Destructable Statics?

[Andrew!]

Hi all, I'm new here and I checked the histroy and I haven't seen this in a thread yet.

----

BF: 2 adds abit of realisim by having destructable statics such as doors or walls to create a short cut, etc. Will this feature be included in the game? If not, I think this would be a great addition since it's a sim.

 

[FYROM]

Its been in the game for a while, since they added the sapper class in...3.0 I believe? Several maps have objectives that need to be destroyed with a satchel charge in addition to the regular cap points. Also, maps like StalingradKessal have various doors and walls that open up new areas of the map when destroyed.

 

[Andrew!]

Oh, ok. Well I never played the mod before so I wouldn't know. Thanks for your input!

 

[SgtH3nry3]

Isn't it possible to give buildings some sort of health system??
When it reaches 90 it begins to show cracks, 50 means it's bricks are falling off and 0 means it just collapses?!?!

Scripted of course, I know the physics engine isn't powerful enough...

 

[Zoring]

Be fun tho, no more hiding from artillery barrages in flimsy wooden huts

 

[Pyros777]

Isn't it possible to give buildings some sort of health system??
When it reaches 90 it begins to show cracks, 50 means it's bricks are falling off and 0 means it just collapses?!?!

Scripted of course, I know the physics engine isn't powerful enough...

That is a really neat idea! I have no clue how they would implement that though. lol

I guess it could be done similar to the way a tank in the mod starts to smoke when hit by a shell but is not destroyed. You could say thats an intermediate damaged state. But, I think all they really do is add an emitter, not change the whole model. Anyway I like the idea of entire buildings suffering damage in that way, but it might get silly if a tiny corner of a wall is constantly pounded, meanwhile the whole building collapses. lol

Maybe on a smaller scale. I dunno but its intriguing.

 

[Zell]

I can't even imagine the lag with that in.

 

[SgtH3nry3]

I can't even imagine the lag with that in.

I can, just a small FPS hit of 5FPS max...
Unless there will be particle dust effects in it.

I'm more concerned of the map file sizes.

 

[worluk]

I can, just a small FPS hit of 5FPS max...
Unless there will be particle dust effects in it.

I'm more concerned of the map file sizes.

you dont map, do you?
and most certainly havent played Kharkov in the first version and dont know that the house fronts were desctructable statics in that version

 

[SgtH3nry3]

you dont map, do you?
and most certainly havent played Kharkov in the first version and dont know that the house fronts were desctructable statics in that version

I have done mapping in UEd, but that is a long time ago.

I have played Kharkov, but I never noticed it though...
Which version are you referring too?

 

[FYROM]

Back when it first came out, in 3.0 and 3.1, all the building fronts were destructable, so when they were hit by tanks and artie craters would appear in the facade. However, it caused enormous server lag, which made the map literally unplayable on most boxes and with more than 20 people on.

 

[Zell]

Wait, they're not destructible anymore?

 

[Andrew!]

Isn't it possible to give buildings some sort of health system??
When it reaches 90 it begins to show cracks, 50 means it's bricks are falling off and 0 means it just collapses?!?!

Scripted of course, I know the physics engine isn't powerful enough...

I know what you mean, Soldner: Secret Wars did almost the same thing. Only with holes instead.

 

[SgtH3nry3]

I know what you mean, Soldner: Secret Wars did almost the same thing. Only with holes instead.

Yeah but Soldner had a decent physics engine, that is.

Ostfront's only options to building destructions are:

• Newer/Better physics engine (Open Dynamics Engine, Tokamak, Novodex)
• Scripted wise (Would cause lag, especially when multiple destructions are done)
• Animated (Would cause just a bit lag, but it isn't efficient...

I'd choose for the first option.

 

[Andrew!]

Eh, I guess the physics were alright in the game. The feel wasn't right though.

 

[SgtH3nry3]

Eh, I guess the physics were alright in the game. The feel wasn't right though.

Yes Karma physics, but those are outdated and are a pain for the framerates.
It contains a damn huge load of bs. Well it's a very simple but CPU-killer physics engine.

I'd rather have a physics engine which is more amazing and CPU-friendlier.
Karma physics have a bad karma...

After seeing the NovodeX SDK and NovodeX rocket would seamlessly on my Pentium 2 450MHz... My jaws just dropped.

I mean it contains all fancy things, and it can update the gameplay to a real simulation level.
Of course some of it has to be toned down to internet-speeds-standards.