Jump to content
Han

Game version 3.008 discussion: Damage model update, fixes and improvements

Recommended Posts

6 minutes ago, wonders9 said:

 

Could you please give us a link to the video you mentioned? I searched YouTube but couldn't find it.

Im not at home now. Its almost in every youtube video about Me163. Or search my  older posts. There is even a  picture of this damaged B17.

 

maybe its the only true video with Mk108 in action

Edited by Voidhunger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Jade_Monkey said:

Wow that's some serious picking and choosing there. They fixed and added a long list of other items that you intentionally left out to make your point. 

 

Your last sentence is just hilarious.

The one thing that's missing for me at the moment is the ability to upvote this a hundred of times!

 

@edit: is Voidhunger talking about this video?

 

Timestamp of the attack is 40:38...

 

:drinks:

Mike

Edited by SAS_Storebror
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am having sometimes a shaking bombsight bug now after this last patch. Anyone else has experienced it??

Edited by 6./ZG26_Gielow

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, SAS_Storebror said:

The one thing that's missing for me at the moment is the ability to upvote this a hundred of times!

 

@edit: is Voidhunger talking about this video?

 

Timestamp of the attack is 40:38...

 

:drinks:

Mike

Yes thats the one. If you look atvthe pictire im my older post or you can search net, two hits in the elevator and dorsal turret were devastating, but the third hit was reduced by the engine. There is only "small" hole

Edited by Voidhunger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Voidhunger said:

Yes thats the one

 

Not more, even less, to see than on the 110 G2 vid I posted recently.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

5. AA searchlights now can follow Attack Area command which can be used to limit their search area and/or use them as visible beacons (useful for mission designers);

Devs, could you please explain to us, how to use searchlights as beacons. I would like to use this feature in a nightfighter campaign.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Juri_JS said:

Devs, could you please explain to us, how to use searchlights as beacons. I would like to use this feature in a nightfighter campaign.

 

I thought it just meant give them an attack area command with a really small radius, so the beam will be directed almost vertically like a pillar of light.  Have not tried it yet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, sevenless said:

 

Not more, even less, to see than on the 110 G2 vid I posted recently.

 

 

I know that video, but to me it seems only like mg151.

In Me163 you can be shure that is mk108 and you can compare it with the picture

Edited by Voidhunger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, unreasonable said:

 

I thought it just meant give them an attack area command with a really small radius, so the beam will be directed almost vertically like a pillar of light.  Have not tried it yet.

That's what I thought too, but it doesn't work for me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Voidhunger said:

I know that video, but to me it seems only like mg151

 

Actually you can see both. The ones with the larger flashes are the 30mm hits, the 20mm hits have almost no visual flash on target. Visual damage effect to target is about the same in both videos. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, sevenless said:

 

Actually you can see both. The ones with the larger flashes are the 30mm hits, the 20mm hits have almost no visual flash on target. Visual damage effect to target is about the same in both videos. 

Maybe but like i said you cant be mistaken in ME 163. Also the B17 looks almost intact if you pause the video after this punischment

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Voidhunger said:

Maybe but like i said you cant be mistaken in ME 163. Also the B17 looks almost intact if you pause the video after this punischment

 

That´s true.  Those three hits are 108 hits, no question about that. What needs to be understood both from the 110 and from the 163 video is, that the B17s in both cases travelled on without blowing up in Micheal Bay special effect fashion. Those airframes could take a lot of punishment and hits needed to be made at the vulnerable areas to force a B17 to leave the formation. Pilot/Copilot were the front vulnerable area and the engines were the top priority areas when attack was performed from six-oclock. All else most likely wasn´t sufficient to take the B17 down.

Edited by sevenless

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The damage model is much better then before. Well done development team.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/5/2018 at 4:39 PM, Han said:

HE shells have provided too much damage for longerons before, it was overdone.

 

What HE shells overdone? - The kinetic energy based ( damage done depending on distance ) or the chemical reaction based ( the same amount of damage done at any distance )?

After testing this patch out, correct me if I am wrong but it really looks like that this game doesn't simulate both typs of ammunition what is really sad....................................

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Livai said:

 

What HE shells overdone? - The kinetic energy based ( damage done depending on distance ) or the chemical reaction based ( the same amount of damage done at any distance )?

