Vehicle damage model

[SandboxPlaya 10]

I'm getting tired of games where vehicles have health bars (like it's some kind of mmo or somethig), especially when there's no further sophistication on top of that. Usually (for example on tanks) you get some side/rear armour damage modfiers and that's about it.

Operation Flashpoint: Cold War Crisis (also known as Arma: Cold War Assault) had a pretty decent damage model for its time. You could blow tyres on any wheeled vehicle and all AFV's had separate hp for hull, tracks, turrets, main guns and most of them could even be disabled. But while all of that was considered to be good enough in 2001, it is not so great 12 years later. Personally, I'd like to see big improvements in this area.

As for AFV's, I think the idea of having one overall health for the vehicle should be eliminated completely that should be broken down to multiple parts which should not represent the overal operating state of a vehicle. All vehicles should have more pieces of equipment with multiple levels of damage affecting their performance as well as the overall performance of a vehicle. (e.g. external equipment - optics, active defense systems, ERA; internal equipment - engine, hydraulics, ammo storage, fire control systems)

This brings me onto another point and that would be ballistics. The game should simulate realistic hull penetration depending on the projectile energy (be it HE or KE), angle, hull thickness / integrity, determine remaining projectile energy after penetration and apply it to the equipment in the way (or crew).

The only way to destroy a completely destroy an AFV without destroying all its parts individually would be to ignite its fuel tank or cause a catastrophic internal ammunition destruction.

The damage model of aircraft has always been severely underdeveloped in the series. Taking down a helicopter a helicoper should be accomplished through damaging its rotors, flight control systems, turbines, killing the crew and so on. As for fixed wing aircraft, I think it's totally reasonable to expect the same levels of fidelity IL-2 Sturmovik had in 2001.

I'd like to mention Iron Front: Liberation 1944 which improves upon ARMA II AFV's damage model quite a lot.

Even modern real time strategies have sophisticated damage systems. For example, the following list of equipment malfunctions is from Wargame: Airland Battle:

Stabilizer hit: Firing accuracy reduced in movement

Fuel leak: the unit loses fuel, even at a standstill

Critical hit: the unit suffers more damage than normal

Restarting ‘firing computer: unable to fire until the timer comes to an end

Ammunition hit: critical hit; the unit will be destroyed shortly

Faulty optics: firing impossible

Jammed weapon: the weapon cannot be used until the timer comes to an end

Crew KO: the unit is immobilized and cannot act until the timer comes to an end

Turbine hit: the helicopter is slowed down

Faulty turbine: critical hit, the helicopter crashes

Ammunition compartment hit: all remaining rounds are lost

Muddy ground: the unit moves more slowly up to the end of the muddy patch

Arduous ground: the unit moves more slowly until the timer or the patch comes to an end

Track/Transaxial stuck: the track is immobilized until the timer comes to an end

Gearbox hit: speed comes down considerably until the timer comes to an end

Detracked: the unit is immobilized until the timer comes to an end

Engine stall: the unit is immobilized

Because of the different nature of ARMA, (1st/3rd person shooter tend to be more detailed) I'd expect Arma 3 to do better than that^^.

Please post further suggestions on the subject.

Edited February 28, 2013 by SandboxPlaya

[chortles 263]

Unfortunately I'm pretty sure that the damage model for Arma 3 is set -- whenever the alpha starts to be on sale is when we'll see what's what, but unfortunately the above suggestions are way too late... and in any case, RoyaltyinExile has said that the "core" gameplay is infantry-based anyway. :p

Make this a wishlist for Arma 4...

[old_painless 182]

Hm, somewhat disappointing that they will bounce more naturally due to physX, but not take damage in a more realistic way ?

[maturin 12]

RoyaltyinExile has said that the "core" gameplay is infantry-based anyway. :p

Make this a wishlist for Arma 4...

Riding in APCs, choppers and thin-skinned vehicles is emphatically part of infantry gameplay. Virtually every mission, be it SP or MP, involves some form of transport. Currently, a humvee clipped by an RPG invariably explodes and kills everyone. Same with chopper crashes. It's not acceptable.

[bluedrake42 10]

Riding in APCs, choppers and thin-skinned vehicles is emphatically part of infantry gameplay. Virtually every mission, be it SP or MP, involves some form of transport. Currently, a humvee clipped by an RPG invariably explodes and kills everyone. Same with chopper crashes. It's not acceptable.

chill out. this is what mod support is for.

[Leopardi 0]

Riding in APCs, choppers and thin-skinned vehicles is emphatically part of infantry gameplay. Virtually every mission, be it SP or MP, involves some form of transport. Currently, a humvee clipped by an RPG invariably explodes and kills everyone. Same with chopper crashes. It's not acceptable.

I survived once an AH-1Z turning into a wreck and falling down. That should happen more often.

[raptor90 1]

You can see how "realistic" model is set in Arma 2 games...

On expert difficulty place you as commander in M1Abrams TUSK and T-34/85 about 10 meters of each other frontally, don`t shoot.

M1Abrams which has 600mm+ as a anti-penetration protection is destroyed by WW2 tank...

I feel really cheated by BIS and their Ultimate Military Simulator...

Even more that ACR does not work no matter how many things commands etc i tried.

I look forward to Cryengine 3 simulation capabilities, still its better optimized than hyped RV engine.

[Tonci87 163]

chill out. this is what mod support is for.

