PDA

View Full Version : The MC. 202's Damage Model



ImpStarDuece
10-03-2004, 11:24 PM
Or, for the sake of accuracy, its lack of one http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

I have been flying P-47s, p-51 B/Cs, Spitfire Vs and Hurricane 11b, 11c and field modded against the MC.202 in QMB for the last week and have had some suprising results. In over 50 kills;

1. I have not managed to get a single fuel leak. Not one, nada, zip, zero.
With 8 .50s hitting i expect some results, even a measly fuel leak. Especially if i have hit more than 50 MC.202's in the last few days.

2. I have not managed to get a single engine smoking. Never ever. Not grey smoke or black smoke. The only smoke produced was by a wingman while flying a P-51B sortie. Not even raking nose to cockpit with the Hurri 11b.

3. I have never damaged an engine. Compare the inline engines of the p-40, Pony, Yak series and the 109 series, to name a couple. A few well placed rounds will kill the engine, cause propeller overspeed, light engine fires or cause oil leaks. I have never had anything of the sort happen when flying against MC.202s. No engine stoppages, no death rattels when viewed from externals, no engine fires and no engine seizures.

4. I have never shot off a flap and only shot off an elevator once. Only time i managed to shoot off an elevator the rest of the left section of the tailplane came with it. The AI pilot continued to fly as normal (which is a known issue).

5. The only kills i have made against a MC.202 have occurred when i have blown off a wing section, either halfway along the wing or right at the wing root. In all cases of my kills (at least 50, closer to 75 i would estimate) there has never been any secondary explosions when the wing has been blown off at the root, either with 20mm, 12.5 or 7.62 ammo. Nor have there been any sympathetic explosions when the actual damage occured. I have never scored a PK, engine kill, engine fire or a kill by damaging the rudder/tail assembly.

6. The MC.202 can absorb massive amounts of damage. 50-60 .50cal hits MINIMUM, i would guesstimate somewhere in the region of 100 average for a kill, possibly quite a bit more. Its more of a tank than the Jug. I have repeatedly seen MC.202s take more than a dozen hits from 20mm ShVak cannon fire, counted from the orange explosive puffs, not just from rounds hitting the target, and continue with little visual damage, not fuel leaks and a perfectly operating engine.


All these observations come from a serise of QMBs i have done over the past week. As i dont have a home internet connection at the moment i cannot post any tracks. AS I DONT HAVE ANY EVIDENCE AT THE MOMENT I NEED SOMEONE ELSE TO CONDUCT A FEW EXPERIMENTS!

It would be GREATLY appreciated if someone else can test my theory that the MC.202 is as tough in the game as i have found it.

Still, it has improved my aim. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

clint-ruin
10-04-2004, 01:11 AM
It's a tough bastard plane - I think it may be one of the AI planes still walking around with the old style Il2 simple DMs, or at least, it needs some heavy tweaking if it's not. There seem to be a number of places you can hit it and get no results whatsoever.

Hope that we get it as a flyable plane in the next planes patch and that this comes with a better DM.

JG53Frankyboy
10-04-2004, 03:42 AM
yes, Mc202 and MS406 are realy though !

the only hope is that the become flyable in future times . so the DM MUST be overworked.
actually the MC202 will be flyable. no words heared about MS406 http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

Oleg_Maddox
10-04-2004, 04:21 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by clint-ruin:
It's a tough bastard plane - I think it may be one of the AI planes still walking around with the old style Il2 simple DMs, or at least, it needs some heavy tweaking if it's not. There seem to be a number of places you can hit it and get no results whatsoever.

