exactly - my intent is not to ask for the “old” damage to be returned.
I just feel that current damage is a bit too strong
to use some random numbers it feels like GJ went from damage being 5-10x too weak to being 2x too strong.
it’s still better on paper but not perfect
“everyone has click and delete firepower now” Yeah exactly, now you have the option to fly anything as you said yourself and be effective with it. Not have to crutch AP, or hope that you miraculously do damage. Not sure how you can “seriously” me when you just argued against yourself within two sentences.
I don’t know which part is wrong.
-Maybe planes need to be tankier
-Maybe planes are fine but rounds do too much damage
-Maybe they are both right an it’s just that blackened (but not cut) wing parts should not lose as much lift
It’s hard to give answer w/o knowing 100% sure how DM works in WT and I don’t know that.
All I know is that, in my opinion, GJ went from significantly too weak damage to a bit too strong damage.
It’s still better than it used to be back when some guns did nothing but it’s still wrong.
I’d rather prefer it to be more realistic.
While I can agree with @Loofah that RB instructor can ignore lot of damage (even though I don’t play RB myself) it still does not change the fact that it might be more problem with instructor than DM.
Anyway - I don’t pretend to know what chain of changes is required to fix the issue in both SB and RB, since I don’t play the latter, and I just want to indicate what is an issue in my opinion based on documents I was able to find so far
MG.151 was not affected by real-shatter damage model change and that is the initial thing that he said was over-performing in the game. If we use that as the standard then Mg.151 needs to be nerfed slightly and every thing else needs to be nerfed significantly…which would return 20mm damage to essentially the bugged levels of realshatter implementation.
In a game where the ability to completely repair your airplane is at maximum 4-5 minutes away in sim mode…and much close in realistic mode that is just unacceptable. In a game where plane performance varies so widely within a battle rating rating range means that with less gun damage that a more clearly defined meta takes hold; i.e M20 API-T > everything else meta, and planes with metric ton of ammo > everything else meta. It also means that the ability of a single player to reduce the numbers on an enemy team is significantly curtailed because punishing oblivious or risky players is even harder.
20mm damage against fighters should not be radically different between shell to shell because they are typically smaller. Fighters just have a smaller capacity to accept damage. Having critical components fail after 2-3 hits with any kind of 20mm round is perfectly reasonable. If anything the fact that MG.151 can do light-yellow damage which basically amounts to nothing is the biggest drawback in the game right now.
The whole entire impetus for adopting larger cannon shells and more cannons was for their effectiveness against bombers…specifically strategic bombers. There is good reason to take German 30mm cannons if your main target is to kill bombers or if you need guaranteed kills in close range deflections.
it’s age old argument of entertainment and balance vs realism.
If you ask me - I support realism.
Of course we can differ and both have it’s own place and time but idea behind my post was still realism and, personally, I will stick to it
I think its both.
I think cannons need minor tweaks, no more than 5-15% damage reduction, but on a round by round basis, not a flat change to all. Some are closer than others
Then we need better damage models. I think in a lot of cases, wings and tails wouldnt fall off, but instead you’d see damage to them having massive impact on aero-dynamics and maybe even destroying the control surfaces. Essentially resulting in the same effect. But the game just blows the tail or wing off instead.
I do think “damage resistance” varies from aircraft to aircraft. P-47 was famed for taking a huge amount of damage, but a spitfire was known to have perticuarly vulnerable water cooled engines. They shouldnt take the same amount of fire to go down. So along with a new damage model, prehaps we would see different aircraft be more tanky to damage.
RazerVon suggested this on the other thread:
“We probably should have better damage zoning on aircraft tho.
Like fuselage split into quarters or eighths front to back.
& wings split into 4 root to tip sections.
That way if you lose say 2 wing root zones you don’t die.”
Its never going to be perfect, but I think if I had to choose, i would rather guns dealt a little too much damage than not enough, nothing feels less satisfying than tickling a target to death
maybe it’s indeed the only way out of it but since neither of us know GJ’s spaghetti coding (unless you will surprise me :D) best I can do is point out problems and hope GJ will figure out how to fix it (if they chose to)
and as I’ve mentioned - this is improvement over what we use do have.
