Korea. IL-2 Series Dev Blog #11: Explosion Craters

[LukeFF]

Dev Blog #11 for Korea. IL-2 Series is now available for your reading: https://il2-korea.com/news/dd_11

 

 

[Rjel]

Now that is cool! I’d rather see the steam engine rupture and throw steam rather the burn but still pretty cool. 
 

AND FIRST!

Edited September 27, 2024 by Rjel

[Juri_JS]

Craters leave a whole in the ground, so I guess things like trench systems are also possible. Right?

[LukeFF]

1 minute ago, Juri_JS said:

Craters leave a whole in the ground, so I guess things like trench systems are also possible. Right?

 

Yes, it's mentioned in the text.

[kramer]

Well, it's awesome. All the ground warfare i've seen so far is significantly improved. What is great as air warfare in Korea was mostly a ground support.

[Avimimus]

Those train physics... need work 😄

[Juri_JS]

3 minutes ago, LukeFF said:

 

Yes, it's mentioned in the text.

I completely missed the text. 😅

[LuftManu]

Hey those look really good!

Also the mention of trenches in the future.

These things make bombs "more powerful" as you see the mess you created with some bombs. 

Can't wait to deploy some bombs on a Corsair! 

[354thFG_Leifr]

This is some Looney Tunes goofy level of vehicle interaction, but it doesn't matter really when you're in the air - neat!

[86Cheese]

This is genuinely one of the most significant technical advances in combat sims in the last decade. The potential for airfield/runway denial is pretty freaking exciting.

[Sneaksie]

56 minutes ago, 356thFS_Leifr said:

This is some Looney Tunes goofy level of vehicle interaction, but it doesn't matter really when you're in the air - neat!

At the moment of collision there is a transition from simplified to detailed motion physics, so the locomotive in the video is thrown too high into the air - this transition is yet to be tuned but will be to give more realistic-looking results.

[354thFG_Leifr]

36 minutes ago, Sneaksie said:

At the moment of collision there is a transition from simplified to detailed motion physics, so the locomotive in the video is thrown too high into the air - this transition is yet to be tuned but will be to give more realistic-looking results.

 

Understandable, and to be honest I'm not really all that bothered by it - we'll be in the air after all.

Thanks for the reply Sneaksie.

[Rjel]

26 minutes ago, 356thFS_Leifr said:

 

Understandable, and to be honest I'm not really all that bothered by it - we'll be in the air after all.

Thanks for the reply Sneaksie.

If the devs are striving for a state of the art sim, then details like that would be an issue. As another said, air to ground was a great deal of the airwar in Korea. I think  it would be hugely important to pay attention to how ground vehicles react to their world too. 

[76IAP-Black]

1 hour ago, Sneaksie said:

At the moment of collision there is a transition from simplified to detailed motion physics, so the locomotive in the video is thrown too high into the air - this transition is yet to be tuned but will be to give more realistic-looking results.

I understand your videos as WIP and feature showing for the ongoing project

[Jade_Monkey]

Really nice improvements, love the new features where it's not just a game object, but actuallt tesellates into the ground.

 

 

May I suggest an improvement to the explosion sound FX?

Any chance we can add a delayed sound of debris falling from the air, similar to the video below: 

 

[[CPT]Crunch]

Will contact fuses make a difference this go around?  As in lesser hole in the earth and a larger more powerful blast radius, like when contacting a hanger or structures roof, or the top of a tank or truck.

[Rjel]

3 hours ago, Sneaksie said:

At the moment of collision there is a transition from simplified to detailed motion physics, so the locomotive in the video is thrown too high into the air - this transition is yet to be tuned but will be to give more realistic-looking results.

Can you tell us if the trains will have their weight and momentum factored into any collision with vehicles or even if they derail? That's is, will they continue on their path after striking a lighter weight object or will they immediately stop as the do in the GB series?

[Mysticpuma]

I would like to see an improvement in the visual explosion effects, especially with a new game engine. They look very dated and simplistic. I hope to see options for cinematic effects which push the graphics much further down the route of improved particle effects, so that debris, dust, particles and dust plumes can be created. After all that is the reward of hitting a target...to.see it be devastated. 

Love the fact the train has some forward motion after destruction, looking for ward to it being corrected (as mentioned), would be nice to see a repeat of this when the physics are sorted and the locomotive at a much higher speed to see what happens to the carriages too.

Also as mentioned by others, maybe not too much fire as likely the steam detonation would have seriously impacted the coal burning tray. Maybe if the rolling stock is fuel or ammo, no issues but this looks like carriages and the fire looks a bit big?

[GOA_Karaya_VR]

The way that the mustang goes to the crater and the trains climb and explodes remember me the physics of IL-2 1946 mixed with some Grand Thief Auto 3.

