This is where I think RO modeling of pentrations should head
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=1116093
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=1116093
This is real modeling
- Thread starter ViViD
- Start date
And RO claims to have simulation level armored combat. 
They could learn something from WWII OL.
They could learn something from WWII OL.
Upvote
0
GG Panhard
GG
But seriously, that is pretty cool. It's a shame one has to pay for WWIIOL on a monthly basis...
EDIT: Oh, and for some reason I have a feeling that implementing this would kill most servers.
GG
But seriously, that is pretty cool. It's a shame one has to pay for WWIIOL on a monthly basis...
EDIT: Oh, and for some reason I have a feeling that implementing this would kill most servers.
Upvote
0
The real shame is that World War II was really quite bad when I last played it (I think it was two years or so ago... maybe less). I remember running at German tanks and sticking bombs on them... or running as an infantryman for an hour just to get shot. Good times. On the other hand, it may be that a "light" version of this could be modeled with just number-crunching (without generating actual shrapnel). Assuming the collision is effectively instantaneous, a sort of "hitscan" method of calculating spalling and damage could be done where no shrapnel is actually generated, but hit events are still registered using hitscan.
Upvote
0
Very impressing but I don't think this is neccesary, although very realistic.
The effects of shrapnels could be almost as well determined by probabilistic means, as probability of kill and wounds based on vehicle size, number of crew, round energy + HE charge. Plus probability of damaging various equipment or cause ammo detonation. Plus probability to shock crew members. Add to this ammo, fuel, crewmans hitboxes and you have almost what above much easier to do and less calculations. For more detailed version also thickness of armor penetrated, HE charge weight, if the HE charge detonated or not (it wasn't time based IIRC but deceleration based and could not go off if armour was thin)...
but I don't think this is neccesary, although very realistic.The effects of shrapnels could be almost as well determined by probabilistic means, as probability of kill and wounds based on vehicle size, number of crew, round energy + HE charge. Plus probability of damaging various equipment or cause ammo detonation. Plus probability to shock crew members. Add to this ammo, fuel, crewmans hitboxes and you have almost what above much easier to do and less calculations. For more detailed version also thickness of armor penetrated, HE charge weight, if the HE charge detonated or not (it wasn't time based IIRC but deceleration based and could not go off if armour was thin)...
Upvote
0
I'm switching to WWIIOL, right now! This is how it should be done. I'm just speechless, this must be the closest calculation to RL.
No hitpoint BS, no red, no yellow health. Just projectiles and what penetration+damage they do. And RO really needs this.
Upvote
0
Wow. If only WWIIOL was ported to a modern engine.
maybe thats why it works so good there ... im asking my self, if it coud be handeled by newer engines, the same way, without loosing to much performance, that it becomes unplayable ?
Upvote
0
Upvote
0
I stopped playing ww2ol once RO came out, now that I'm in college I'd rather not pay the monthly fee. It was the hardest game I've ever played, bar NONE. If the entire RO community went to WW2ol, I promise you that half of the community if not more would cry about how tough the game is and would give it up. The infantry combat isn't perfect but it is still intense as hell, and you no longer have to run an hour. The only problem I have with it is the over abundance of tanks, at times it seems like there are more tanks in a town than infantry, and because of that you can't cross the street.
Upvote
0
WWIIOL's vehicular system is over 5 years old. RO's is just over one year IIRC.
Of course it's more refined. But...
In WWIIOL, you can't leave your tank.
In WWIIOL, you often can't FIND a tank to drive (even though they are WAY over-represented in the game).
In WWIIOL, the physics model is a lot more refined. It also doesn't help that much because lag and latency can really screw you over.
In WWIIOL, there are STILL hit points. The TANK doesn't have them, but the systems inside the tank DO (in a way. They have a joules damage threshold that, once exceeded, causes the system to stop working).
My hope is that one day RO can afford the physics behind WWIIOL's penetration and damage model (in particular in the damaging of crew department). But the truth of the matter is that RO is FAR better in the infantry department than WWIIOL.
So if you're into Tanking or flying fighters, then WWIIOL is probably a better game for you (better get the best rig in the world to play it though). If you prefer infantry combat (like I do), then RO wins hands down.
Of course it's more refined. But...
In WWIIOL, you can't leave your tank.
In WWIIOL, you often can't FIND a tank to drive (even though they are WAY over-represented in the game).
In WWIIOL, the physics model is a lot more refined. It also doesn't help that much because lag and latency can really screw you over.
In WWIIOL, there are STILL hit points. The TANK doesn't have them, but the systems inside the tank DO (in a way. They have a joules damage threshold that, once exceeded, causes the system to stop working).
My hope is that one day RO can afford the physics behind WWIIOL's penetration and damage model (in particular in the damaging of crew department). But the truth of the matter is that RO is FAR better in the infantry department than WWIIOL.
So if you're into Tanking or flying fighters, then WWIIOL is probably a better game for you (better get the best rig in the world to play it though). If you prefer infantry combat (like I do), then RO wins hands down.
Upvote
0
WWIIonline does not require 'the best rig' to play it at all. The damage system in WWIIonline is waaaaaaaaaaaay ahead of RO. If it wasn't for the monthly fee I would not be playing RO at all. It also has much greater implementation of combined arms with towable guns, warships dumping shells all over coastal towns, tanks carrying infantry, no snipers, fighter and bomber support etc...
The monthly fee also keeps some of the internets retards at bay. TBH I really wish I wasn't such a tight ass cos it's far superior to RO in almost every aspect.
The monthly fee also keeps some of the internets retards at bay. TBH I really wish I wasn't such a tight ass cos it's far superior to RO in almost every aspect.
Upvote
0
Considering there was a poll not too long ago about implementing a lot of RO's infantry features in to WWIIOL, I can see the game as getting a lot better as far as the infantry combat is concerned -- I did enjoy it a lot even though I played for two weeks in a trial version. Another thing, a British infantryman should not be able to endure being stabbed in the face 15 times before dying. He just shouldn't.
RO is good for a quick game. WWIIOL is good for a simulation; well, not quite, it could learn a bit from RO's infantry before it could get there.
RO is good for a quick game. WWIIOL is good for a simulation; well, not quite, it could learn a bit from RO's infantry before it could get there.
Upvote
0
