Ground object damage model

[Finkeren]

With BoS being more heavily focused on the ground war than either RoF or ClOD, it would be nice to know a bit more about what visions the team and the community has for ground object DM.

 

Most combat flight sims tend to have fairly simplisitc DMs for ground objects, and even if they incorporate some advanced elements like diffrences in armor thickness for tanks and special vulnerable parts, the visual representation of damage in ground objects is nearly always limited to "flamers" or the object simply exploding.

 

While I don't expect to see anywhere near the level of detail in the DM that we will get for the planes, I hope for much more variety in at least the visual representation of ground object DMs in BoS.

 

My wish list includes:

 

Vehicles and static planes tilting or flipping over when hit by strong forces (explosions, heavy caliber guns, other vehicles) or when gliding down slopes. Obviously, this should incorporate the weight of the vehicle, so we can't do "tank-bowling" as was posible until recently in RoF.

 

Vehicles getting run off the road or simply stopping due to engine damage or a flat tyre.

 

Vehicles and guns losing control due to crew getting hit.

 

Vehicles and static planes suffering structural damage and partly collapsing.

 

Crew abandoning hit or threatened vehicles.

 

Ground objects only exploding when appropriate (when munition stores are hit etc.)

 

Ground objects only burning when appropriate

 

Masonry, earth works and concrete ground structures only getting completely destroyed by powerful forces (HE bombs etc) with wooden strutures collapsing more readily.

 

Exploding fuel tanks producing large fireballs

 

Non-penetrating concussive attacks having effect on armoured vehicles.

 

A system of confirmation oof ground kills, that prioritize exploding, burning or flipped over vehicles over vehicles with a dead engine or killed crew (as was the case historically)

 

 

 

Now I understand, that much of this won't be achievable under the Digital Nature engine (at least not without severe penalties to performance) but I'd still like to hear both from the community and from the devs: What are your visions for ground object DM?

[AX2]

Elements like diffrences in armor thickness for tanks is the most important,

I Never attack tanks in ROF  ...then I don´t know

Some explosions for  fuel trucks ...are welcome.

First I would like to see two formations of tanks fighting . Like in IL2 1946

Make a fight of tanks within a city is too complex, I think... would require a lot of CPU power and waste a lot of time programming.

But in the field without obstacles is something easier

 

.

[Zoring]

It has been said that they don't want to do Infantry, but since Stalingrad was such a heavy infantry battle, I would love to see it represented in some way. The easiest way I can think of is by making an 'occupied building' that shoots at other buildings or vehicles, this way you can have buildings shooting at each other, to give us some visual representation from above, and gives CAS missions more targets then picking out vehicles from between buildings.

 

Trenches could also function this way.

[Finkeren]

It has been said that they don't want to do Infantry, but since Stalingrad was such a heavy infantry battle, I would love to see it represented in some way. The easiest way I can think of is by making an 'occupied building' that shoots at other buildings or vehicles, this way you can have buildings shooting at each other, to give us some visual representation from above, and gives CAS missions more targets then picking out vehicles from between buildings.

 

Trenches could also function this way.

I think it's a good idea, and I honestly still don't get, why it's such a hassle to just have the crew visibly abandon vehicles under attack like in the old IL2, but I digress.

 

Occupied buildings and trenches would be a great and not too demanding substitute. I remember trenches, pill boxes and the like being ground targets all the way back in Pacific Strike (that was back in 1994). It worked just fine back then, and I don't see, why it shouldn't work now.

[Zoring]

Yea, It was always fun to see the guys spilling out of the wagons when you came screaming down. I have honestly wanted to see infantry in a flight game since i played my first ever. (Knights of the Sky)

 

ROF had an issue with AI's causing lag in large numbers, given that we are on the same engine there may just be some technical issue that prevents it. I just hope we get a bit of action as we zoom over the little infantrymensch below us.

[Lord_Haw-Haw]

The same was with IL2 when you where able to drop paratroopers, several paratrooper transports and you could freeze

the game.

[Freycinet]

The easiest way I can think of is by making an 'occupied building' that shoots at other buildings or vehicles, this way you can have buildings shooting at each other, to give us some visual representation from above, and gives CAS missions more targets then picking out vehicles from between buildings.

.

Intriguing idea, I like it...

[Zorin]

I see loads of mix-ups resulting out of your nickame Zoring...

