I'm glad the new visual damage made me realise that....

[McDuff]

my planes are built out of 2 inch plate steel....no wonder I can't fly for s**t.. 

[Trooper117]

lol!... I didn't know the Tempest used turret armour from a naval destroyer!

[RyanR]

The holes are just a basic "decal" on the plane's texture map. No doubt that the devs will fine tune the system with a wider array of decals. I'm surprised the 20mm hole next to the pilot wasn't fatal. I've been finding those to be pretty lethal.

 

-Ryan

[McDuff]

10 minutes ago, RyanR said:

The holes are just a basic "decal" on the plane's texture map. No doubt that the devs will fine tune the system with a wider array of decals. I'm surprised the 20mm hole next to the pilot wasn't fatal. I've been finding those to be pretty lethal.

 

-Ryan

Why use them then...they look stupid and cartoony.. They belong to Tank Crew.

 

IL2 COD does a great job for a much older sim...

 

[Mtnbiker1998]

Try turning off invulnerability in the realism settings

[McDuff]

3 minutes ago, Mtnbiker1998 said:

Try turning off invulnerability in the realism settings

It was turned on to show how bad the decals are...How is turning it off going to make the decals better?

They'll still show a 2 inch steel plate hole..

[Koziolek]

19 minutes ago, McDuff said:

It was turned on to show how bad the decals are...How is turning it off going to make the decals better?

They'll still show a 2 inch steel plate hole..

Well, you'll probably die fast enough not to notice them ?

[Jade_Monkey]

Have you tried giving constructive feedback?

[Sunde]

11 minutes ago, Jade_Monkey said:

Have you tried giving constructive feedback?

I feel like the testers need to do that first of all? How did anyone ever think this looked good?
 I mean the update is welcome in my book, but this just looks a bit... ugh?
 

[Jade_Monkey]

6 minutes ago, Sunde said:

I feel like the testers need to do that first of all? How did anyone ever think this looked good?
 I mean the update is welcome in my book, but this just looks a bit... ugh?

 

What's the logic there? constructive feedback is only for the (unpaid) testers, everyone else can skip that step and go straight to being sarcastic and sardonic?

[Sunde]

4 hours ago, Jade_Monkey said:

 

What's the logic there? constructive feedback is only for the (unpaid) testers, everyone else can skip that step and go straight to being sarcastic and sardonic?

If you cannot handle the obvious joking nature of OP's post, I believe ordering a healthy dose of thicker skin to be in order.
No reason to be so proud on behalf of this product that you can’t handle someone making a joke whilst highlighting an OBVIOUS issue. 

Hardly an assault at every hope and dream this dev team has ever had. 
I'd rather have people jokingly point out errors here rather than not at all. 

[McDuff]

1 hour ago, Jade_Monkey said:

Have you tried giving constructive feedback?

I have in the past about visual damage modelling being one of it's weakest points...I had support but was jumped on by certain parties.

I don't care what you say...I know that you know it looks awful...How can anyone not?.....Anyway...I know it's not just me...

[MisterSmith]

3 hours ago, McDuff said:

my planes are built out of 2 inch plate steel....no wonder I can't fly for s**t.. 

It does seem worthy of a proper bug report. I encourage you do do so, please.

 

Smith

[oc2209]

3 hours ago, McDuff said:

Why use them then...they look stupid and cartoony.. They belong to Tank Crew.

 

IL2 COD does a great job for a much older sim...

 

 

Got to admit, that COD damage does look impressive. And is better than what we have here.

 

I guess recently increasing the size of the decals (compared to what they were when DVD first came out--much smaller) only exacerbated the tanky look.

 

Could be fixed, or at least mitigated, by changing the elevated area around the hole into a more 'shredded tin foil' texture and appearance. The 30mm already does this, but they evidently wanted the 20mm to be visually distinct from the 30mm.

Edited October 24, 2022 by oc2209

[oc2209]

Let's assume for the sake of simplicity that the current BoX visual damage model can't mimic COD's. Forget why and how.

 

So then the question becomes: how to make a flat decal look plausible?

