Suggestion for (another) new damage system

[b00ce 160]

More specifically, this suggestion is how the game handles damage. Basically, my idea mitigates the annoying issue of things exploding that shouldn't, without adding too much work for the dev team.

Fire:

Requirements:

• Fuel is present
  
  
• There is an ignition source (IE. explosion or other fire near by)
  
  
• A fuel leak would increase the likelihood and aggressiveness of the fire. However, it does not guarantee one.
  
  

Effects:

• Potentially causes damage to people, items and ammunition inside, depending on location and severity.
  
  
• Causes ammunition to cook off.
  
  
• Depletes fuel. (Fires will eventually burn themselves out.)
  
  

Explosion:

Requirements:

• Ammunition present.
  
  
• There is an ignition source (IE. other explosion or fire near by)
  
  
• Fires take a few minutes to detonate ammunition.
  
  

Effects:

• Rounds cook off, causing stray bullets to fly at best, or bombs to detonate on the racks.
  
  
• Items in inventory cook off too. (IE. magazines, grenades and satchel charges are also effected and cook off.)
  
  

The location of an impact or explosion would determine the effects, just as it does now. Where ever the ammunition or fuel is stored will be the ignition point.

For example, if a T-72 gets hit in the turret by a HEAT round, the ammunition would likely explode, as the T-72 is notorious for doing. In this video a tank fully armed is hit by an ATGM and the ammo almost instantly cooks off. Granted, it isn't really an explosion; however, it is catastrophic and anything within what would be the explosion radius of the high explosives would be dead or severely injured anyways.

z3AJfTBig0E

Conversely, if a helicopter runs out of fuel and hits the ground too hard, it would simply become inoperable and could hurt the crew. Take this crash for example, if this happened in ArmA 2 it would have probably hit with more than three times the force that is required to make a helicopter explode.

Granted, there will be some exceptions, such as a fuel truck which would likely explode after being on fire for a while, as seen in this video.

Ypb6noVaXf8

Adding this to ArmA would greatly improve realism at a minimal cost to the amount of time the Dev team would need to dedicate to it, compared to other options being suggested.

[onlyrazor 11]

It's a good idea, to be honest. But it would require some engine tweaks, especially with fire. At best worst, it can be modded in with something like ACE.

Edited July 3, 2011 by OnlyRazor

[Daniel 0]

I think it's a very good idea. When everything explodes it sort of takes some of the drama away. And the uncertainty. I think it would even work if vehicles sometimes had mobility and crew kills but with no obvious damage, not even a fire, until you actually walk up and see the hole punched by the sabot. Was it ECP that had the incredible fuel truck and petrol station explosions?

[b00ce 160]

It's a good idea, to be honest. But it would require some engine tweaks, especially with fire. At best, it can be modded in with something like ACE.

The infrastructure is already in the engine. Fuel leaks are already in engine, so are fires, all that would need doing is tweaking scripts so things don't blow up and putting the ammunition on a random timer in the presence of fire. :D

And at worst it could be modded in. ;)

[Beagle 684]

The infrastructure is already in the engine. Fuel leaks are already in engine, so are fires, all that would need doing is tweaking scripts so things don't blow up and putting the ammunition on a random timer in the presence of fire. :D

And at worst it could be modded in. ;)

The power of secondary explosions is already defined by the amount of fuel and ammo in a vehicle. just try it with a empty and a full fuel tanker or ammo truck or any armed vehicle. Even Helos with depleted ammo and low fuel are less likely to simply explode at hard crash landings. It's rudimentary but its already in the A2 game. Maybe it gets a further refinement in A3. Edited July 2, 2011 by Beagle

[katipo66 94]

For a game I like the fact that something blows the f%#k up and has billowing smoke as a visual indicator, would be great to see variation on the explosion and smoke.

[b00ce 160]

The power of secondary explosions is already defined by the amount of fuel and ammo in a vehicle. just try it with a empty and a full fuel tanker or ammo truck or any armed vehicle. Even Helos with depleted ammo and low fuel are less likely to simply explode at hard crash landings. It's rudimentary but its already in the A2 game. Maybe it gets a further refinement in A3.

However, if you have a few Mk. 82s on your downed A-10, the secondary explosions aren't going to be a 500lb bomb. What I'm saying is having the actual ordinance explode, instead of having some little puff every now and again.

I've managed to make a helicopter without fuel or weapons explode. Figure that one out. :p

For a game I like the fact that something blows the f%#k up and has billowing smoke as a visual indicator, would be great to see variation on the explosion and smoke.

Yes, it is a nice and gratifying indicator, and it won't go away entirely. Things will still burn and they will still explode. Chances are, 9 times out of 10, a kill will result in an explosion. Let's face it, you aren't aiming for the tracks or lower hull of a tank. You're shooting at the engine or turret, where all the burny explody bits are. ;)

[5LEvEN 11]

BIS should do some quick research about the safety measures put into place to prevent explosions and protect the crew inside the vehicle.