 

The effect on the wing spars. Wing spars have been strengthened, also bullet impact angle is now considered for AP rounds. There is now a more pronounced difference between AP and HE and different calibers.

1 hour ago, 150GCT_Veltro said:

 

 

Not trying to be suggestive, but this bird took a real pounding, was surely shredded but keep flying and looked safe enough still for crew to evacuate/bail out.

I'm honestly very unsure about what to expect from damage model and real life, various sources tell very differing pictures, from one shot wonderweapons to fluffy puff puffs that seem not nearly as threatening. Given the footage above I find our results in the sim more than plausible and that might also be true for 37mm. Maybe in some cases were only 1 or  2 rounds needed for 30mm or 37mm but then there is also the question: was the plane really shot down, regarding the staggering amount of overclaims on all sides.

Edited by 216th_Jordan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Voidhunger said:

Im not at home now. Its almost in every youtube video about Me163. Or search my  older posts. There is even a  picture of this damaged B17.

 

maybe its the only true video with Mk108 in action

 

Thank you for the reply.

 

2 hours ago, Voidhunger said:

Yes thats the one. If you look atvthe pictire im my older post or you can search net, two hits in the elevator and dorsal turret were devastating, but the third hit was reduced by the engine. There is only "small" hole

 

1 hour ago, sevenless said:

That´s true.  Those three hits are 108 hits, no question about that. .

 

I disagree; it is not totally certain that that gun camera footage is from an Me163 combat mission. The producer may have put some other fighter's gun camera video there, only to illustrate an air combat against the B17s.

 

If it were a whole German gun camera recording with the Luftwaffe's note in it saying that it was recorded by an Me163 gun camera, that would be convincing evidence. 

 

2 hours ago, 150GCT_Veltro said:

 

 

I am afraid that the title of the video is wrong. 

Edited by wonders9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, wonders9 said:

 

Thank you for the reply.

 

 

I disagree; it is not totally certain that that gun camera footage is from an Me163 combat mission. The producer may have put some other fighter's gun camera video there, only to illustrate an air combat against the B17s.

 

If it were a whole German gun camera recording with the Luftwaffe's note in it saying that it was recorded by an Me163 gun camera, that would be convincing evidence. 

No its from the Me163.

 

Lt. Charles Laverdiere’s B-17 XK-B of the 305th Bomb Group after its return to Chesterton, UK, 8-24-44. Damage often attributed to Ryll, but consistent with Schubert’s gun-camera film.

 

 

shredded-b-17dhjiu.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, wonders9 said:

 

Thank you for the reply.

 

 

I disagree; it is not totally certain that that gun camera footage is from an Me163 combat mission. The producer may have put some other fighter's gun camera video there, only to illustrate an air combat against the B17s.

 

If it were a whole German gun camera recording with the Luftwaffe's note in it saying that it was recorded by an Me163 gun camera, that would be convincing evidence. 

 

Sure, feel free to doubt everything you like. Impacts in that film, however look exactly like 110 G2s, 190 A8s or 190 A7s and a lot different than 190 A6s. Up to you to believe whatever it was what hit them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, wonders9 said:

If it were a whole German gun camera recording with the Luftwaffe's note in it saying that it was recorded by an Me163 gun camera, that would be convincing evidence. 

 

 

I am afraid that the title of the video is wrong. 

 

What else should it be? Here is what Mg151/20 looks like:

Edit: starting from 2:00.

 

 

Edited by 216th_Jordan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, 216th_Jordan said:

 

What else should it be? Here is what Mg151/20 looks like:

 

 

1:53 looks like MK108 in action. pfff

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Voidhunger said:

1:53 looks like MK108 in action. pfff

 

Yes, I picked the 2:00 mark, should have written that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Has anyone did any extensive quantitive research on these matters?

I used to watch a great number of such videos  too.

 

31 minutes ago, JG27_Kornezov said:

 

 

We can see one terribly BIG fireball ,  at least 8 meters in diameter if my guess is correct  -- THAT could be an MK108 hit.