 

As I said, the 30mm does a better job than the 20mm:

 

Spoiler

 

Notice how the 30mm texture and shape draws the eye downward into the hole. Also note the 12.7mm HE in the lower right corner of the screen. It doesn't look too bad at that size, with the lighting fully on it to give some metallic impression.

 

However, in the dark, and much larger, the 20mm hole becomes the weakest of the bunch:

 

Spoiler

 

It takes on the '2-inch' steel look much more, the larger it gets.

 

In proper lighting, however, it looks okay from certain angles:

 

Spoiler

 

So, I'd say that a few tweaks to the 20mm HE hole could improve it. Reduce the size slightly, and lower the ridges along its edge.

[Voidhunger]

im not sure if even the mighty Bf can fly with such a hole in the engine. oh sorry two holes. :))))

Just now, Voidhunger said:

im not sure if even the mighty Bf can fly with such a hole in the engine. oh sorry two holes. :))))

 

Edit: leave this DM model only for TC please. its ridiculous

[oc2209]

5 minutes ago, Voidhunger said:

im not sure if even the mighty Bf can fly with such a hole in the engine. oh sorry two holes. :))))

 

For the record, the engine seized shortly after I took the screen. It was part of a 109 vs 109 combat I was testing.

[RyanR]

Whatever. It's a work in progress. If you understand anything about 3D graphics and texturing, you'd know that it's not rocket surgery to fine tune once the foundation is in place.

 

Frankly, if you turn off invulnerability, you won't notice that problem so much. There's a pretty good balance of the DVD damage and the prior damage visualization. Is it perfect, nope. In single player, I you look at planes that actually return to base with damage, there's no overwhelming amount of "decals".

 

-Ryan

 

 

 

 

[CUJO_1970]

1 hour ago, oc2209 said:

So, I'd say that a few tweaks to the 20mm HE hole could improve it. Reduce the size slightly, and lower the ridges along its edge.

 

It's a tough call...once you look at the size holes from the MG151/20mm:

 

20MM from FW190, B-17:

 

20mm hits on B-17 "Frenesi" six guys bailed, plane junked after landing:

 

 

 

20mm from a 109, hit on P-47:

 

 

So the size of the 20mm holes are actually pretty close - what we don't see visually is the sheet metal skin and internals being blown outward by the chemical/gas pressure. So what we see gives the appearance of inward pressure - but it was really blowing everything outward.

 

The MG151/20 was a nasty gun, especially the mine rounds.

 

 

Edited October 24, 2022 by CUJO_1970

[oc2209]

12 minutes ago, CUJO_1970 said:

 

It's a tough call...once you look at the size holes from the MG151/20mm:

 

So the size of the 20mm holes are actually pretty close - what we don't see visually is the sheet metal skin and internals being blown outward by the chemical/gas pressure. So what we see gives the appearance of inward pressure - but it was really blowing everything outward.

 

The MG151/20 was a nasty gun, especially the mine rounds.

 

Yeah, I didn't necessarily mean the holes were too big from a realism perspective as much as a texture one. The smaller 12.7mm HE holes look a lot better because they're smaller, in my opinion.

 

The 20mm holes appear to have been simply upscaled without increasing their complexity/density in terms of detail, hence the rather 'mushy' heavy metal look they have.

 

As for which way the shredded skin should be going--yes, it should be projecting outward, but I think that's more likely to end up making the decal look fake from certain angles.

 

Notice from the pictures you posted, how the 20mm holes aren't really very round in most cases? That's what the CoD damage recreates much better.

 

BoX's 30mm hole looks better than the 20mm, I think, because it's not perfectly round. The 20mm hole is too round and symmetrical. The edges need to be squarer and more jagged, instead of round and mushy.

[CUJO_1970]

7 minutes ago, oc2209 said:

Notice from the pictures you posted, how the 20mm holes aren't really very round in most cases? That's what the CoD damage recreates much better.

 

BoX's 30mm hole looks better than the 20mm, I think, because it's not perfectly round. The 20mm hole is too round and symmetrical. The edges need to be squarer and more jagged, instead of round and mushy.