Edited August 23, 2013 by Zorin

[Bussard_x]

I hope they will add at least driver in cars and trucks, does not matter how they look like.

[Avimimusold]

Mobility kills would be great.

 

It'd also be great to have crews abandon their vehicles in some circumstances (e.g. trucks stop driving when under attack)...

 

It would add greatly to immersion.

[Heywooood]

remember the RoF model...get the core sim out there, get it working....then make improvements and embellishments over time, using the sales capital as you go.

 

What we will see in Premium early release will look very basic - please remember this when you open your present on Xmas morning

What we see in Standard pre-release should be better....

What we see by the time the general release comes next year should be better yet...

After 6-12 months of ongoing development we should have the complete base elements - ready for expansion modules...unless these guys are very fast and very very good

Which they seem to be...

Zoring vs Zorin....somethings gotta give...how about a cage match?

just dont try Heywoood er sumpfin

dems fightin woids

[Flanker15]

Repeating what's been said above, fancy damage effects do more for a flight sim than complex damage models in ground units.

You should have different armor facings on tanks though and mobility kills (half damage = chance to immobilize + radiator smoke etc).

Having different typse of ground units getting different hit effects like steam shooting out of a loco or fire works from an ammo truck.  Vehicles going out of control and flipping over, little dudes running out, tanks blowing up or just catching on fire or just smoking, variety is the name of the game.

[leitmotiv]

i would like to see also reduced max speed of vehicles if not traveling on roads, and to have different max speeds on different terrains

[Finkeren]

remember the RoF model...get the core sim out there, get it working....then make improvements and embellishments over time, using the sales capital as you go.

 

Let's not forget, that part of the RoF Development process was also, that the sim changed hands from neoqb to 777.

 

But yes, I totally agree. I don't expect BoS to be fully developed at launch, or even for the first few years after that. I've long since accepted that as part of the conditions that flight sims exist under.

 

Despite all the good intentions and high ambitions, that's propably part of what went wrong with ClOD. They tried to get it all done at the same time, with the result, that few things were really finished at launch and performancew was tanking. Better get things to run smootly first and work your way up from there.

[FlatSpinMan]

I just love the ideas in this thread. Variety of damage effects would be so immersive, especially seeing some vehicles burning, some flipped,and others exploding.

That would be awesome.If they cant implement them for AI models then just some static ones for scenery would be great. I'll take what I get though :-)

[Freycinet]

i would like to see also reduced max speed of vehicles if not traveling on roads, and to have different max speeds on different terrains

This would mean that computer cycles are spent checking for which terrain any vehicle happens to be on, constantly. You have to take those checks from somewhere, since there is only a limited amount that can be done in each computer cycle, if you want to keep smooth frame rates. Do we remove some checks on the state of your plane? Do we remove some calculations on aerodynamics?

 

There are a lot of great ideas in this thread, for more complex AI behaviour and for fancier graphics. Just remember that whatever goes into the ground battle will have to be taken out of the flight simulation. Both when it comes to what the computer has to check in each cycle and when it comes to the work the developer perform. It is a stark choice for the programming team leader... So much more fun to just dream up good ideas in a forum. I do it too! We just have to remember that somebody actually have to make it all work in the end... :-)

[Trooper117]

I'll take whatever they dish out... going on what 777 have achieved with RoF, and the IL2 team now working as one unit, you know it will be worth it regardless.

[RAF74_Winger]

i would like to see also reduced max speed of vehicles if not traveling on roads, and to have different max speeds on different terrains

 

 

This would mean that computer cycles are spent checking for which terrain any vehicle happens to be on, constantly. You have to take those checks from somewhere, since there is only a limited amount that can be done in each computer cycle, if you want to keep smooth frame rates. Do we remove some checks on the state of your plane? Do we remove some calculations on aerodynamics?

 

There are a lot of great ideas in this thread, for more complex AI behaviour and for fancier graphics. Just remember that whatever goes into the ground battle will have to be taken out of the flight simulation. Both when it comes to what the computer has to check in each cycle and when it comes to the work the developer perform. It is a stark choice for the programming team leader... So much more fun to just dream up good ideas in a forum. I do it too! We just have to remember that somebody actually have to make it all work in the end... :-)

 

 

The ability to do this is already incorporated into RoF. Admittedly it relies on the mission builder to put it in, but the capability is there.

 

W.