That still does not mean it’s perfect and that’s whole point behind this thread :)
No idea :D but the number of times i’ve seen something like a Tornado take sidewinder to the face, and only loose its radar, is mind boggling. Something is definetly not right. I dont think we’ve had any changes to how the game handles aircraft damage models since they were added. Certainly looks and feels basically the same to when I started playing 10 years. (at least I dont htink its changed that much)
Aka. Devs spend too much time on Tank damage models and not enough on planes
remember the time when we all were under impression that GJ’s economy is what we have to live with?
and then suddenly people raged about it enough for GJ to suddenly start throwing out ideas they should’ve done years ago.
Anyway - I’d still rather give my though about things I think are wrong and see them being ignored than say nothing and double-guess myself :)
Yeah, Tornado F3 had a bug with its radar that was driving me nuts, finally asked on here if it was a bug or feature. Turns out, bug, got fixed last month. Still a bad jet, but at least that bug isnt driving me nuts anymore.
I personally I am fine with not all planes being equally useful. We have planes that are very niche and will never be meta.
There are also planes that can either be weak-ish or OP-ish. Given choice between plane that is OK and possibly weak when uptiered and plane that OK and OP when downtiered - I’d chose the former.
if you make one plane useless you ruin that one plane, if you make one plane OP, you ruin every other plane.
Anyway, it’s not discussion about Tornado, match making or anything other than if guns do correct damage :)
Yeah agreed. Though real-shatter and damage models effect all BRs. Not just WW2 planes. (should see how many HE rounds the Su-25 use to take, hoping thats now fixed)
But yeah, WW2 though has a lot of data points to look at.
I really wish that shell impacts did specific area damage (which the game is clearly capable of doing)
However, instead we have a system were a single hit can cause an entire section of wing to turn black completely messing up the whole aerodynamics of the plane
The worst example is on the glistcer javelin.
A single cannon hit will make 1/4 of the 86m² wing area completely useless.
I mean that’s fine, but WT is the farthest “sim” from realism out right now, and honestly I’m past it actually being a good game, WT is just a semi decent air quake as it stands, EC barely works at all and has been degrading as time goes on. If the game is just going to always be an air quake, at least let it be one with a low time to kill.
Planes have different speed climb and maneuvrability. What’s wrong with planes having different toughness and less/more effective armanent? It’s a part of the “variety”. You keep missing the point. No one wants planes to have armanent that “doesn’t work”. But there’s a huuuge area between current situation and “doesn’t work”. Some planes should have less effective armanent, good gunnery should be rewarded. Right now everyrhing is “one and done”.
the issue here isnt with ammunition damage as that i pretty close to RL (ik ik its a game but yes it is comparable). the real issue is with the implementation of damage. because as long as a wing or flight surface is majority intact it continues to produce lift and not drag (not more than its non damaged self). hence DM is the issue
while I understand this opinion I totally disagree with it.
I would still push for more realism :)
Zargleblyte is a simulator battles player so his experience is not going to be the same as yours. Accuracy within Air SB is significantly harder to achieve to the extent that the effective range of all weapons can be cut in half. Also within Air SB the battle rating system is even more skewed because the range is fixed on any one day; i.e you can just choose to fly best plane for the BR and be in permanent down-tier territory.
Air SB also has similar problems to Air RB where the logical gameplay loop for K/D oriented players is to do pure top to bottom BnZ and then run to airfield if they feel threatened. Except within context of Air SB there is absolutely no downside to it because your team can perpetually respawn. Also run-to-AA is a much more accepted strategy within SB community than RB community which results in more players using it.
Someone that is willing to climb over their base and only turn in once they have overwhelming altitude advantage is very hard to kill in SB; even more-so than RB because them doing so never results in numerical disadvantage. This basically results in a situation where having fastest plane at BR or just playing fast plane on the friendly side of the map can result in player being unkillable…much like in same way players pad their stats with AA in RB.
The only actual respite from this playstyle is having guns that can pose a challenge in the head-on or can at least do damage in long range tail chase.
as am I if that’s somehow important. We are discussing realistic damage regardless of game mode not how easy or hard it’s to put shots on target.
There are good and bad aimers in every mode but even if your hit is 100% luck, it should do realistic damage.