Hope that we get it as a flyable plane in the next planes patch and that this comes with a better DM. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

You are right. However we simply unable to make all plane to the new stadards for a short time... The development of all things that are way more importasnt take all the time. And, as a sample for you: we had not any weekends for 3 months making PF....
So if only MC202 will became flyable - then we may think about new DM and not like in some other new planes, but a bit simplified... Becasue for the new one need completely be reworked internals of the planes... simply new 3D models of internals... then programming...

clint-ruin
10-04-2004, 08:26 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Oleg_Maddox:
So if only MC202 will became flyable - then we may think about new DM and not like in some other new planes, but a bit simplified... Becasue for the new one need completely be reworked internals of the planes... simply new 3D models of internals... then programming... <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Nice to see you about on the forums again Oleg.

Something a lot of people don't realise is the amount of work put into plane DMs - it is a whole seperate 3d model inside the airplane, each section with different damage effects and durability. Plane sections blowing off have to be set up and tested to make sure that it doesn't look stupid when the plane is destroyed in different ways. How many degrees roll rate you lose from a shredded aileron at different stick pressures, the areas control cables and fuel systems take inside the plane, what size holes different styles of fuel tanks should be able to self-seal, it goes on and on. Even for just AI planes all this needs to be done.

If we at least get the 202 flyable, I don't think too many people will complain if the damage model is not as detailed as others. As long as when you shoot and hit it, it takes some kind of damage from each shot should be fine :>

Gato__Loco
10-04-2004, 04:47 PM
On the other hand, I've been flying a IL-2 campaing, and the damage model in this plane is awesome!! I've seen all sorts of geometry changes, plane chunks flying off, etc.etc. (and this baby keeps flying!!). Hopefully the rest of the planes (at least the flyable ones) will get damage models this detailed.

ImpStarDuece
10-04-2004, 05:57 PM
Woot. An answer from the MAN himself http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Thanks for the explanations. Should of figured it was something like that.

If its not going to be fixed anytime soon, thats cool. I need something nimble that doesn't die too quickly as target practice for my Jug. Those tightened .50s take a bit of getting used to after the 2 or so years of the 'cone of doom' style dispersion. Good to see accurate shooting in the Jug rewarded with results now.

P.S. If you want to really try your hand at improving your aim, strap yourself into a Hurri I or IIb or a I-16 tip 18. With those 7.62s and .303s you can spray away at one of the buggers at convergence with your entire ammo load before structural failure occurs. Managed to saw a wing off with a sustained 5 second burst with the 12 .303s of the Hurri IIb. More like a buzz saw than anything else really

pdog1
10-06-2004, 10:06 AM
If MC202 become flyable?
Why wouldn't it?
Nuts

Sto1MAR1MP
10-06-2004, 12:13 PM
If MC202 become flyable?
Why wouldn't it ????? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif

clint-ruin
10-06-2004, 12:59 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by pdog1:
If MC202 become flyable?
Why wouldn't it?
Nuts <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Why, the VVS conspiracy of course, Pdong! :>

clubmed_pippz
10-11-2004, 06:46 AM
sure =) ! is a kind of Kgb cospiracy... i recived ammunitions to not continue mine and clubmed works or a black dressed man whit sunglasses would come to shot me when i go for a coffee break (like the movies)

btw, about the mc202 (or other italian planes) we did some major changes since last mail excange whit oleg and friends, changed cockpits model 90% to match fb requirements (initial releases were really crappy) /we already sent a primitive release at maddox, but i think they haven t had time to work (and according to what i m reading in another oleg post, they wont spend too much time anymore on them )

added some elements to the external models (mc 202 / 205 are brand new models, nothing to share whit the previous il2 mc202 release, whit different parts, polys, dmg.. etc.)


according damage models /hitboxes ... i have a question.... is the obvious copy and paste method a valid solution to work some of the mc202 parts ? ( i. e. engines are db601.. already modelled for other planes)

LEXX_Luthor
10-11-2004, 07:06 PM
Thanks club meds. It will be so nice to see FB populated with lots of Italian planes.

