Developer asking feedback on damage model on russian forum

[JaffaCake]

https://forum.il2sturmovik.ru/topic/8007-какая-dm-нравится-больше-до-3008-или-после/

 

I wish our community also got something like this. It is interesting to go through the russian forum with google translate once in a while. A lot more communication from the developers. 

[=EXPEND=Tripwire]

Yeah, I used to use Google translate all the time to do the same and was disappointed seeing the difference. Lots of information/interaction there that we miss here.

[CountZero]

Everyone can vote there, your acount is same on that forum, and it looks question is simple, do you like dm before 3.008 or in 3.008, no discusions needed just vote for one of two.

[Dutchvdm]

I voted. I like the new damage model. Yes there is room for improvement, but for me it's way better then the older pre3008 model. 

 

Grt M

[303_Kwiatek]

It could be better if all cannons would be so effective like before patch :). 

 

Also wonder why we dont have the same pool in these forum.

Edited December 11, 2018 by 303_Kwiatek

[Voidhunger]

Dm is good now, it needs some minor tweaking. Im still waiting for improved undercarriage dm(hydraulics/eletric) and pilot dm. I cant remember if I was ever wounded.

[6./ZG26_Klaus_Mann]

Well, Custard and I tested the big Cannons on Berloga, firing directly into the fuselage from dead six at close distance, 23mm and upwards against a variety of Aircraft, and the Mk108 for example needs 5 to 8 Fuselage Hits to kill a P-47, and even a LaGG-3 takes more than 4 30mm Hits.

The same is true for the Russian 37mm Hits, which are only slightly more effective than the 108, requiring between 3 and 7 Hits to bring down Bf109s and P-47s.

 

We also recreated the Spit Wing and Fuselage Hits but the Spitfire ate the 30mm for Breakfast, half of the Rounds not doing any damage at all.

 

Armor Piercing was more effective than HE still, even when hitting at an angle. 

 

Overall I am not terribly impressed. 

[216th_Jordan]

The poll there was a response to another poll.

[sevenless]

I think DM is fine and supposedely more sophisticated than before, but naturally weapon effectivity has to be adapted/tweaked for higher caliber guns. I´m confident the team will handle that with the next patch(es).

Edited December 11, 2018 by sevenless

[II./JG77_Manu*]

If it would have been the other way round, and the 3.007 DM would be the new one, and you would do the poll, the outcome would probably be the same. People are always craving for "new updates, improvements" or however they are called. People are just happy with changes and things "moving forward" instead of stagnation. 

 

While the DM might be "more sophisticated" (haven't seen proof of that yet), generally it has moved in the wrong direction. Airplanes can endure too much damage and one-approach kills with 20mm against an enemy fighter are very rare now (while they really weren't in history). HE cannons in general seem way too weak, getting worse, the bigger the caliber. Overall the old DM/gun effectiveness seemed more plausible and closer to actual pilot reports and gun cams, then the new one.  It reminds me a bit of War Thunder now, where aircraft had to be made more "tanky" to counteract the precise shooting due to just having to point the mouse. You can bet the average IL-2 player can shoot a lot more precise then the average WW2 pilots.

Edited December 11, 2018 by II./JG77_Manu*

[303_Kwiatek]

  Wing brokens against fighters where not such rare expecially when target was hit in the deep turn.  Also guncams show that short action was quite enough to be deadly for target. 

 

 

 

It is not exacly the case after 3.08 update in BOX.

Edited December 11, 2018 by 303_Kwiatek

[Feathered_IV]

39 minutes ago, 6./ZG26_Klaus_Mann said:

Well, Custard and I tested the big Cannons on Berloga, firing directly into the fuselage from dead six at close distance, 23mm and upwards against a variety of Aircraft, and the Mk108 for example needs 5 to 8 Fuselage Hits to kill a P-47, and even a LaGG-3 takes more than 4 30mm Hits.

The same is true for the Russian 37mm Hits, which are only slightly more effective than the 108, requiring between 3 and 7 Hits to bring down Bf109s and P-47s.

 

We also recreated the Spit Wing and Fuselage Hits but the Spitfire ate the 30mm for Breakfast, half of the Rounds not doing any damage at all.

 

Armor Piercing was more effective than HE still, even when hitting at an angle. 

 

Overall I am not terribly impressed. 

 

That sounds like the damage was altered for balance rather than realism.

[Sgt_Joch]

The update just came out, it is a bit early to decide. I have not had a chance to play that much, but so far I have not noticed a huge difference. I have had kills with one pass, La5FN (20mm) vs 190F8 and 109 G6 (30mm) vs La5FN. 

 

One thing I do like is the progressive damage where a hit may trigger a reaction which will bring down the AC some time later.

[dburne]

1 minute ago, Sgt_Joch said:

The update just came out, it is a bit early to decide. I have not had a chance to play that much, but so far I have not noticed a huge difference. I have had kills with one pass, La5FN (20mm) vs 190F8 and 109 G6 (30mm) vs La5FN. 

 

One thing I do like is the progressive damage where a hit may trigger a reaction which will bring down the AC some time later.

 

Yes I have certainly noticed this as well, pretty nice.

[Mad_Mikhael]

50 minutes ago, Voidhunger said:

Dm is good now, it needs some minor tweaking. Im still waiting for improved undercarriage dm(hydraulics/eletric) and pilot dm. I cant remember if I was ever wounded.

You can. Even to the point, where you barely control aircraft (your movements are slowed down) or can't control at all or even can't bail out.

[Ptk]

In single player I find the ai can still fly too well after taking damage. A human pilot would probably disengage or crash and burn while the ai just keeps on trucking.

[unreasonable]

20 minutes ago, Feathered_IV said:

 

That sounds like the damage was altered for balance rather than realism.

 

I do not think so: according to the DD the angle of the hit also now affects the damage calculation. It looks like an attempt to increase realism.  I wonder what the angle effect means and if it is causing any unanticipated consequences?

 

 

[II./JG77_Manu*]

3 minutes ago, Ptk said:

In single player I find the ai can still fly too well after taking damage. A human pilot would probably disengage or crash and burn while the ai just keeps on trucking.

 

It's actually quite the opposite. Single player AI will abandon fight and be a "kill" a lot sooner then a human controlled aircraft. In SP destroying one engine of a bomber always results in a kill, while online it really doesn't. 

[LLv34_Flanker]

S!

 

 The DM has gone from glassplanes to flying tanks almost. A P40E eats easily 4 to 6 hits of 30mm to go down, and even then the damage is some leaks or severed control surfaces, pilot kill or controls gone. Once saw fire when a single 30mm put a La-5 ´s engine or oil tank on fire. IL-2 gets some leaks and possibly loses conrol surfaces, even a pilot kill. But no fires or lost wings so far. Even with Fw190A-8 and 2 x 30mm it soaks up tremendous amount of 30mm. Just strenghtens the feeling that this game values kinetic energy over chemical(HE) energy when determining lethality. Sure the Pe-2 rear gunner does not nail you in one shot anymore, but the already ridiculously tough Pe-2 just got even tougher. Pumping in 3 x 20mm just is a series of puffs causing some leaks, hardly fires or lost wing/surfaces. DM could use a review by the devs and refinement. It is a step towards better, but maybe a bit too much from extreme to another.

[Voidhunger]

25 minutes ago, =LG=Mad_Mikhael said:

You can. Even to the point, where you barely control aircraft (your movements are slowed down) or can't control at all or even can't bail out.

I know, but for me it was extremely rare.

14 minutes ago, LLv34_Flanker said:

S!

 

 The DM has gone from glassplanes to flying tanks almost. A P40E eats easily 4 to 6 hits of 30mm to go down, and even then the damage is some leaks or severed control surfaces, pilot kill or controls gone. Once saw fire when a single 30mm put a La-5 ´s engine or oil tank on fire. IL-2 gets some leaks and possibly loses conrol surfaces, even a pilot kill. But no fires or lost wings so far. Even with Fw190A-8 and 2 x 30mm it soaks up tremendous amount of 30mm. Just strenghtens the feeling that this game values kinetic energy over chemical(HE) energy when determining lethality. Sure the Pe-2 rear gunner does not nail you in one shot anymore, but the already ridiculously tough Pe-2 just got even tougher. Pumping in 3 x 20mm just is a series of puffs causing some leaks, hardly fires or lost wing/surfaces. DM could use a review by the devs and refinement. It is a step towards better, but maybe a bit too much from extreme to another.

Yeah, something between both dmg models would be nice

[Hanu]

The new DM has its good side, sure, but HE damage is way "overcorrected" now. I see hardly any point of using for example Mk108 now as HE damage is so poor. You do much better with MG151/20 AP+HE mix.

 

It is regrettable if they are asking feedback only from russian forum as it seems at this point at least.

Edited December 11, 2018 by Hanu
non-native language errors

[Operatsiya_Ivy]

8 minutes ago, LLv34_Flanker said:

It is a step towards better, but maybe a bit too much from extreme to another.

 

Is it though?

 

I think we are getting a little bit too generous simply because it is new. Did wings fall off too easily before the update and was the damage pattern too one dimensional? probably. Do we have a better DM now? probably not. In my opinion we just got a 180° turn and ended up at the opposite side of the spectrum despite the technical improvements like the AP changes. It doesn't really feel much more "realistic" than before. 

 

Now this doesn't mean that the changes weren't necessary out of a devs perspective and it certainly gives them more room to build up on it and do adjustment to improve it. 

 

I can't help however but feel a bit disappointed by in which way the DM is currently seems to be heading. 

[Ehret]

45 minutes ago, 6./ZG26_Klaus_Mann said:

We also recreated the Spit Wing and Fuselage Hits but the Spitfire ate the 30mm for Breakfast, half of the Rounds not doing any damage at all.

 

It looks like there is a bug in some hit detection routines more and more...

The 37mm M4 shells are unreliable to the point they doing nothing - just nothing! I'm not sure if the 0.50"s aren't affected too because I'm getting a huge discrepancy between results per hits taken by targets. Sometimes just few rounds is enough; other times multiple bursts can not take down the target nor damage it seriously.

 

In 3.008 patch notes you can read about fixing a bug about registering some types of hits twice. Perhaps, that fix introduced an error somewhere else thus we are getting less hits to register than should be. Or, it could be some older subtle bug and latest changes to DM just made it much more apparent.

[Semor76]

1 hour ago, II./JG77_Manu* said:

 

It's actually quite the opposite. Single player AI will abandon fight and be a "kill" a lot sooner then a human controlled aircraft. In SP destroying one engine of a bomber always results in a kill, while online it really doesn't. 

nope... AI fighters are stilling pull high-g maneuvers with multiple Football size holes in wings & fuselage, leaking liquids, and 2 from 3 AI fighters still engages the players own plane or the players squadron mates.

 

I observe this X- times in Career, PWCG and scripted campaigns. So same broken stuff as before.

 

 

[Herne]

This is one of those awkward things, that no matter what the devs do, they will never please everybody. A couple of nights ago I took a spit ix for a full round on berloga, during which time I had a couple of 1 shot wing losses, a few pilot snipes, and some very severe if not quite catastrophic hits against me. 

Now i've seen vids posted on these forums of the 108 shells doing some really impressive damage in ground tests against brit airframes, but I don't think that tells the whole story. The round as I understand it has a much lower muzzle velocity to it's peers. What was it's effective range, not just in terms of ability to aim, but for penetration.

Also does anyone know the mechanism for how these rounds detonate ? just to satisfy my own curiosity. 

I'm digressing a bit here, but my point is that just because we know that a 108 round can cause catastrophic damage, does it necessarily follow that a single round should do catastrophic damage every time ? 

I don't mind what the dev's decide is best for the game regarding damage capacity of ammunition, I enjoyed it pre 3.08 I enjoy it now, and am satisfied from my own experiences in the spit ix and p47 that either way it is still a very effective round.

[SCG_motoadve]

Like the new DM hundred times better, before it was like shooting missiles, every plane felt like paper, wings came off all the time, hated it , felt very arcade.

Maybe too many people got used to one pass and killed, which was easy, or seeing wing or tail come off , so they were sure they got a kill.

Developers please dont go back to the old DM.

The new one can be updated (your airplane should under perform when full of holes, and pieces missing, and 30mm revised if at all)

[II./JG77_Manu*]

2 minutes ago, =11=Herne said:

Now i've seen vids posted on these forums of the 108 shells doing some really impressive damage in ground tests against brit airframes, but I don't think that tells the whole story. The round as I understand it has a much lower muzzle velocity to it's peers. What was it's effective range, not just in terms of ability to aim, but for penetration.

Also does anyone know the mechanism for how these rounds detonate ? just to satisfy my own curiosity. 

I'm digressing a bit here, but my point is that just because we know that a 108 round can cause catastrophic damage, does it necessarily follow that a single round should do catastrophic damage every time ? 

 

Mk108 damage is not dependent on muzzle velocity. It's almost only chemical (explosion) damage, and this explosion damage is always the same, no matter how fast the bullet travels. Round detonates after a (very short) threshold time after hitting something solid, would normally happen around 5-10 cm inside the enemy's airframe. All those information is available in the respective thread, you just have to read it. 

6 minutes ago, Semor76 said:

nope... AI fighters are stilling pull high-g maneuvers with multiple Football size holes in wings & fuselage, leaking liquids, and 2 from 3 AI fighters still engages the players own plane or the players squadron mates.

 

I observe this X- times in Career, PWCG and scripted campaigns. So same broken stuff as before.

I know from a lot of online and offline experience that offline aircraft will still be rendered ineffective a lot quicker then online, especially bombers. But also fighter pilots will jump out of their aircraft a lot sooner then it will happen with real players online..

[Herne]

1 minute ago, II./JG77_Manu* said:

 

Mk108 damage is not dependent on muzzle velocity. It's almost only chemical (explosion) damage, and this explosion damage is always the same, no matter how fast the bullet travels. Round detonates after a (very short) threshold time after hitting something solid, would normally happen around 5-10 cm inside the enemy's airframe. All those information is available in the respective thread, you just have to read it. 

 

Ok I'll take another look thanks, but if that round does not penetrate, then there is a much lower potential for catastrophic damage which i'm sure you understand is the reason why I asked

[II./JG77_Manu*]

Just now, =11=Herne said:

 

Ok I'll take another look thanks, but if that round does not penetrate, then there is a much lower potential for catastrophic damage which i'm sure you understand is the reason why I asked

 

It penetrates (even if just a bit) and creates a 50cm+ hole which, in most cases, will cause catastrophic damage. There are very few places on an aircraft where you can just put a 50cm chunk out and nothing serious will be broken

[THERION]

1 hour ago, 303_Kwiatek said:

  Wing brokens against fighters where not such rare expecially when target was hit in the deep turn.  Also guncams show that short action was quite enough to be deadly for target. 

 

 

It is not exacly the case after 3.08 update in BOX.

 

Hi, 

 

I find it a bit difficult to compare the actual DM of 3.008 and real gun cam footage. In the real gun cam footage shown here, we actually don't know if it's just a momentum before

the victim plane is finally killed and what damage these victims already had at that moment - in this footage it seems that we only see the final killing stroke.

 

And there is a second point in this footage to consider. There are also gun cam records of Japanese planes, well known being very fragile and they had no self-sealing fuel tanks.

Finally, I read a lot about American, British and Canadian pilots stating that most of the late war German pilots didn't even trimmed their planes correctly, because of the lack of

training and too short training period and therefore were quite easy targets.

 

And citing your first sentence, mate, that "Wing brokens against fighters where not such rare...", then I have to inform you the footage you are showing us depicts only one

"wing incident" and it was shown twice in the whole footage.

 

Cheerio

Edited December 11, 2018 by -IRRE-Therion

[II./JG77_Manu*]

9 minutes ago, -IRRE-Therion said:

 

Hi, 

 

I find it a bit difficult to compare the actual DM of 3.008 and real gun cam footage. In the real gun cam footage shown here, we actually don't know if it's just a momentum before

the victim plane is finally killed and what damage these victims already had at that moment - in this footage it seems that we only see the final killing stroke.

 

And there is a second point in this footage to consider. There are also gun cam records of Japanese planes, well known being very fragile and they had no self-sealing fuel tanks.

Finally, I read a lot about American, British and Canadian pilots stating that most of the late war German pilots didn't even trimmed their planes correctly, because of the lack of

training and too short training period and therefore were quite easy targets.

 

And citing your first sentence, mate, that "Wing brokens against fighters where not such rare...", then I have to inform you the footage you are showing us depicts only one

"wing incident" and it was shown twice in the whole footage.

 

Cheerio

 

Hans Joachim Marseille managed to kill enemy fighters (Spit and P40, we have both in game) with very short bursts of 7mm, in one approach. Now test this in game, is it possible? There were situations (quite a lot) were pilots managed to shoot down 6 or 7 or 8 aircraft in one sortie - confirmed, not claimed (that would have been quite a bit more). Before 3.008 this was surely possible..but try this now, even against rookie AI it will be quite the challenge. 

[Aap]

16 minutes ago, -IRRE-Therion said:

I have to inform you the footage you are showing us depicts only one

"wing incident" and it was shown twice in the whole footage.

 

A sample of guncam footages obviously does not tell us about the frequency of various incidents, but certainly the shots in the video at 2:00, 8:20, 8:28 and 8:41 marks were separate incidents.

[Herne]

4 minutes ago, II./JG77_Manu* said:

 

Hans Joachim Marseille managed to kill enemy fighters (Spit and P40, we have both in game) with very short bursts of 7mm, in one approach. Now test this in game, is it possible? There were situations (quite a lot) were pilots managed to shoot down 6 or 7 or 8 aircraft in one sortie - confirmed, not claimed (that would have been quite a bit more). Before 3.008 this was surely possible..but try this now, even against rookie AI it will be quite the challenge. 

 

those kind of statistics would have been the exception, not the rule. Otherwise Germany would have won the war through total air superiority. 

[CountZero]

Just now, II./JG77_Manu* said:

 

Hans Joachim Marseille managed to kill enemy fighters (Spit and P40, we have both in game) with very short bursts of 7mm, in one approach. Now test this in game, is it possible? There were situations (quite a lot) were pilots managed to shoot down 6 or 7 or 8 aircraft in one sortie - confirmed, not claimed (that would have been quite a bit more). Before 3.008 this was surely possible..but try this now, even against rookie AI it will be quite the challenge. 

 

did he criticly damaged thouse airplanes with that short burst of 7.7, or did pilots bailed out when some one shoot at them in their airplane? in game most players dont care if your pilot is wonded or airplane full of wholes or on fire if you can stil play and try to shoot at enemy. While in real i bet one would bail out even if you hear rock hiting your airplane thinking its enemy bullet

[II./JG77_Manu*]

1 minute ago, =11=Herne said:

 

those kind of statistics would have been the exception, not the rule. Otherwise Germany would have won the war through total air superiority. 

 

Of course he was an exceptional fighter pilot, but online we have a lot more pilots capable of aiming in the same manner. Online pilots have a lot lot more experience at shooting and hitting targets then most real WW2 pilots had. In real life pilots rarely hit enemy aircraft and had an abysmal hit ratio. Pretty much every guncam footage shows the same, all aircraft on all sides just spraying and praying, no precise aiming at specific points.

 

2 minutes ago, 77.CountZero said:

 

did he criticly damaged thouse airplanes with that short burst of 7.7, or did pilots bailed out when some one shoot at them in their airplane? in game most players dont care if your pilot is wonded or airplane full of wholes or on fire if you can stil play and try to shoot at enemy. While in real i bet one would bail out even if you hear rock hiting your airplane thinking its enemy bullet

 

That's a valid point. Probably hard to get factual data about that.

[Garven]

15 minutes ago, 77.CountZero said:

 

did he criticly damaged thouse airplanes with that short burst of 7.7, or did pilots bailed out when some one shoot at them in their airplane? in game most players dont care if your pilot is wonded or airplane full of wholes or on fire if you can stil play and try to shoot at enemy. While in real i bet one would bail out even if you hear rock hiting your airplane thinking its enemy bullet

He was known to over-claim IIRC.

[216th_Jordan]

3 hours ago, II./JG77_Manu* said:

If it would have been the other way round, and the 3.007 DM would be the new one, and you would do the poll, the outcome would probably be the same. People are always craving for "new updates, improvements" or however they are called. People are just happy with changes and things "moving forward" instead of stagnation. 

 

 

 

 

I disagree and history has shown otherwise. When bad updates came they were rejected by most of the community, whenever highly central processes or mechanics were altered there was a lot of suspicion involved. To have 2/3rds of people liking the results is rather solid proof that the updated damage mechanics are very welcomed.

 

Also IRL pilots would not have fought as long in a badly damaged plane as we do on average.

 

One thing regarding nuzzle velocity btw: It is important because it determines the amount of distance travelled inside an object before the projectile explodes, that can have a very large effect on damage inflicted. Also it determines if the projectile is able to penetrate at all.

 

Just to get this clear, I'd like to see better HE damage model for normal as well as mineshells but I'd like to keep what we have until something more accurate can be introduced. Also nice for the bomber guys who always had to take the beating

[Guest deleted@134347]

their poll, complaints and opinions are pretty much in line with the English forum.  The dev's aren't actually asking for the commentary on how to improve it, they are simply inquiring which damage model is likeable more. Frankly, I don't understand the point of the poll. However, the player response is in line with:  "3.008 is better for representing the plane's rigid structure, however  the impact to the airdynamic efficacy of the maimed airframe/wings is severely lacking".

[SCG_motoadve]

4 minutes ago, moosya said:

their poll, complaints and opinions are pretty much in line with the English forum.  The dev's aren't actually asking for the commentary on how to improve it, they are simply inquiring which damage model is likeable more. Frankly, I don't understand the point of the poll. However, the player response is in line with:  "3.008 is better for representing the plane's rigid structure, however  the impact to the airdynamic efficacy of the maimed airframe/wings is severely lacking".

If this new DM would have come together with the plane being shot at , starting to loose performance while pieces were shot and holes were made, there will have been a lot less complaints.

Plane looses performance like in real life would have been, then he cannot fight you back, just try to survive, which makes it easier to finish him off.

 

I am grateful they fixed 3.007 , and its going in the right direction, did not expect it to be perfect right away, one important tweak is , it needs the complement of the modelling of the damage that plane has received.

Hopefully in the next update this gets implemented.

 

Great job developers, and even as it is now the votes are almost 70% in favor which means most people are happy with the change.

[69TD_Hajo_Garlic]

I've been lit on fire recently much more frequently than ever before.  It was maybe a once or twice a month occurance, I've burned 5-6 times since the new patch now.