The first image is the hit; the second image the frame right after the hit, for viewing how large the b17 is.

vlcsnap-2018-12-08-01h47m59s278.png

vlcsnap-2018-12-08-01h48m30s878.png

Edited by wonders9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, JG27_PapaFly said:

Dear developers, as a faithful customer I'm really disappointed. I had expected that you fix e.g.

- the overheat issue in the FW-190 A8

- the fact that the spit9 never overheats

- the missing gyroscopic forces in the spit9.

- game stability issues

 

Instead, we get new bugs, like the massively nerfed MK-108 30 mm.

 

My impression of a low quality, sub-par product grows stronger every week.


Feel free to stop playing then.  I'm sure DCS would appreciate your money. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, wonders9 said:

We can see one terribly BIG fireball ,  at least 8 meters in diameter if my guess is correct  -- THAT could be an MK108 hit.

The first image is the hit; the second image the frame right after the hit, for viewing how large the b17 is.

vlcsnap-2018-12-08-01h47m59s278.png

vlcsnap-2018-12-08-01h48m30s878.png

 

The big fireballs are due to ignition of B17s outer wing fueltanks. You can see them flame up both on right and left wing of the plane. Without hitting the fueltanks there would have been no such big fireballs.

 

B17 fuel tanks here:

 

http://ships.bouwman.com/B17/Fuel-Oil.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, SShrike said:

*snip*

 

 

Derp, that's because I had a major brain stoppage.  There is no TrackIR field lol.  It's added under force feedback.   

 

[KEY = force_feedback]
    amplitude = 1.00000
    enabled = 1
    force = 1.00000
    update_freq = 10.000000 
[END]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, 216th_Jordan said:

 

It's really telling that everybody complaining here just mentions German 30mm. What about the M4 37mm that was said to be able to down bombers in 1 hit? 

 

High caliber guns in this game are devastating, but it seems generally not as much as in reality, they are far from worthless though. 3 hits of 30mm will let 80% of the planes not reach their bases.

As far as my testing goes, the two guns underperforming I feel are MK108 and 37mm (on p39 and LaGG). Especially when I hit planes like P47, FW190 - up to 5 hits soaked in no problem, and particulary in the spot where ammoboxes are located (no detonation there).

 

Visual effects of shells hitting airframe I see no problem with, just the effectiveness lacks.

Edited by Mac_Messer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Mac_Messer said:

As far as my testing goes, the two guns underperforming I feel are MK108 and 37mm (on p39 and LaGG). Especially when I hit planes like P47, FW190 - up to 5 hits soaked in no problem, and particulary in the spot where ammoboxes are located (no detonation there).

 

Visual effects of shells hitting airframe I see no problem with, just the effectiveness lacks.

This hasent been my experience at all, sure the planes down blow up into pieces like before but it only takes 1-2 hits to damage them to the point of not being able to fight.

 

Mk 108 is still very effective, it's just not a instant kill like it was before. I'll record a video with ,my friend and show just how much damage it actually does.

If you're only on the shooting end of things it can look like aircraft soak up Mk 108, but if you are actually being hit by them you'll know that they are effective.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/5/2018 at 6:53 PM, LeLv30_Redwing said:

Dear Devs,

 

I see you are addressing also editor issues so hear my cry and please help all mission builders with a simple fix; instead of port_up_unit_XXX let us have ammo containers and boxes which are on the ground or unlock the y-axis. I'm sure everyone who is building missions would appreciate this simple task for you with great joy, because it really gives options to build targets. Thanks in advance!

 

 

Have you tried in the editor the button to Set up Objects on the Ground?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Ouky1991 said:

 

Hi. Can you please confirm that Mk 108 works as intended? Or can you pass this question to devs? Some official word on this would be nice so we know that there's no need to report it as bug. 

 

There is no "as intended" mindset with us. That would indicate bias which we don't have. Our results are the culmination of the team's work based on information we have, our technology and sometimes your feedback. Our update was based on all that and the result is what it is. We feel overall we've improved the damage system and made it more realistic. Some like it, some don't. I'm sorry, but we are dealing with a subjective topic and our planes are not real ones and our damage system is an approximation and made to look and feel believable, it can never be perfect. Just a limitation of what a computer simulation is. We always listen to your complaints, but we don't always make changes. I this case, we felt there were technical changes we could make that would make the damage more realistic and you the user more satisfied. Can we make everyone happy all the time? Nope.