 

This is a good point - for example here are 13mm hits to a Mustang, they comparatively round:

 

 

This is the Spitfire IX (BS 409, PK-B) of Stanisław Blok of No. 315 Polish Fighter Squadron, hit by 20mm from FW190:

 

 

The German 20mm round created a large chemical/gas explosion - and order does not result from chaos

 

 

[1PL-Husar-1Esk]

p47

20mm

 

37 AA shell, p47 tail -elvator

 

 

btw these deformed pieces of sheet metal on the wings sometimes acted as trims, (as seen in other post)

 

Edited October 24, 2022 by 1PL-Husar-1Esk

[Legioneod]

There is a reason Clod and even DCS have a better looking damage model, they actually model the interior of the airframes and have a 3d damage model. Il2 doesn't do this for the most part, it would take far longer to make each aircraft if they did.

 

I wouldn't spend too much time comparing the visuals of IL2 BOX vs other games because the way they do visual damage is different and it will never look the same.

a 3d model will always look better than a decal, it's just how it is.

 

Imo the devs did a decent job with what they have to work with, and the decals can always be improved over time.

Edited October 24, 2022 by Legioneod

[oc2209]

33 minutes ago, CUJO_1970 said:

 

This is a good point - for example here are 13mm hits to a Mustang, they comparatively round:

 

 

This is the Spitfire IX (BS 409, PK-B) of Stanisław Blok of No. 315 Polish Fighter Squadron, hit by 20mm from FW190:

 

 

The German 20mm round created a large chemical/gas explosion - and order does not result from chaos

 

 

 

Excellent photo of the 13mm. The BoX 13mm decal looks quite similar (certainly close enough), and I suspect the 20mm decal is either identical or very similar to the 13mm, but simply larger. That's where it loses detail and thus realism.

 

The 20mm HE decal should be squarer to simulate the fact that it often seems to totally destroy the skin between the framing. Makes sense for the weaker 13mm to simply be a round hole, as it's not ripping up the skin with the same force.

 

While it's not going to be as attractive as CoD's, it could at least superficially approach it.

 

That, and the fact that CoD's damage isn't modelling each bullet/shell impact (correct me if I'm wrong there). I'm willing to sacrifice damage detail to see exactly where each bullet strikes; if decals are the only way to do that, so be it.

 

3 minutes ago, Legioneod said:

There is a reason Clod and even DCS have a better looking damage model, they actually model the interior of the airframes and have a 3d damage model. Il2 doesn't do this for the most part, it would take far longer to make each aircraft if they did.

 

I wouldn't spend too much time comparing the visuals of IL2 BOX vs other games because the way they do visual damage is different and it will never look the same.

a 3d model will always look better than a decal, it's just how it is.

 

Imo the devs did a decent job with what they have to work with, and the decals can always be improved over time.

 

I largely agree. By the way, do either CoD or DCS model individual bullet/shell impacts at a 1:1 level, or is it more of a 'damage area' model?

Edited October 24, 2022 by oc2209

[343KKT_Kintaro]

6 minutes ago, oc2209 said:

That, and the fact that CoD's damage isn't modelling each bullet/shell impact (correct me if I'm wrong there). I'm willing to sacrifice damage detail to see exactly where each bullet strikes; if decals are the only way to do that, so be it.

 

 

Back in the 2000s, in English-language interviews Oleg Maddox announced that very same feature for his future game... and this is exactly what "Cliffs of Dover" is doing from its release in 2011, thus keeping Oleg's promise. I think Cliffs of Dover was the first sim to accomplish such a milestone in the history of PC flight sims. Maybe DCS did it first, but I doubt it. In Cliffs of Dover damage model, when a bullet hits an area in an aircraft, the systems in this area are affected, not randomly but locally, and this is modeleld in the game since the very beginning. Going back to the Great Battles series, please remember that the "V" in "DVD" stands for... "visual". Cheers.

[Legioneod]

26 minutes ago, oc2209 said:

 

I largely agree. By the way, do either CoD or DCS model individual bullet/shell impacts at a 1:1 level, or is it more of a 'damage area' model?

I'm almost certain it's just a general damage area like Box used to have and not 1:1. But keep in mind this is just visual representation not not actual damage.

 

While I think the visual damage location (not necessarily looks) is more accurate in Il2 Box the actual damage being done under the visuals is more accurate in sims like DCS or Clod imo.

 

For instance DCS actually models individual hitboxes for things like wing spars, control rods, control surfaces, etc. While I think Il2 has some hitboxes modeled it's nowhere near the detail of DCS. The end result is you get a more accurate damage model in DCS due to more being modeled.

 

 

Personally I don't care about the visual damage model as much as I do the actual damage that is done under the surface. I'm happy with Il2 Box visually but I hope to see the internal damage model improved and modeled to even high degree like DCS.

Edited October 24, 2022 by Legioneod

[oc2209]

1 hour ago, Legioneod said:

I'm almost certain it's just a general damage area like Box used to have and not 1:1. But keep in mind this is just visual representation not not actual damage.

 

While I think the visual damage location (not necessarily looks) is more accurate in Il2 Box the actual damage being done under the visuals is more accurate in sims like DCS or Clod imo.

 

Right. To be clear I wasn't trying to conflate exterior visual to internal damage models--I was always strictly referring to visual effects.

 

I'm sure the devs would like to improve the level of detail in BoX's internal/component damage model, but it'd likely be a huge undertaking. For the time being, I'd be happy with just improving the exterior damage decals a little.

 

*Edit: to elaborate more on what I mean regarding visuals: in CoD, I'm guessing the same level of damage that @McDuff's screens show, could be made by either a barrage of AP strikes, or a few HE strikes; the end result would be the same visually. Whereas I find BoX's clear distinction between AP and HE DVD holes to be preferable.

 

If someday the DVD system could be married to a more complex damage model, then it'd be the best of both worlds.

Edited October 25, 2022 by oc2209

[354thFG_Drewm3i-VR]

CoD models individual bullet hits.

[343KKT_Kintaro]

33 minutes ago, drewm3i-VR said:

CoD models individual bullet hits.

 

 

And damage systems model and damage visual model are affected locally where the projectiles do hit:

 

[Dusty926]

I think the decals look good. They're not perfect but in the confines of what's possible with the engine I think these are a great step up for all aircraft.

The reason invulnerability is notable there, by the way, is because with that much damage, it probably would've just come straight off. Of course when you're invincible, then a wing full of holes on an intact plane looks a bit silly.

Moreover, it may not be CLOD levels of obsessively specific, but the DM is definitely more than just, "Ehhh apply a little damage to the engine, call it a day" simple bologna. The synchronization between the DVD and the actual damage the plane seems to suffer is extremely close, in my experience. I've had extraordinarily rare cases where that wasn't the case, and in those it was likely shrapnel damage that wasn't immediately obvious to me. So I have to say that such a thing is not a unicorn feature of CLOD's anymore. Even DCS has an adept local damage model now, and that game's years behind the balls both IL-2s have been kicking about.

[oc2209]

3 hours ago, drewm3i-VR said:

CoD models individual bullet hits.

 

2 hours ago, 343KKT_Kintaro said:

 

And damage systems model and damage visual model are affected locally where the projectiles do hit:

 

 

That GIF doesn't really show me how visual damage works. Too far away, wrong angle.

 

So you're saying that if you shot the center of the roundel on the Spitfire's wing like a bull's eye, that spot would show damage? Not a generic pre-determined damaged area beside it? And that you could tell whether it was a solid AP shot or an HE shot?

 

For the purposes of this thread topic--which was about visual damage rendering--I'm only talking about visuals here.

 

If CoD already does all that, then yeah, that's a pretty big deal.

[oc2209]

Under further examination, the jagged inner edges of a German 20mm hole make the overall shape less symmetrical and round than it appears at a distance (and under poor lighting):

 

Spoiler

 

However, the textures are still awful next to the 13mm (right beside it).

 

This might be a per-airframe DVD glitch that can be fixed over time. 20mm holes don't look this blurry on every plane (I think).

[9./JG52_J-HAT]

1 hour ago, oc2209 said:

 

 

That GIF doesn't really show me how visual damage works. Too far away, wrong angle.

 

So you're saying that if you shot the center of the roundel on the Spitfire's wing like a bull's eye, that spot would show damage? Not a generic pre-determined damaged area beside it? And that you could tell whether it was a solid AP shot or an HE shot?

 

For the purposes of this thread topic--which was about visual damage rendering--I'm only talking about visuals here.

 

If CoD already does all that, then yeah, that's a pretty big deal.

In CloD, rifle caliber bullets show individual hit decals where they actually hit.

Cannons do area damage. Ie pre baked damage but concentrated to a relatively small area and shown when that area gets hit (by cannon). So those screenshots show bullet hit decals where they actually hit and also the pre-baked damage done by the cannon hits.

Visually, you could get many small holes (decals) on the plane from small caliber, but never something like the pic in the op from multiple cannon hits. You could keep pounding that same wing with cannon and the damage visualization won’t change because it‘s hit its max damage visualization. Even though internally the aircraft would be a real mess and the wing would eventually break off. 

 

And also as mentioned, CloD models internal components and the bullets / rounds travel and hit these components triggering damage. For example, I‘ve been hit in the water hose of my left radiator with a single bullet. Looking over my left wing I could see a single decal at the exact spot it entered. Had it been a cannon round explosion, the wing would be torn open in some form but would be a variation of the pre baked damage. Much like the Spitfire above. Not necessarily where the round hit exactly.
 

So the functionality is indeed there for individual hits, both small caliber and cannons / explosions / shrapnel. Just the visualization differs between types.

Edited October 25, 2022 by 9./JG52_J-HAT

[the_emperor]

10 hours ago, CUJO_1970 said:

So the size of the 20mm holes are actually pretty close - what we don't see visually is the sheet metal skin and internals being blown outward by the chemical/gas pressure. So what we see gives the appearance of inward pressure - but it was really blowing everything outward.

 

Yes, the delay charge employed by the germans to maximize blast&pressure damage inside the airframe ripping apart the aircraft from the inside out taking advantage of the load barring structure in a confined space wanting to resists and thereby increasing the effect, is currently not in the game.

[BOO]

OT but this never ceased to impress me

 

 

[nachinus]

55 minutes ago, BOO said:

OT but this never ceased to impress me

 

 

That's actually pretty amazing. I'm definitely giving CoD another go as soon as the new update comes out.

[oc2209]

14 hours ago, 9./JG52_J-HAT said:

In CloD, rifle caliber bullets show individual hit decals where they actually hit.

Cannons do area damage. Ie pre baked damage but concentrated to a relatively small area and shown when that area gets hit (by cannon). So those screenshots show bullet hit decals where they actually hit and also the pre-baked damage done by the cannon hits.

 

 

I see, so it's a combination of DVD and predetermined damage. Thanks for explaining it so well.

 

Overall, BoX would undeniably be better off with such a system, but expecting it anytime soon is probably wishful thinking.

[RyanR]

Let's be objective. I flew straight and level and got an Ace 190A-8 pilot to to shoot me up with invulnerability on and off.

 

Invulnerability on:

 

 

 

 

Invulnerability off. There's two or three "decals" with some other "minor" damage:

 

 

 

The difference is pretty staggering. Clearly, the DVD system is just an enhancement to the previous situation.

 

-Ryan

 

[McDuff]

21 hours ago, RyanR said:

Let's be objective. I flew straight and level and got an Ace 190A-8 pilot to to shoot me up with invulnerability on and off.

 

Invulnerability on:

 

 

 

 

Invulnerability off. There's two or three "decals" with some other "minor" damage:

 

 

 

The difference is pretty staggering. Clearly, the DVD system is just an enhancement to the previous situation.

 

-Ryan

 

OK... I started this thread and I'm not having a go at developers trying to improve this game in any way.. I love this game... I am also not having a go at the physical damage modelling which is great but I do care about the pretty poor visual damage modelling...To even have one of those 2 inch plate hole decals on my plane is wrong...Don't understand why some can't see this..

[RyanR]

2 hours ago, McDuff said:

Don't understand why some can't see this..

 

You didn't really do the best job explaining your opinion.

 

You finally succeeded.... but in the very last sentence.

 

I can now appreciate your opinion.

 

-Ryan