More soon, NOW! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/784.gif

CR.42
G.50
MC.200/202/205
Re2001/2005 (correct numbers?)
G.55
SM.79 (hopefully Flyable...hopefully early versions http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif
CR.32 http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/11.gif

I don't know anything about later Italian fighters, but I will soon. FB is a real educational tool, especially for us westerners.

ITA_5SA_Tecnico
10-13-2004, 07:48 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by ImpStarDuece:
Or, for the sake of accuracy, its lack of one http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

I have been flying P-47s, p-51 B/Cs, Spitfire Vs and Hurricane 11b, 11c and field modded against the MC.202 in QMB for the last week and have had some suprising results. In over 50 kills;

1. I have not managed to get a single fuel leak. Not one, nada, zip, zero.
With 8 .50s hitting i expect some results, even a measly fuel leak. Especially if i have hit more than 50 MC.202's in the last few days.

2. I have not managed to get a single engine smoking. Never ever. Not grey smoke or black smoke. The only smoke produced was by a wingman while flying a P-51B sortie. Not even raking nose to cockpit with the Hurri 11b.

3. I have never damaged an engine. Compare the inline engines of the p-40, Pony, Yak series and the 109 series, to name a couple. A few well placed rounds will kill the engine, cause propeller overspeed, light engine fires or cause oil leaks. I have never had anything of the sort happen when flying against MC.202s. No engine stoppages, no death rattels when viewed from externals, no engine fires and no engine seizures.

4. I have never shot off a flap and only shot off an elevator once. Only time i managed to shoot off an elevator the rest of the left section of the tailplane came with it. The AI pilot continued to fly as normal (which is a known issue).

5. The only kills i have made against a MC.202 have occurred when i have blown off a wing section, either halfway along the wing or right at the wing root. In all cases of my kills (at least 50, closer to 75 i would estimate) there has never been any secondary explosions when the wing has been blown off at the root, either with 20mm, 12.5 or 7.62 ammo. Nor have there been any sympathetic explosions when the actual damage occured. I have never scored a PK, engine kill, engine fire or a kill by damaging the rudder/tail assembly.

6. The MC.202 can absorb massive amounts of damage. 50-60 .50cal hits MINIMUM, i would guesstimate somewhere in the region of 100 average for a kill, possibly quite a bit more. Its more of a tank than the Jug. I have repeatedly seen MC.202s take more than a dozen hits from 20mm ShVak cannon fire, counted from the orange explosive puffs, not just from rounds hitting the target, and continue with little visual damage, not fuel leaks and a perfectly operating engine.


All these observations come from a serise of QMBs i have done over the past week. As i dont have a home internet connection at the moment i cannot post any tracks. AS I DONT HAVE ANY EVIDENCE AT THE MOMENT I NEED SOMEONE ELSE TO CONDUCT A FEW EXPERIMENTS!

It would be GREATLY appreciated if someone else can test my theory that the MC.202 is as tough in the game as i have found it.

Still, it has improved my aim. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes,it is possible MC202 is like F1 Ferrari...
simply invincible!! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

ImpStarDuece
10-13-2004, 06:01 PM
Bah! Is it painted red? I dont think so.

Ferrari only wins because its a scientific fact that red cars go faster.

BTW Well done to Michael, Rubens and the boys at Ferrari for another stunning victory this year. You have deprived me of far to many Sunday nights sleep but it was worth it.

asso.di.picche
11-20-2004, 02:42 AM
Why wouldn't MC202 become flyable ?

G

Atomic_Marten
11-20-2004, 06:32 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
Thanks club meds. It will be so nice to see FB populated with lots of Italian planes.

More soon, NOW__!__ http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/784.gif

CR.42
G.50
MC.200/202/205
Re2001/2005 (correct numbers?)
G.55
SM.79 (hopefully Flyable...hopefully early versions http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif
CR.32 http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/11.gif

I don't know anything about later Italian fighters, but I will soon. FB is a real educational tool, especially for us westerners. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I'm so thrilled with this.. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/11.gif
I mean SM79, MC.205?.. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif