modelling...<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

here you go..

http://img23.photobucket.com/albums/v68/wolf4ever/IL2M_W040603_204337_C04051014521264.jpg

http://img23.photobucket.com/albums/v68/wolf4ever/IL2M_W040603_204522_C04051014524376.jpg

http://img23.photobucket.com/albums/v68/wolf4ever/IL2M_W040603_204526_C04051014531751.jpg


http://img23.photobucket.com/albums/v68/wolf4ever/IL2M_W040603_204536_C04051014535159.jpg

'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' '''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' '''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' '''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' '''
http://www.danasoft.com/sig/oleg86.jpg
'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' '''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' '''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' '''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' '''


plane is 2slow, guns are 2weak and DM suck?...Then click here (http://www.hmp16.com/hotstuff/downloads/Justin%20Timberlake%20-%20Cry%20Me%20A%20River.mp3) | Fear british army. (http://216.144.230.195/Videos/Medium_WMP8/British_Attack.wmv)

http://img23.photobucket.com/albums/v68/wolf4ever/Animation3.gif
Bad boys, bad boys, what you gonna do, what you gonna do when they come for you..

Luftcaca
06-03-2004, 01:43 PM
yep, the Pe2 and Pe3 catch on fire quite well, dunno why I missed that comment in Tipo's post...

as for the M-105P, try to shoot down some P-40 Field mod equipped with the russian engine

For some reason when mounted on the P-40 its quite easy to damage the M-105P...

http://www.ifrance.com/boussourir/luftcaca.jpg

Formerly ''known'' as Gunther Aeroburst

ajafoofoo
06-03-2004, 01:51 PM
p63 damage model doesn't exist right now.

You can lob cannon rounds right into the wings and never see wing damage.

The only thing it does well is catch on fire.

It is one of the most ridiculous planes in the game atm.

Hunde_3.JG51
06-03-2004, 01:59 PM
Just wanted to say one more time, please e-mail Oleg and ask him to look at P-63C DM, right now all of Gibbage's hard work is wasted IMO. Make the engine tougher, and make the wings/fuesalage vulnerable to 20mm and below. I'm just saying this again so people will e-mail Oleg as he is likely very busy now and he probably does not see what is posted here. However I do believe he checks the bug-reporting e-mail personally which is a great credit to him.

http://www.militaryartshop.com/prints/bailey/warwolf.jpg

Formerly Kyrule2
http://www.jg51.com/

Luftcaca
06-06-2004, 02:07 PM
ahhhhhhhhhhhhh...the lagg3 DM is so screwed up...the engine SHOULD be at least as easy to take down as the DB...

right now this plane is a big bullet sponge...

http://www.ifrance.com/boussourir/luftcaca.jpg

Formerly ''known'' as Gunther Aeroburst

JG77Von_Hess
06-07-2004, 03:40 AM
http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif A Bump from me!!

Good thread and yes the DM on some planes.. as mentioned here in this thread, could for sure use a little checkup from the devs..

Regards.

VH.

Luftcaca
06-07-2004, 08:04 PM
Anyone flies the AIR 80/81 often like I do?
I have this Romanian career runnin and I found the IAR to be quite a tough plane, not as tough as the Lagg3 or the 190 but still pretty tough, is this accurate?

ah and yes I wanted to say that the engine can leak oil for very long without suffering any failure like the DB or the BMW engines do, just like the P-39 finally

one last thing....http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_razz.gif still about the IAR80, and its campaign related not DM related (wow Im off-topic in my own topic thats a new one http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_razz.gif)
I started the romanian CAMPAIGN b4 the patch 2.01
Ive chosen IAR81c for the Stalingrad battle (sept 42) oddly enough, I got to fly the IAR81a for this battle. and the IAR81a was an addon plane from the new patch right??...what do you guys think about that??

well in a positive way at least it means that ONE of the new plane has been included in the campaigns http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_razz.gif

http://www.ifrance.com/boussourir/luftcaca.jpg

Formerly ''known'' as Gunther Aeroburst

actionhank1786
06-08-2004, 08:53 AM
I just want to say, that i dont know about the Damage Models, since i havent taken on those planes yet. But i've got to say, i like how everyone's kept this threat polite and on topic. Half of these things turn into a sides issue...where everyone gets up in arms about an elevator or a trim tab, or something stupid
Good work. Here's hoping Oleg notices, because if the DMs are as bad as you guys have been saying... http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_eek.gif

http://img18.photobucket.com/albums/v54/Halfwayhank/Actionsig.png

Actionhank
~Aaron White

BitwiseOp
06-08-2004, 09:22 AM
I agree the DM seems a bit flaky in places - especially the AI pilot's actions /reactions to certain events.

For instance I was practicing 1 Spit Vb v 2 FW 190 A6 last night... I damaged the first lead plane then went after his wingman - after a few neat turns I came in a sweeping turn at about 30 degree AoT and turned his engine into flaming scrap metal... figuring that any pilot with an engine on fire (streaming flames over the cockpit) is out of the fight (if he has any sense of self preservation he's out of the plane too) I turned away to look for the leader... big mistake - the #2 turned onto my tail and took off my wing with couple of shots http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-mad.gif

Luftcaca
06-08-2004, 12:18 PM
LOL yeah its funny to see the AI staying in its plane on fire but getting out of a plane that simply lost its rudder controls...odd

I cant understand why Oleg did it this way...after so many patches it SHOULD be fixed, not to mention it would also tune down even more the kill stealing (which is still there)

when your single engine fighter is on fire, GET OUT NOW

http://www.ifrance.com/boussourir/luftcaca.jpg

Formerly ''known'' as Gunther Aeroburst