1CGS LukeFF Posted August 27 1CGS Posted August 27 Hey everyone! Today's video is about the damage model for Korea. IL2 Series. Dive into all the details here! 15 4
Avimimus Posted August 27 Posted August 27 What about HE shells penetrating through the skin before detonating? This is considered by some forum members to be the primary reason why the Mk-108 is a bit less reliable in game than it was in real life (where, I've been told it had a slight fuse delay). P.S. Regarding probability calculations - it would still make sense for hitting some parts of the spar (e.g. joints). I've often thought that the Hurricane, IAR-80, I-16 and other aircraft relying on small calibre rounds would benefit from a certain probability of scoring a 'critical hit' to part of the spar, engine etc... Of course, this is less of an issue in Korea - but I suspect it will return as an issue when a WWII or WWI module is released!
Avimimus Posted August 27 Posted August 27 Also, it goes without saying but - I'm amazed. I keep being more and more surprised by how far the team is pushing the technology. 1
Avimimus Posted August 27 Posted August 27 Also, thinking more about this - shouldn't the most forward spar contribute more to structural strength under load?
Aapje Posted August 27 Posted August 27 I love the new damage visuals. Almost makes it worth getting shot. But this: Quote Let's cast a line into the distant future. The emergence of systems is essentially the key to the possibility of entering clickable cockpits someday in the future. The team is regaining confidence in being able to model clickable cockpits??!!! Clearly not coming for Korea, but it does make me wonder if they will try it out later on in the Korea engine life cycle. 1
86Cheese Posted August 27 Posted August 27 Skyraider confirmed? Those blueprints in the intro are undeniable.
Trooper117 Posted August 27 Posted August 27 1 hour ago, 86Cheese said: Skyraider confirmed? Those blueprints in the intro are undeniable. Whereabouts, I didn't see one?
LuftManu Posted August 27 Posted August 27 This is really awesome! The existing Damage model, although not perfect it's one of the best in the market. The team pushing now for even a better tech speaks a lot about the new engine capabilities. YES YES YES! Great work! 1
=MERCS=JenkemJunkie Posted August 27 Posted August 27 These damage model changes away from RNG to real hits are very nice and should reduce people's sodium levels. It will be much less frustrating to know I just missed or didn't hit the whatever hard enough, instead of I had a bad dice roll. The eye candy, and depth of the damage model and two types of incendiary is ❤️. Will we be able to choose to extend the engines life beyond whatever value you calculate from the manual in whatever the new engine timer system is? Not all pilots followed the manual perfectly in reality, so we should be able to choose to fly as one of the naughtier pilots, as you could argue it wouldn't be historical to have every single pilot following the manual limits at all times. 1
1PL-Husar-1Esk Posted August 28 Posted August 28 Great to see evolution on DM. Good work. I wonder how do explosion on ground would look , can an engine unmount from airframe do to abnormal vibration or plow through field after crash.
tattywelshie Posted August 28 Posted August 28 Love this, loving the hydraulic failure as with footage of the landing gear flapping about in the wind! 1
1PL-Husar-1Esk Posted August 28 Posted August 28 In case of future dream on FC in new engine I do wander does new engine allow fabric tearing 😁. I think next step in CFS would be soft body physics, CFDs and aeroelasticity ,no more only rigid body simulation. 1
Rei-sen Posted August 28 Posted August 28 (edited) 16 hours ago, =MERCS=JenkemJunkie said: new engine timer system Edited August 28 by Rei-sen 1 1
=MERCS=JenkemJunkie Posted August 28 Posted August 28 Pretty much yeah. There's reason to believe it will be less horrible than Box's version because they're doing things like making the timer show up in the gauges and have the damage happen gradually instead of sudden death, but there's still the core issue of calculating these limits from manuals written by various neurotics using different standards that often aren't even known, instead of being based on real tests. I know the devs want a concrete black and white answer to use, but the manual limits are false concrete answers to a problem that really operates on an unknown chaos theory. If we know these limits are faulty then we shouldn't be forced into them. We should have the option to loosen or remove them, as historically alot of the pilots ignored them too. A lot of these pilots were 20 something frat boys. What happens when you give a frat boy a plane with triple the horsepower of a race car, then send him out alone with the boys away from the prying eyes of the ground crew and commanders? 2
FuriousMeow Posted August 28 Posted August 28 (edited) 18 hours ago, =MERCS=JenkemJunkie said: These damage model changes away from RNG to real hits Aside from the forum sewing circles, has any actual evidence been put forth that there is an RNG as to what is damaged in a hit? Because the rods and other small damageable parts that can't be seen have real hit boxes which this supposed RNG would make pointless. The same shot is not going to do the same identical damage in back to back "testing." That's true in the real world too where, to my knowledge, there's no programming that can be fudged using RNG. Alternate to the RNG stuff, these seamstresses just aren't as great a shot as they think they are. Edited August 28 by FuriousMeow
=MERCS=JenkemJunkie Posted August 28 Posted August 28 (edited) Its cute that you're asking this in a thread with a video on the top where the devs themselves explain the RNG in the damage model. Here's a quote: "It will be in uh on this is also a significant step uh forward because uh previously uh our control damage was uh statistically random. Now this randomness will practically disappear. Uh now that our control wires and cables uh have collisions, we have to get to where the lines actually run to to damage them." Edited August 28 by =MERCS=JenkemJunkie Quote had white text at first
the_emperor Posted September 3 Posted September 3 On 8/28/2025 at 5:59 PM, =MERCS=JenkemJunkie said: If we know these limits are faulty then we shouldn't be forced into them. We should have the option to loosen or remove them, as historically alot of the pilots ignored them too. I hope they will use IL-2 BoX as a testbed for that option and implement in Korea 1
the_emperor Posted September 4 Posted September 4 Does any one know. whether detonation will be modelled?
Dagwoodyt Posted September 4 Posted September 4 With all the new effects there must be internal discussions on how VR performance can be enhanced to keep up. That's the discussion I'm most anxious to see. This is a fantastic video. I watched all the way thru nonstop, fully engaged throughout☺️
JG27*PapaFly Posted September 5 Posted September 5 Sounds like the more complex DM will expand the spectrum of damage and malfunctions that we'll encounter by orders of magnitude. I like it! We'll have to up our game a lot when it comes to dealing with in-flight emergencies. Great challenges ahead!
=MERCS=JenkemJunkie Posted September 5 Posted September 5 You can tell this topic went down well. I think its pretty funny the devs just talked about the DM for 30 mins straight, and were not at page 10+ of a salt mine... in IL2 .
Avimimus Posted September 5 Posted September 5 On 9/4/2025 at 9:02 AM, the_emperor said: Does any one know. whether detonation will be modelled? Of ammunition?
=MERCS=JenkemJunkie Posted September 6 Posted September 6 The post he linked includes talking about detonation in engines. I don't remember that being mentioned specifically in any vids yet though.
Recommended Posts