 

Some of you want uber amazing one shot kills with certain weapons. Some want extended battles with rounds only chipping away at the enemy. Like FMs this topic will never be fully resolved. What we've made is a dynamic and believable damage system where there is a whole range of possibilities and outcomes with different weapons behaving generally like they did in real life. That's the best we can do at the moment. I honestly don't think there is another combat sim product that has taken as many steps and done as much tweaking as we have to make the damage model better.  
 

The team does their best to improve the product and I trust their judgement on some of these "in the weeds" items. Maybe some ammo is a little off, but there is absolutely no correct answer under the technology and circumstances we have to work with and under.

Please enjoy the product and our hard work and take such specific testing and videos to another part of the forum. This thread is for general discussion.

 

If we make further changes or have more to say you'll be the first to know.

 

Jason  

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 4
  • Haha 1
  • Confused 1
  • Upvote 29

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

For mission designers we added a way to control Timer and Counter values dynamically. To do this, there are two new logical objects Modifier: Add Val and Modifier: Set Val. We plan to widely use them to alter various triggers in the future, but at the moment they can be used for:
- modifying a Timer trigger value. A modifier can set, add or substract the time value in a timer by using the 0 index of the controllable value and 1-st field of the value vector. When set to a negative value, the time counter is reset and the timer stops until the next input. For example, this can be used to reset and stop a timer in a mission, delaying some events tied to it.
- modifying a Counter trigger value and threshold (initiall set in a mission). To alter a Counter value, use the 0 index of the controllable value or alter Counter threshold using the 1-st index. For example, a certain mission event like a premature elimination of some targets can lower the threshold of a Counter to make sure the others are eliminated at the moment the player arrives to the waypoint.

 

Maybe I did not understand how things were supposed to work, but I can't get it to work the way I would expect.

  • I can stop timers using Modifier; Set Val (data[0] = -1, index = 0), but triggering it again causes it to fire much earlier than it should, maybe as if it never stopped
  • I can set counters, e.g. to 1 using Set Val (data[0] = 1, index = 0). According to @Han this should change the threshold to 1. This is a minor issue, changing the value of a counter is what I expect I'll need, changing the threshold I don't have uses cases for yet.

I'm also disappointed that the old behaviour of retriggering a timer has changed. In the past, triggering a non-deactivated timer would always (re)start it. I used this to implement non-trivial conditions such as "Spawn AI patrol when enemy close, then repeatedly try to despawn it after 1 min unless there is still an enemy nearby". It would not be too hard to change it to use the new timer reset mechanism, but it does not work. Old trick no longer works, new mechanism doesn't work yet. I'll figure something out, but it will make the logic even more complex than it was.

Edited by coconut
  • Upvote 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Jason_Williams said:

 

There is no "as intended" mindset with us. That would indicate bias which we don't have. Our results are the culmination of the team's work based on information we have, our technology and sometimes your feedback. Our update was based on all that and the result is what it is. We feel overall we've improved the damage system and made it more realistic. Some like it, some don't. I'm sorry, but we are dealing with a subjective topic and our planes are not real ones and our damage system is an approximation and made to look and feel believable, it can never be perfect. Just a limitation of what a computer simulation is. We always listen to your complaints, but we don't always make changes. I this case, we felt there were technical changes we could make that would make the damage more realistic and you the user more satisfied. Can we make everyone happy all the time? Nope.

 

Some of you want uber amazing one shot kills with certain weapons. Some want extended battles with rounds only chipping away at the enemy. Like FMs this topic will never be fully resolved. What we've made is a dynamic and believable damage system where there is a whole range of possibilities and outcomes with different weapons behaving generally like they did in real life. That's the best we can do at the moment. I honestly don't think there is another combat sim product that has taken as many steps and done as much tweaking as we have to make the damage model better.  
 

The team does their best to improve the product and I trust their judgement on some of these "in the weeds" items. Maybe some ammo is a little off, but there is absolutely no correct answer under the technology and circumstances we have to work with and under.

Please enjoy the product and our hard work and take such specific testing and videos to another part of the forum. This thread is for general discussion.

 

If we make further changes or have more to say you'll be the first to know.

