DCS Damage Model Concerns

[shadepiece]

Hey guys,

Although I have been having an extraordinarily good time on CloD recently, I have had my eye on the WWII plane modules in DCS for quite some time. I think that level of simulation would be absolutely fantastic, and I have really enjoyed putzing around a bit in the TF-51. That being said I have a big concern. I have heard, much to my dismay, that the damage model in DCS is somewhat basic, at least for AI flown aircraft. Even heard that it's as if the aircraft had a health bar, and were not effected in engine performance, flight model performance, or hindered in any way until they finally took enough hits to depleate the health bar. Although, I've heard that non AI planes in multiplayer do receive damage as they should, and I am curious as to what all that entails.

I am looking for some explanation on this. What is the point of having the most realistic flight model, and to be able to dogfight if at the end of the day you cannot do any real damage to another aircraft short of destroying them outright. Also, in Cliffs, we can alter our convergences, ammo loadouts, and fuel amount. I'm having a lot of trouble seeing as to why I ought to give DCS the time of day. Although I really want to. I think that the outstanding level of simulation would be very much fun to dogfight with, but this damage model issue is a deal breaker if it is indeed true.

TL: DR I have heard DCS's AI aircraft don't receive any damage short of outright destruction. This gravely concerns me.

[Mudcat]

Hey guys,

Although I have been having an extraordinarily good time on CloD recently, I have had my eye on the WWII plane modules in DCS for quite some time. I think that level of simulation would be absolutely fantastic, and I have really enjoyed putzing around a bit in the TF-51. That being said I have a big concern. I have heard, much to my dismay, that the damage model in DCS is somewhat basic, at least for AI flown aircraft. Even heard that it's as if the aircraft had a health bar, and were not effected in engine performance, flight model performance, or hindered in any way until they finally took enough hits to depleate the health bar. Although, I've heard that non AI planes in multiplayer do receive damage as they should, and I am curious as to what all that entails.

I am looking for some explanation on this. What is the point of having the most realistic flight model, and to be able to dogfight if at the end of the day you cannot do any real damage to another aircraft short of destroying them outright. Also, in Cliffs, we can alter our convergences, ammo loadouts, and fuel amount. I'm having a lot of trouble seeing as to why I ought to give DCS the time of day. Although I really want to. I think that the outstanding level of simulation would be very much fun to dogfight with, but this damage model issue is a deal breaker if it is indeed true.

TL: DR I have heard DCS's AI aircraft don't receive any damage short of outright destruction. This gravely concerns me.

Well they certainly don't have a health bar :P You can do damage to individual systems to the AI, just as they do to yours. The "issue" is more that the AI will fly in a way that maintains energy perfectly, regardless of damage. Basically, since they aren't human they can perfectly compensate for damage in their flying. You can force them down due to damage, they'll turn on their landing lights and ever so slowly ascend if you do the right damage to them.

That's the way it is currently, whenever we get DCS World 2.0 etc, I wouldn't expect the same to hold true. The WW2 craft wasn't exactly what it was originally developed for, so I guess it's a bit of a consequence of flying piston fighters with machine guns under an engine originally meant for more modern jets and bvr combat.

I wouldn't let that scare you away though. When the sales come up they are a ridiculously good price for the level of detail and some major improvements to the game engine are lurking on the horizon that will probably remedy a lot of those type of issues.

[1lokos]

From similar question ED:




Actually ED products and 3rd parties modules has a "basic" Damage system on add-ons module (The planes / helos / vehicles and ships, can be destroyed on some pre-defined zones), and only can reach some level of damaged / destroyed detail, but not more (DCS:W has no dynamic destructive models or disintegration models implemented).

The actualy DM working by "Cells" with the develop assign the destructible regions of a module. The develop can add "detachable" parts or your module is some cells has been destroyed.

VEAO Hawk "cells" damage model example.

http://www.veaosimulations.co.uk/dcshawk/media/Damage-Cells.jpg

The destroyer model on every 3D model has actually always the same. (someone correct me if that is wrong)

ED actually work has centred on improve and add new system functionality, and expected on the future (Hope to) can improve the damage model and crash animation on some level of details, but not has any info of that level of improvement or dates about when can coming.

Visually, the DM on DCS looks inferior to the original il-2 (`46), is more like Wings of Prey (in this sometimes you aim in the right wing of a bomber, and the left wing fall off).

CLoD has nice visual DM, but looks that a hollowed wing has little impact of plane performance (this is more noticeable in the old il-2, dont know if is more `real`).