 

I wish that this is not even the final stage of the product.

 

Regards.

[BraveSirRobin]

1 hour ago, Mysticpuma said:

I would like to see an improvement in the visual explosion effects, especially with a new game engine. They look very dated and simplistic. I hope to see options for cinematic effects which push the graphics much further down the route of improved particle effects, so that debris, dust, particles and dust plumes can be created. After all that is the reward of hitting a target...to.see it be devastated. 

Love the fact the train has some forward motion after destruction, looking for ward to it being corrected (as mentioned), would be nice to see a repeat of this when the physics are sorted and the locomotive at a much higher speed to see what happens to the carriages too.

Also as mentioned by others, maybe not too much fire as likely the steam detonation would have seriously impacted the coal burning tray. Maybe if the rolling stock is fuel or ammo, no issues but this looks like carriages and the fire looks a bit big?

I’m pretty confident that before this game is released they will take an actual steam locomotive, bring it up to full speed, drop a bomb in front of it, and film the results just to get the perfect in game recreation.  In fact, they’re probably going to do it multiple times.  Once with freight cars filled with bombs. Once with freight cars filled with aviation fuel.  Then they’ll do it with ordinary gasoline.  That way they can model the subtle differences between the different fuel types.  Lastly they will use a troop transport in order to accurately model how the troops fly out of the train as it crashes.  It’s probably going to take a little time to find volunteers for that.  But it will totally be worth it.

 

Then people will complain that the train crash was not realistic enough in a combat flight sim.

Edited September 28, 2024 by BraveSirRobin

[Rjel]

22 minutes ago, BraveSirRobin said:

I’m pretty confident that before this game is released they will take an actual steam locomotive, bring it up to full speed, drop a bomb in front of it, and film the results just to get the perfect in game recreation.  In fact, they’re probably going to do it multiple times.  Once with freight cars filled with bombs. Once with freight cars filled with aviation fuel.  Then they’ll do it with ordinary gasoline.  That way they can model the subtle differences between the different fuel types.  Lastly they will use a troop transport in order to accurately model how the troops fly out of the train as it crashes.  It’s probably going to take a little time to find volunteers for that.  But it will totally be worth it.

 

Then people will complain that the train crash was not realistic enough in a combat flight sim.

So then, what we have now in GB is good enough? Why go to all the trouble of having new ground graphics then? Why recreate the same shallow game if all that is needed are airplanes buzzing around? I think I'd prefer a more full fledged experience that more closely mirrors reality, including brand spanking new ground objects and state of the art special effects.

Edited September 28, 2024 by Rjel
spelling

[BraveSirRobin]

Just now, Rjel said:

So then, what we have now in GB is good enough? Why go to all the trouble of having new ground graphics then? Why recreate the same shallow game if all that is needed are airplanes buzzing around? I think I'd prefer a more full fledged experience than more closely mirrors reality, including brand spanking new ground objects and state of the art special effects.

No, it clearly is not good enough.  We need to accurately model the difference between a train crash with aviation fuel compared to one with ordinary gasoline.  Hell, I left out diesel fuel.  We need to model that, too.  Are you planning to volunteer for the troop train crash?

[BlitzPig_EL]

 

The first few seconds tells the story.  They really did derail a train for this scene.

Edited September 28, 2024 by BlitzPig_EL

[BraveSirRobin]

53 minutes ago, BlitzPig_EL said:

 

The first few seconds tells the story.  They really did derail a train for this scene.

Sorry, we need it to hit a much bigger crater.  Nice try.

[Rjel]

3 hours ago, BraveSirRobin said:

No, it clearly is not good enough.  We need to accurately model the difference between a train crash with aviation fuel compared to one with ordinary gasoline.  Hell, I left out diesel fuel.  We need to model that, too.  Are you planning to volunteer for the troop train crash?

"We" aren't modeling anything, at least I'm not. I can only suggest what my idea of reality in an up to date simulation could be. Obviously our ideas of that reality differ. I'm pretty sure I'm content not sharing yours.

[LukeFF]

7 hours ago, GOA_Bf109Pilot_VR said:

The way that the mustang goes to the crater and the trains climb and explodes remember me the physics of IL-2 1946 mixed with some Grand Thief Auto 3.

 

I wish that this is not even the final stage of the product.

 

Regards.

 

Sneaksie wrote up above on this same page that there is still tuning to do.

[1PL-Husar-1Esk]

Nice to see more ground physic, I imagine that bomb explosion effects are only place holders and in the future we will see new ones, those present in the video are not much changed since  ROF - 15 years ago.

 

Derbits and right amount of dust visualisation= satisfactions to watch , ground close to crater should be changed also, to nice cut off.