A T-72 is more likely to explode when heavily damaged then a M1A2... The shells for example are kept in a easy to access compartment that keeps them safe in the abrams...

[heroes maker 10]

and what about not implanting this and made an a mod or an official addon for the player who want this function ? why not let the community do want they ever wanted like everytime, see in ArmA 2 ? this function wasn't here, well JTD add it and SLX then ACE, i think i clear my point of view so for me it's a no

[jake_krieger 10]

I agree 100 % with this Proposition ! Go ahead Bohemia !

[b00ce 160]

and what about not implanting this and made an a mod or an official addon for the player who want this function ? why not let the community do want they ever wanted like everytime, see in ArmA 2 ? this function wasn't here, well JTD add it and SLX then ACE, i think i clear my point of view so for me it's a no

Why should BIS even bother making anything, someone can just mod it later, right? :rolleyes:

[elmas 10]

Yeah i dont like the fact that everything catches on fire and explodes in ArmA, even Bikes and ATVs explode 100% of the time. Not a hughe issue but certanly it can be improved.

[onlyrazor 11]

And at worst it could be modded in. ;)

Right, then

[Archosaurusrev 12]

I agree 100%.

Also, musta suck to be in that tank and live through it.

[b00ce 160]

You wouldn't live through that.

[Primarch 10]

I agree 100%.

Also, musta suck to be in that tank and live through it.

So, you'd live through it? I think not.

Good note is that the tank didn't go RETARDBOOM like every single vehicle in ArmA 2, I just tried 27 M1A2 tanks versus 35 T-72 in OA Desert.

25 of the 27 M1A2 blew up, every T-72 blew up. In a fireball.

[b00ce 160]

T-72s really do blow up like that though. :p

[rangerpl 13]

I'm really interested in having aircraft that can do a hard "crash" landing, even with fuel. You could have them hit the ground and lose pieces, becoming inoperable and then explode after a moment when the fuel reaches an ignition source.

[b00ce 160]

That's pretty much how it would end up working.

[antoineflemming 14]

Why should BIS even bother making anything, someone can just mod it later, right? :rolleyes:

Yeah, later. Why not have a game that's as good and realistic (without sacrificing ArmA gameplay) as possible? Then modders can focus on other things than "fixing" the game. BIS gets more sales because of more added features, and more realistic ones at that, and the community gets more features that don't have to be modded in, right out the box. Seems like a win-win situation to me.

[b00ce 160]

Yeah, later. Why not have a game that's as good and realistic (without sacrificing ArmA gameplay) as possible? Then modders can focus on other things than "fixing" the game. BIS gets more sales because of more added features, and more realistic ones at that, and the community gets more features that don't have to be modded in, right out the box. Seems like a win-win situation to me.

Pretty much my thoughts. Things blowing up instantly is VERY arcady. Hell, in most games things burn for a little while before they blow up catastrophically. :rolleyes:

It always bothered me that if I went down in an A-10 fully laden, the GBU-12s didn't blow up. The plane did, bombs didn't. Secondaries may be tied to the ammunition, even in the vehicle's inventory (Hand grenades cause secondaries.), however it's not the ammunition itself going off. You can test this by placing the unarmed HMMVW, USMC and Army (Army has grenades, MC doesn't. Alternatively, you can just take the grenades out of the Army humvee.) and blowing them up. It's the same little puff no matter what is going off, whether it's a hand grenade or a 1000lb bomb.

The functionality is there for inventory items blowing up. (Something I was iffy about how easy implementing it would be.) This wouldn't be hard to implement for the Devs and it would add a lot of gameplay, realism and a bit of suspense. :p

[dmarkwick 261]

So basically what we agree on is detailed component-driven damage modeling, which is something I think the devs already know about, (given that they do read this forum) so whether it gets implemented or not is probably already in the works.

[b00ce 160]

I wouldn't go so far as to say "detailed component-driven" damage system. It would still be hit point based.

[dmarkwick 261]

I wouldn't go so far as to say "detailed component-driven" damage system. It would still be hit point based.

I might guess that even a component-driven damage system is hit point based at it's core :) Just more objects with different hit point credits.

[b00ce 160]

The system I'm proposing does not add points that can be damaged or any real penetration like with component driven damage. It uses the same basic damage system and only changes how the game handles information. For example, if a jet with a few 1000lb bombs on it gets lit up by a machine gun and the the fuel tank springs a leak (Already in the game right now.) this increases the vehicle's propensity for the ignition of fuel. (From say a 5% chance to a 10% chance) As the plane burns, the weapons systems "heat up" causing them to detonate.

Not that I like rehashing the same basic concept over and over. lol

This could also create a need/ use for fire extinguishers or fire trucks.