[ATAG_Colander]

Those cells look to me like enough for external damage but two questions arise:
1.- Is the damage on/off only or can be incremental? I'm thinking if this was having missile damage in mind, it might be on/off only.
2.- Are internal systems damages independent of these external zones? I mean, one bullet can barely damage a zone (bullet hole) but do great damage to internals (hydraulic hoses for example). This again seems like an issue only when using bullets instead of a missile hit.

[SorcererDave]

AI planes in DCS will continue to fly indefinitely, even while venting glycol, or having engine damage, or being on fire, etc. It's actually very irritating to be honest. It's nowhere close to CloD's damage modelling in my opinion.

[shadepiece]

Well they certainly don't have a health bar :P You can do damage to individual systems to the AI, just as they do to yours. The "issue" is more that the AI will fly in a way that maintains energy perfectly, regardless of damage. Basically, since they aren't human they can perfectly compensate for damage in their flying. You can force them down due to damage, they'll turn on their landing lights and ever so slowly ascend if you do the right damage to them.

That's the way it is currently, whenever we get DCS World 2.0 etc, I wouldn't expect the same to hold true. The WW2 craft wasn't exactly what it was originally developed for, so I guess it's a bit of a consequence of flying piston fighters with machine guns under an engine originally meant for more modern jets and bvr combat.

I wouldn't let that scare you away though. When the sales come up they are a ridiculously good price for the level of detail and some major improvements to the game engine are lurking on the horizon that will probably remedy a lot of those type of issues.



Thanks for clearing that up Mudcat. That makes me feel a ton better, and I also think that with the addition of more piston and prop aircraft modules that ED will sort out the DM for these planes. I was very turned off by what I had heard, and am relieved to hear that that's not the case. That said however, I think Dave is very much right, and the DM has a lot of work cut out for it. I'd love to see it get closer to CloD in regards to functionality, while also maintaining that hyper-realistic simulation that I so desperately crave!

Also ATAG_Colander has a good question about the cells working as a damage on, or damage off type of system for each cell, and subsequently affects the internal systems.

[PhoenixCNE]

From similar question ED:




Visually, the DM on DCS looks inferior to the original il-2 (`46), is more like Wings of Prey (in this sometimes you aim in the right wing of a bomber, and the left wing fall off).

CLoD has nice visual DM, but looks that a hollowed wing has little impact of plane performance (this is more noticeable in the old il-2, dont know if is more `real`).


Wow I had no idea that the DM in DCS was that badly done .... Thank you much for this info. I will await 2.0 with hopes that they will improve it before I take the plunge into the list of modules (and if not I will do without DCS) This is one of the things that makes Cliffs such a wonderful game to me, you can get sprayed with rounds and they all completely miss EXCEPT 1 round that hits you, or leaves you with 1 of your gear hanging.

[RCAF Rob]

There are some things to keep in mind about the damage model in DCS. Just for transparency, because I am not sure about some of the things said by some of the posters, I own all the WWII modules, Flaming Cliffs, Combined Arms, the Huey, the Sabre and Mig-15bis. The Sabre has recently been my favorite ride and I have accumulated about 100 hrs in multiplayer in the months since it was released last summer.

DCS started out as Flaming Cliffs and the damage model for the modern jet fighters is different from what we want from a WWII piston engine a/c. For these a/c damage was usually catastrophic from a single missile strike, devastating from a near miss and detonation, or negligible. That being said, the damage model was reasonable.

With the expansion, the damage model has evolved and will continue to evolve I am confident, however I do not believe that DCS 1.5 or 2.0 will be the silver bullet. There are two components it appears to the damage model: the cells pointed out above which is about structural damage and systems that can be damaged. The earlier modules and the AI only a/c like the B-52 have few cells and damage appears to be indicated by 'decals' representing damage to that cell. The higher the percentage of damage to that cell the more bullet holes appear in that decal in that location until failure occurs. For systems, they can fail with a single hit.

The Sabre and the Mig are a good comparison, I fly them most online because they are a great match-up and just plain fun. Both are Belsimtek, a 3rd Party developer, products and were released about six months apart. The Sabre was released first, last summer, and along with it an AI version of the Mig-15bis for an adversary while Belsimtek continued to develop a flyable version of it. The Sabre appears to have fairly large cells and damage is limited to either bullet holes that appear to be about .50 cal or large black jagged patches over the skin that simulate holes from cannon shells. If a cell, like an aileron for example reach failure (one or two direct hits from a 23mm shell for example) it will break off and you are reduced to aileron control from the other wing only. On the system side, a single 37mm to a fuel tank will case catastrophic failure, fire and possibly a secondary explosion if you do not eject in time. The Mig, released this spring (Feb was it?) has a more advanced damage model. When first released as an AI only plane, it showed only damage 'decals' on the surface that looked like .50 cal hits and the more you hit the a/c the more holes appeared, however they looked wrong, if you hit the Mig with 20 rounds you may have seen dozens of 'holes' appear all over the a/c. Now the damage is far more realistic, you can put actual holes in the wings and see the ground passing through below. This is true for both the AI and player controlled a/c in the same server.