Mod Support can´t fix everything.

And it sn´t only the transportation stuff. Infantry Tactics change if you know that you can take out this tank only from behind, or even that your RPGs will bounce off the armor 90% of the time and that you need to find something with a bigger caliber.

I would like Arma 3 to have a system such good and belivable as in IF, or Men of War.

[old_painless 182]

Exactly, mod's should be the last resort for something that the developers have given up on. Having it in the core game is always better.

And credible damage to items that an infantryman interacts with is of the highest essence for that infantrymans experience to be immersing. Tanks not going through a fence, stuff like that is hopefully fixed in A3. We'll see on the 5th !

[BigMorgan 11]

It would be nice to see IF's damage model stolen (for lack of a better term) for Arma 3, but ultimately there's things I'd like to see improved before this and everything is about prioritizing one goal over another.

For instance: if we can get mod integration done right (read: easy for casual players) for multiplayer we'll get our improved damage models from the community and get to use them in PvP too.

[-Coulum- 35]

I want a bit more realistic simulation in this area as well. I doesn't have model every piece of a vehicle, but it would be nice to have more possible effects from being shot than loose a tire or burst into flames.

That being said, I think it is best we wait until after the alpha before making judgements. I think that BIS will maintain the same system as before, but I have hopes that it will be more detailed than previously. It might just be good enough...

[BobcatBob 10]

Yep accurate armor simulation for vehicles is hands down the biggest missing feature we have always needed in Arma to improve the gameplay astronomically, and rocket ballistics would be nice to have on release at least! But infantry centric A3 means we will have vehicles to uh, be "centric" about on A4! TKOH flightmodel+ PhsyX3.xx certainly is an awsesome contribution to the mechanized side of things though.

[raptor90 1]

I am very worried about that word "centric".

If you take it out the meaning you will realize that Arma 4 will be arcade. No different then OFP by codemasters.

[StroggCmd 10]

I could see this being modded in. If they make it so that tires can be blown (GTA4 did this years ago), you can probably set something up rotors on helicopters to do the same. The difference is that a blown tire changes the way a vehicle moves, rather than stopping it from moving altogether, unless the rotor itself actually factors into the physics/movement of the helicopter in-game (as in movement is only enabled if the rotor/propellers are intact), which would be pretty impressive. Usually they're just invincible, animated propeller blades stuck on the model for looks.

Edited March 1, 2013 by StroggCmd

[dm 9]

I am very worried about that word "centric".

If you take it out the meaning you will realize that Arma 4 will be arcade. No different then OFP by codemasters.

Yes, because centric means arcade... FPDR

All it means is that they are focusing design efforts on the infantry experience. They're not putting the same level of effort into improving the vehicles as they are to improving the soldiers.

Note that they are improving the vehicles tho. At least with the inclusion of physX they will be able to do more things better.

Note also that they are not removing any of the existing vehicle functionality. So there is no "dumbing down" as you are suggesting.

[raptor90 1]

Note that they are improving the vehicles tho. At least with the inclusion of physX they will be able to do more things better.

You mean less FPS ? Damn, BIS should really give attention to x64 Bit and Multi-Core/thread optimizations instead some "Physx"

But the "not necessary" words by devs are quite bad.

[dm 9]

You mean less FPS ?

And you've played Arma3 on your PC to see that you really get less FPS?

And given that you've played it, you can proove 100% that it it physX that is causing your FPS loss?

No?

Thought so.

Troll.

[raptor90 1]

And you've played Arma3 on your PC to see that you really get less FPS?

And given that you've played it, you can proove 100% that it it physX that is causing your FPS loss?

No, but it could be in the expectation.

Try CPU benchmark of vanilla Arma 2 and you will see why though...

[On_Sabbatical 11]

I just have a small question ?

When did ArmA become a infantry oriented game ????

[raptor90 1]

When did ArmA become a infantry oriented game ????

+1

Epic question.

[antoineflemming 14]

I just have a small question ?

When did ArmA become a infantry oriented game ????

Probably that is said because infantry is probably done better than their aircraft, vehicle, or sea gameplay. But, in the real world, everything exists to support the infantry. The infantry is the main fighting force. Your air, land, and sea mobilized and mechanized units all serve to support the infantry units.

[maddogx 13]

I think it's worth pointing out that Arma already had a physics engine before PhysX entered the picture. It was shit, but it was there, eating CPU cycles. Who's to say that it was any less CPU-hungry than the PhysX implementation?

[On_Sabbatical 11]

This is the old vision of war in which the main goal was occupation not destruction and elimination ... nowadays,modern armies try to reduce infantry to replace it with more technology...

I think it's so hard to defend the damage model used in previous titles,i don't care about RAW features like Physx if they're not going to bring some addition to the game ... a plane that loses its wing and avionics when hit by a stinger in the air would affect a situation more deeply than a plane that gets hit and survives long enough to take you down !

[OMAC 254]

I just have a small question ?

When did ArmA become a infantry oriented game ????

^ ^ ^ ^ Great question. This thread is making me worry about A3 for the first time. Aren't advanced vehicle damage models to be included, especially with relatively few new "futuristic" vehicles?

[maddogx 13]

^ ^ ^ ^ Great question. This thread is making me worry about A3 for the first time. Aren't advanced vehicle damage models to be included, especially with relatively few new "futuristic" vehicles?

There has been no official info on this subject yet. Everyone here is just speculating.