I think “severe damage” should mean losing the engine, sustaining a large hole in the fuselage that significantly reduces mobility and speed, or losing a rudder; however, having a wing snap almost all the way to the root is an extremely severe form of damage—to the point where attempting to land becomes riskier than bailing out. Another idea: they could create an incentive where, if you bail out of a heavily damaged plane, the repair cost is reduced by 15% or something similar.
Right, I only mentioned the “damage model” to keep things simple. It’s just about giving the modules more health—it certainly doesn’t mean creating distinct zones on the aircraft.
1 Like
._.
->occured in Florida.
" 1. Tactical Incident Summary
- Date & Time: December 29, 1943 | 23:03 GMT
- Location: Thomas Howe Demonstration Forest (P.G. Tipping Trail), Gander, Newfoundland, Canada
- Aircraft Model: Boeing B-17 Flying Fortress (Registration/Serial: 42-97493)
- Operator: United States Army Air Forces (USAAF) / Transport Command
- Flight Phase: Initial Climb / Takeoff Departure (Runway 27)
- Flight Route: Gander, NL (YQX) – Valley, Wales (EGOD)
- Mission Profile: Transatlantic Ferry & Transport Flight
- Occupants: 10 Total (5 Flight Crew, 5 Passengers/Personnel)
- Casualties: 10 Fatalities (0 Survivors)
- Airframe Status: Destroyed (Exploded and burned on impact; wreckage scavenged over time)
- Investigating Agency: USAAF (Report lead: Major Richard Loomis) | Archaeological Survey by Lisa M. Daly (2010)
- Probable Cause: Undetermined loss of control during a steep left bank shortly after takeoff."
Source: USAAF B-17 42-97493 Crash: The Thomas Howe Demonstration Forest Archaeology Site - BIC News
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZQnj8oY5Li0&themeRefresh=1 ->B-18 Bolo.
I don’t know, bud; I don’t really see anyone surviving a tree when their wrecks look like that.
the way it breaks is annoying and your comparing a wing tip hit vs a full on crash straight into a forest
Well, about his comments, I meant his comment about ‘I am a console player’ has partial points, since controlling a turret is drastically worse than controlling it with a mouse. So you shouldn’t just dismiss that with ‘doesnt really change anything here’
I understand you both are being a bit emotional, but being a console player affects bomber gameplay, and hypothetically, you cannot tell him ‘Buy Mouse/PC instead’ just like how you usually told to bomber main that ‘play fighter instead’. right…?
Then we should’ve advocated for ‘fix the gameplay to be fair for everyone’ instead of ‘just play fighter’ or ‘just play air sim’ (Of course, playing fighters in Air RB or moving toward Air Sim is one of the only options which bomber mains in Air RB currently have)
Well, reworks on bomber DM were required, since old DM of bombers are made of crepes. Even less durable than Mille crepes.
But eeeeh, like this? Was this more important than improving the gameplay loop? Probably not.
If I remember correctly, according to our last discussion about bombers a few years ago in the Dev server thread(Which now went into the void), you go overboard more than ‘sometimes’. But fine. :/
Yes. They overkilled it. Just like when they sent F-15A down to 12.7BR, or sent F-86A-5 down to 8.0BR.
Oh but is not what you said? “if I trash into a tree with my left wing the whole plane acts as if it was made of a unearthly material if i hit a tree with my left wing the plane does a 180 and cracks and blows up instantly that’s not realistic at all”
All I see is you trying to scoot around, while I provide a solid counterargument with as few words coming out of my brain onto digital paper.
Another separate issue that also comes with bomber durability is kill credit. How much damage count as a kill or severe? Because most double taps on flaming wrecks are because people try to take credit or securing their kill.
It’s not going to be fun or fair to cripple a bomber, get a “crit” for your efforts, then someone swoops in and claims the rest.
FYI, a crit/assist is like 50% rewards maximum. A severe is around 70-80%.
2 Likes
so your saying my plane needs to do a 180 when hitting a tree that’s no possible
That is not what I am saying, what I am saying is what you think isn’t possible has occurred.
I have seen a video way more recent of a F16 touching trees and exploding but it didn’t do a 180 flip wings didn’t come off it just simply disingraded
I think the inconsistency is the issue, it’s completely bizarre when you lose the whole wing and can fairly easily RTB, while other times you get a patch of yellow damage and go completely out of control.
Or you turn an enemy into a wingless fireball and get a crit, other times you hit their oil cooled and get sever damage despite the fact they will still be fully functional for several minutes.
But like you said, even losing half the wing should be severe damage, and forcing someone to RTB should gain some reward as it takes them out of the fight for a decent amount of time, which takes pressure off your team, it’s also not ahistorical as pilots where credited with “damaged” enemy aircraft.
in their overtuned state i did, but i have already stated it’s needed (again, needed but not in its current form) and would improve the experience for affected aircraft. im battling your position because you support the next to indestructible damage model… (er, rather the other guy i responded to in my first post)
as for the rest?
im responding with easily provable facts displayed within the game itself which anyone can go try
only now do i realize most of those arent your points but you did support them so it all works out…
you never came back with immediately displayed facts, but just arbitrary numbers and aggressive attacks and claims about the party which opposes the unkillable damage models. and again you never actually responded to the points i shot back with and instead turned to personal attacks.
feel free to try ingame
??? ? what? people actually use all time over monthly?
sorry for another quotation but its the easiest way to respond to most posts imo
a turkish F16 crashed into a tree guess what happend well the tree didn’t make the a 13 pound jet stop instantly into the tree or do a 180
IRL. An F-16 clipping a tree (and not just branches that break easily, but the actual solid part of a tree) is more than likely going down, whether that is due to physics being physics or the damage causing issues forcing the pilot to eject.
The issue in-game is that the tree models are mostly just air, with the really dangerous, solid part as an unmovable brick wall.
Coupled with the damage models being a few large pieces… and a glancing blow is usually guranteed death.
Though note, I have hit a tree before and survived in-game. Just what you are in and what part of the aircraft the tree hit is what matters,
1 Like
The main trunk or just the canopy?
Those are 2 radically different things.
you see in war thunder you hit a tree you wings fall off instantly and you jet catch’s fire the tree STOPS the jet or makes it do a 180 and crash
90% of the time you hit the tree you die unless you’re going like 20kmh.
my jet should be with the trees phyiscs and me going mach 1 it should be nothing left after the fire but a crater and overly burnt metal
20kmh isn’t possible while flying
I can not tell you gajin how satisfying it would be to see my jet crash and do damage to a line of those crazy trees like it would irl envorment damage JUST not to buildings for obvious reasons