As far as system damage both still have a way to go. For example engine fires don't happen yet no matter how many rounds you put into the engine, it just is not modeled yet. For the F-15, a Flaming Cliffs Module, which is much older and has recently been given a revamp by Belsimtek for ED, you can get hit by canon fire from a Mig or Su and have an engine fire.

To clarify some of the misconceptions. You can shoot down an AI with a single hit, the same as a human opponent. This leads me to believe that the damage model for player and AI a/c is the same. I have caused enough damage to a Mig to see it try to disengage and RTB, unlike the CloD AI, which fight until the death or the idiot switch is flipped and they fly straight and level to home base while you take your time to line them up and shoot them down. I have also caused damage to AI a/c that have vented all of their fuel and bailed while their wingmen continue to fight me, cause fires that prompted them to bail immediately and I have shot at a/c and expended a full load of ammo into a part of the a/c that absorbed all of the damage and they continued to fly.

Most of the a/c that we are interested in are still in beta and the damage models are not fully implemented yet, so damage models are at varying stages for each a/c. As well the DCS world damage model seems to be continuing to evolve to the modules themselves will, I am sure continue to improve as they come out of beta damage models are finalized.

Where I hold out hope that DCS 1.5 will improve the damage model is the appearance. Damage should appear better along with everything else in DCS but more importantly, they have been working on the visual effects and I hope that this is also applied to the damage models. As it is now, on some a/c like the Mig-15, it appears that no matter how much or little you hit them in say a fuel tank, they will vent the same amount of fuel vapor. So you may see a significant white stream coming from the wing of a Mig and think great! He is going to run out of fuel soon, only to find that you only hit him with one .50 cal round from that entire burst, so of course the rate of fuel lost is significantly less than it appears to be from the damage model. In short, depending on visual confirmation to gauge the damage you inflict is not reliable for a number of reasons. In single player you can pause the simulation and hit the ' key to get a blow by blow of the fight so far and see how many rounds you fired, how many actually hit from each type of weapon. In multi-player, for those servers that allow it, you can use Tacview to get an ACMI recording of the fight and see when you actually hit your opponent and how many rounds did damage.

I agree with Mudcat on his description of the AI issue.

The bottom line is, I would not let concerns about the visual component of the damage model put you off DCS and I would not rely on 1.5 (2.0 without the new maps) to fix it all. The damage model should continue to evolve and as modules come out of beta they will be fully implemented but no a/c is invulnerable and sometimes a single hit to a vital system is all that is needed. DCS is complex and making the jump from CloD can seem as daunting as making the jump from War Thunder to CloD seems, it will not be for everyone but it is highly rewarding and the damage to systems is part of it.

[BlitzPuppet]

A few months ago I was flying on the DoW server in a 109 when I got jumped by a couple of AI (I believe) P51s. I shot both down and ran home after being shot up a few times. Everything appeared and sounded to be fine except the gunsight which was noticeably dimmer than before. By the time I made it back to base my gunsight was almost completely off.

I can only assume my battery was hit and drained for the duration of my RTB.

[Mudcat]

There are some things to keep in mind about the damage model in DCS. Just for transparency, because I am not sure about some of the things said by some of the posters, I own all the WWII modules, Flaming Cliffs, Combined Arms, the Huey, the Sabre and Mig-15bis. The Sabre has recently been my favorite ride and I have accumulated about 100 hrs in multiplayer in the months since it was released last summer.

DCS started out as Flaming Cliffs and the damage model for the modern jet fighters is different from what we want from a WWII piston engine a/c. For these a/c damage was usually catastrophic from a single missile strike, devastating from a near miss and detonation, or negligible. That being said, the damage model was reasonable.

With the expansion, the damage model has evolved and will continue to evolve I am confident, however I do not believe that DCS 1.5 or 2.0 will be the silver bullet. There are two components it appears to the damage model: the cells pointed out above which is about structural damage and systems that can be damaged. The earlier modules and the AI only a/c like the B-52 have few cells and damage appears to be indicated by 'decals' representing damage to that cell. The higher the percentage of damage to that cell the more bullet holes appear in that decal in that location until failure occurs. For systems, they can fail with a single hit.