Edited September 28, 2024 by 1PL-Husar-1Esk

[1PL-Husar-1Esk]

I imagine with crater technology it is now possible to make a whole in the ground   when plane hits the earth with enough speed 😆

[Mysticpuma]

I think CloD had the best representation of explosions/debris until they changed them a while back.

Plumes of smoke and debris (Video starts at ground explosions).

 

 

[Robli]

7 hours ago, BraveSirRobin said:

Then people will complain that the train crash was not realistic enough in a combat flight sim.

 

Yes, as this is a combat flight sim, they should definitely restrict themselves to only shooting down real B-29's, with various bomb loads and fuel quantities, Migs, F-86's etc, as this is apparently the only way to make a flight sim not look cartoonish.

[IckyATLAS]

15 hours ago, Sneaksie said:

At the moment of collision there is a transition from simplified to detailed motion physics, so the locomotive in the video is thrown too high into the air - this transition is yet to be tuned but will be to give more realistic-looking results.

A question to the developers. It was said that with the Il2GB map building technology it was not possible to do trenches (in FC simulated by black lines) and craters are just a visual thing a few layers on top of the map ground and flat, which makes craters on slopes awkward.

 

But that technology can have mountains and valleys as well as steep slopes (Kuban map).

If we move the whole map upwards from the zero reference point to say + 100 meters altitude, then we could have trenches as they would just be "steep valleys" lower than ground level but still at a positive altitude. Tunnels is different and maybe the "old" map building tool cannot do it if it has topological geometry limitations. Craters is more complicated as they will be created during the game and you need to modify the map mesh in game, and if I am not wrong this is not possible except if the craters are built already in the map and why not if you want to have from start bombed and destroyed cities or villages.

 

[1PL-Husar-1Esk]

1 hour ago, IckyATLAS said:

A question to the developers. It was said that with the Il2GB map building technology it was not possible to do trenches (in FC simulated by black lines) and craters are just a visual thing a few layers on top of the map ground and flat, which makes craters on slopes awkward.

 

But that technology can have mountains and valleys as well as steep slopes (Kuban map).

If we move the whole map upwards from the zero reference point to say + 100 meters altitude, then we could have trenches as they would just be "steep valleys" lower than ground level but still at a positive altitude. Tunnels is different and maybe the "old" map building tool cannot do it if it has topological geometry limitations. Craters is more complicated as they will be created during the game and you need to modify the map mesh in game, and if I am not wrong this is not possible except if the craters are built already in the map and why not if you want to have from start bombed and destroyed cities or villages.

 

But the resolution of height map is limited in GB , so there can't be one meter wide trench. I think 10 m is smallest.

[Gunfreak]

18 hours ago, 86Cheese said:

This is genuinely one of the most significant technical advances in combat sims in the last decade. The potential for airfield/runway denial is pretty freaking exciting.

It been in that other sim for many years. You can bomb runways and taxi ways to stop player or AI from using them. So airfield attacks in multiplayer has a major strategical effect  

[BlitzPig_EL]

7 hours ago, BraveSirRobin said:

Sorry, we need it to hit a much bigger crater.  Nice try.

 

You have missed the point entirely.  Did you even note how there was no huge explosion?  No fireball?  Just escaping steam and black smoke from the fire in the firebox?

[MajorMagee]

4 hours ago, Mysticpuma said:

I think CloD had the best representation of explosions/debris until they changed them a while back.

Plumes of smoke and debris (Video starts at ground explosions).

 

 

I love this shot

 

[kestrel79]

Wow this looks really nice for us ground pounders. Air to ground is going to be awesome.

[86Cheese]

4 hours ago, Gunfreak said:

It been in that other sim for many years. You can bomb runways and taxi ways to stop player or AI from using them. So airfield attacks in multiplayer has a major strategical effect  

I don't believe it has. Do you have a video or anything? This is a long requested feature in their forums as well. Explosions do the same thing there, its just a terrain decal. They still dont even splash damage or functional fusing. Airfield denial in all current sims, as far as I'm aware, is still limited to hitting planes on the runway or draining supplies on a mp campaign map. 

[Mysticpuma]

3 hours ago, MajorMagee said:

I love this shot

 

Back when I used to make their videos I was always looking to showcase it's abilities, to the point when I created a video with 200 Wellington bombers flying through heavy flak and the team leader told me it wasn't possible...even with my video showing it was 🤣

[MajorMagee]

Just what we need for Taengkeu Seungmuwon (Tank Crew Korea).

[IckyATLAS]

7 hours ago, 1PL-Husar-1Esk said:

But the resolution of height map is limited in GB , so there can't be one meter wide trench. I think 10 m is smallest.

I did not know that. Now that explains a lot of things.