 

Jason  

Thank you for clear answer. I'm sure there's a lot of work behind this, I just thought if there is any place to discuss latest changes and hive you guys feedback, it would be here. I still enjoy the game and I'm looking forward to future updates.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow guys, wasn't expecting such a long list of upgrades. Haven't been able to play because of real life for several patches now but really looking forward to getting some time to in the holidays and seeing how much the AI and damage model has improved. 

 

Cheers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, coconut said:

 

Maybe I did not understand how things were supposed to work, but I can't get it to work the way I would expect.

  • I can stop timers using Modifier; Set Val (data[0] = -1, index = 0), but triggering it again causes it to fire much earlier than it should, maybe as if it never stopped
  • I can set counters, e.g. to 1 using Set Val (data[0] = 1, index = 0). According to @Han this should change the threshold to 1. This is a minor issue, changing the value of a counter is what I expect I'll need, changing the threshold I don't have uses cases for yet.

I'm also disappointed that the old behaviour of retriggering a timer has changed. In the past, triggering a non-deactivated timer would always (re)start it. I used this to implement non-trivial conditions such as "Spawn AI patrol when enemy close, then repeatedly try to despawn it after 1 min unless there is still an enemy nearby". It would not be too hard to change it to use the new timer reset mechanism, but it does not work. Old trick no longer works, new mechanism doesn't work yet. I'll figure something out, but it will make the logic even more complex than it was.

 

Go Coconut, go!  (My brain hurts and I'm a bit drunk tonight, so I won't be doing any testing! Hic!)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Jason_Williams said:

 

There is no "as intended" mindset with us. That would indicate bias which we don't have. Our results are the culmination of the team's work based on information we have, our technology and sometimes your feedback. Our update was based on all that and the result is what it is. We feel overall we've improved the damage system and made it more realistic. Some like it, some don't. I'm sorry, but we are dealing with a subjective topic and our planes are not real ones and our damage system is an approximation and made to look and feel believable, it can never be perfect. Just a limitation of what a computer simulation is. We always listen to your complaints, but we don't always make changes. I this case, we felt there were technical changes we could make that would make the damage more realistic and you the user more satisfied. Can we make everyone happy all the time? Nope.

 

Some of you want uber amazing one shot kills with certain weapons. Some want extended battles with rounds only chipping away at the enemy. Like FMs this topic will never be fully resolved. What we've made is a dynamic and believable damage system where there is a whole range of possibilities and outcomes with different weapons behaving generally like they did in real life. That's the best we can do at the moment. I honestly don't think there is another combat sim product that has taken as many steps and done as much tweaking as we have to make the damage model better.  
 

The team does their best to improve the product and I trust their judgement on some of these "in the weeds" items. Maybe some ammo is a little off, but there is absolutely no correct answer under the technology and circumstances we have to work with and under.

Please enjoy the product and our hard work and take such specific testing and videos to another part of the forum. This thread is for general discussion.

 

If we make further changes or have more to say you'll be the first to know.

 

Jason  

Very eloquent!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just finished a MP mission , flying a 109 G14 , got  2 hits on a P47 and he went down.

I dont see it a lot harder as some people are putting it, just more realistic now.

30mm? , I dont know, not an expert, but dont see planes are that hard to shoot down, even with MGs.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, IckyATLAS said:

 

Have you tried in the editor the button to Set up Objects on the Ground?

 

It won't work, they still hover. At least unlocking the Y-axis would to the trick. It is a small problem and I see how easily it gets buried under the discussion of wings falling off / being glued on and 30mm killing everything / killing nothing. All servers would benefit and therefore players too if mission builders would have these simple objects in use.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, II./JG77_motoadve said:

Just finished a MP mission , flying a 109 G14 , got  2 hits on a P47 and he went down.

I dont see it a lot harder as some people are putting it, just more realistic now.

30mm? , I dont know, not an expert, but dont see planes are that hard to shoot down, even with MGs.

 

 

I think some ppl are not happy with inconsistencies in new damage as shown by these mg17s taking off the wing(as example)

Appears the weakened (damaged) control surface it so quickly that when it rolled wings snapped off.

I think some may interpret as guns shot off wings...

 

 

Edited by =RS=Stix_09

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...