The Sabre and the Mig are a good comparison, I fly them most online because they are a great match-up and just plain fun. Both are Belsimtek, a 3rd Party developer, products and were released about six months apart. The Sabre was released first, last summer, and along with it an AI version of the Mig-15bis for an adversary while Belsimtek continued to develop a flyable version of it. The Sabre appears to have fairly large cells and damage is limited to either bullet holes that appear to be about .50 cal or large black jagged patches over the skin that simulate holes from cannon shells. If a cell, like an aileron for example reach failure (one or two direct hits from a 23mm shell for example) it will break off and you are reduced to aileron control from the other wing only. On the system side, a single 37mm to a fuel tank will case catastrophic failure, fire and possibly a secondary explosion if you do not eject in time. The Mig, released this spring (Feb was it?) has a more advanced damage model. When first released as an AI only plane, it showed only damage 'decals' on the surface that looked like .50 cal hits and the more you hit the a/c the more holes appeared, however they looked wrong, if you hit the Mig with 20 rounds you may have seen dozens of 'holes' appear all over the a/c. Now the damage is far more realistic, you can put actual holes in the wings and see the ground passing through below. This is true for both the AI and player controlled a/c in the same server.

As far as system damage both still have a way to go. For example engine fires don't happen yet no matter how many rounds you put into the engine, it just is not modeled yet. For the F-15, a Flaming Cliffs Module, which is much older and has recently been given a revamp by Belsimtek for ED, you can get hit by canon fire from a Mig or Su and have an engine fire.

To clarify some of the misconceptions. You can shoot down an AI with a single hit, the same as a human opponent. This leads me to believe that the damage model for player and AI a/c is the same. I have caused enough damage to a Mig to see it try to disengage and RTB, unlike the CloD AI, which fight until the death or the idiot switch is flipped and they fly straight and level to home base while you take your time to line them up and shoot them down. I have also caused damage to AI a/c that have vented all of their fuel and bailed while their wingmen continue to fight me, cause fires that prompted them to bail immediately and I have shot at a/c and expended a full load of ammo into a part of the a/c that absorbed all of the damage and they continued to fly.

Most of the a/c that we are interested in are still in beta and the damage models are not fully implemented yet, so damage models are at varying stages for each a/c. As well the DCS world damage model seems to be continuing to evolve to the modules themselves will, I am sure continue to improve as they come out of beta damage models are finalized.

Where I hold out hope that DCS 1.5 will improve the damage model is the appearance. Damage should appear better along with everything else in DCS but more importantly, they have been working on the visual effects and I hope that this is also applied to the damage models. As it is now, on some a/c like the Mig-15, it appears that no matter how much or little you hit them in say a fuel tank, they will vent the same amount of fuel vapor. So you may see a significant white stream coming from the wing of a Mig and think great! He is going to run out of fuel soon, only to find that you only hit him with one .50 cal round from that entire burst, so of course the rate of fuel lost is significantly less than it appears to be from the damage model. In short, depending on visual confirmation to gauge the damage you inflict is not reliable for a number of reasons. In single player you can pause the simulation and hit the ' key to get a blow by blow of the fight so far and see how many rounds you fired, how many actually hit from each type of weapon. In multi-player, for those servers that allow it, you can use Tacview to get an ACMI recording of the fight and see when you actually hit your opponent and how many rounds did damage.

I agree with Mudcat on his description of the AI issue.

The bottom line is, I would not let concerns about the visual component of the damage model put you off DCS and I would not rely on 1.5 (2.0 without the new maps) to fix it all. The damage model should continue to evolve and as modules come out of beta they will be fully implemented but no a/c is invulnerable and sometimes a single hit to a vital system is all that is needed. DCS is complex and making the jump from CloD can seem as daunting as making the jump from War Thunder to CloD seems, it will not be for everyone but it is highly rewarding and the damage to systems is part of it.

Well said, had a much longer post all typed up yesterday when i got a BSoD. But to the point of the 1 shot take-down, I had forgotten I even had it, but here you go. Not a typical result, but yes, possible and in the second part you can see the sort of lack of a good visual DM. I know you can also force them to land and they don't fly on forever, can't find that one, guess I'll have to fire it up later on tonight :)


https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=HvzoAYwiZps

[aus3620]

Yep, DCS is not miracle-ware, and the DM definitely needs some work, and the FM. Having said that, IMHO, the look and feel of flight in DCS is superior to CLoD and I am hoping some of the "visibility" issues with DCS maybe, if not fixed, then better for typical WW2/Korea distances.
I'm more a WW2 guy but I decided to give the Sabre a punt. Like, wow!, it is a great fun aircraft and I recommend it to any WW2 prophead (like me) to give it a go. A Korean map with the applicable DCS aircraft would be a real hoot.
I have the Mig15bis, but have not flown it yet as I want to get vaguely confident with the Sabre first.
Next sale, do yourself a favour and pick up a F86F!

[gavagai]

Also, in Cliffs, we can alter our convergences, ammo loadouts, and fuel amount. I'm having a lot of trouble seeing as to why I ought to give DCS the time of day. Although I really want to.

Other people covered the AI issues (yes, the AI aircraft are simplified).

In DCS you can alter your convergence, but you have to dive into a text file to do it. Otherwise the convergence is set to the standard harmonization used during wartime.

[vranac]

In DCS you can alter your convergence, but you have to dive into a text file to do it. Otherwise the convergence is set to the standard harmonization used during wartime.

Can you use your convergence settings online?

[RCAF Rob]

Can you use your convergence settings online?

I'm sure you can; when the F-86 Sabre first came out, Belsimtek had mistakenly taken the data already done by ED for the .50 cal in the P-51 for the M3 and used it for the M3 in the Sabre, only changing the loadouts to period correct ammo. The problem was that in the years between the end of WWII and the deployment of the Sabre to Korea the USAF realized that with increased speeds the window for firing was going to be much smaller so either a 20mm needed to be developed that was satisfactory or more .50 cal bullets needed to hit the target. They managed to increase the rate of fire by about 50% if I recall correctly and developed better ammunition. One of the regular Sabre players made a MOD that corrected the rate of fire that could be used online, and provided instructions for those who preferred to manually modify the files required. This modification was usable online and was in the same file that carried loadout and convergence. Since then Belsimtek has corrected the beta and the mod is no longer needed.

So, right now I believe that you can change convergence and loadout manually or make a mod to do it but I'm not sure once DCS 1.5 is released if you will be able to use that edited file online. There has been discussion of including a feature (I'm not sure if this was official discussion or wishful thinking now) in the mission editor and loadout editor within the mission to adjust this as well. Perhaps they will implement an option to choose the standard harmonization patterns for various types of missions that were used.

For now the radar sight on the Sabre and the gyro sight on the P-51 and upcoming Spitfire IX and XIV are very nice and work well with the standard convergence.

[4535jacks]

As a WW2 nut I originally tried dcs to fly the p-51 and I haven't touched CLoD in a few months and don't plan to!

The level of simulation in DCS is what I am after I can't wait for DCS 1.5 next month. After getting the P-51, I bought the sabre and dedicated my time to learning to fly it. Unfortunately I have shelved that module for the time being as dogfighting is very difficult due to the visibility issues. I still fly the P-51 but not as much as I thought I would due to the FPS hit due to tracers can spoil the immersion. That said I have still enjoyed some great online coop missions. I also have concerns over the DM for the WW2 aircraft as the AI seem invincible and it seems that the first hit on the P-51 will knock out the prop governor 9 out of 10 times, ending your battle.

One thing that has surprised me about DCS is just how much I enjoy flying the Cold War and modern conflict jets, particularly the Mig-21, A-10C and SU-25T. But I am even more surprised how much I love the helicopters (particularly the Mi-8) and one of my best online experiences was flying in the recent airmobile air assault event hosted by chuck of this parish.

I second that the DM on some modules is excellent. Last night in the Mi-8 I took off to find a random fault with both generators meaning I has to reduce the load, check the breakers, test each circuit and eventually RTB which proved to be an excellent training mission. After repairing and reaching the target area, I took a few hits and got an engine fire in the right engine, the DM still allowed me to extinguish the fire, shutoff the engine, jettison all weapons, and return home on one engine the whole monitoring the remaining engine and the electrical systems.

Just because DCS has it issues, it is a great simulator and the future of combat simulation IMHO. Do not be put off by the reports of poor DMs. DCS is pretty unique in that it allows you to fly a wide variety of aircraft from a range of eras so try it with a open mind as you might find, like me, you enjoy flying types of aircraft or eras that you wouldn't have previously thought of trying. For me that is the real beauty of DCS.

I am sure however that once DCS WW2 has larger maps, carrier ops, large bombers, more fighters and more WW2 ground units, I won't touch a DCS jet again.

Now I am off to fly the Mi-8!

Jacks

[gavagai]

Can you use your convergence settings online?

Not unless the server isn't running a weapons integrity check. But it's easy to disable the check, and I do it when I host so people can use mods without any trouble.