homepage Forums Air Combat & Civil Aviation Rise of Flight - The First Great Air War Question about the damage model

I've been watching RoF since the beggining and never quite got around to installing it, however i think i'm getting there. So i have this simple question:

What to you think of the dm? Watching all these videos makes me wonder if it's not somewhat off, as i have a hard time believing that massive structural damage (blown wings and such) was a common occurence irl. Even in WW2, especially early, many if not most kills were scored with pk, which was what caused such an emphasis on pilot armour.

I have to say that my knowledge of WW1 aerial combat is basically zero ;), so i would appreciate any insight coming from wiser men .

I have the game and played it a lot.

I can't say the DM is 100% realistic, but it's TOTALLY coherent and concrete.
Makes you believe.

Never seen (during my gaming) anything DM related that had me to think, not even for a split second, "naaah, impossible".

Which to me it's the only really meaningful thing.
Go for it, it's free!

OH! But careful to use a torrent and not the Torrent2Exe.
It's a proper b!tch.

There were lots of reports of structural failure in WWI (wings, spars, control surfaces, bracing wires...) ROF models this pretty realistically.

There were still lots of pilot kills in WWI that lead to crashes and so on. I don't think you're seeing that as much in vids because people simming are just bad shots.

I'm not sure if I am a wiser man, but here are some thoughts. Many WW1 aircraft relied on wire bracing for their structural integrity; they weren't just there for extra strengthening. In our simulation it's common to have the wires shot away and not suffer any serious consequences, but it is not clear how much correspondence there is between the damage model and what we actually see. Knowing that wings sometimes failed without damage from combat, it is plausible to see them collapsing after being repeatedly shot.

The one thing that might happen too frequently is flamers. It was a major event in the career of any pilot to witness a flaming aircraft (for the first time); some pilots went for weeks or months before they finally saw one. In the simulation I see a flamer almost every combat sortie.

In Rise of Flight it takes 4 bullets to kill a pilot or gunner. That's like two or three extra lives, which goes some way to explaining the flamers and collapsing wings mentioned above.

Hope that helps!

Have read plenty of pilot accounts about the enemy's wings "folding up like hands-in-prayer". That part of the damage model is very correct. Miracles can also happen, as seen below...



BUT what I'd like to see, someday, is damage to the planes (bullets or g-stress) resulting in torn and flapping canvas... This was most commom, but I imagine difficult to model and a potential resource hog.

Thanks a lot guys, sure does help.

Yes i forgot to mention the burning engines, noticed that as well. However i was thinking that perhaps videos do not give a correct idea of the frequency of these radical events in the sim, as i'm sure most video makers will select them for more dramatic footage . For sure just watching a plane crashing after being shot at does not look as good as them flames and flying parts.

So 4 bullets irrespective of impact location to kill the pilot? No modeling of wounding and / or one shot kills?

Pretty sure it takes 3 pilot hits to kill, and for you as well, so be thankful! First hit reduces visibility (blur), second hit and your controls are much less responsive --i.e. you are a sitting duck, start praying...

I don't think flamers occur with unrealistic frequency. I fly multiplayer more and more, and seldom see them.

Not sure what you are so worried about, you can install and fly RoF for free (two aircraft of course) so just give it a try!

No, it is 4 bullets to kill a pilot or observer. You can actually be triple wounded in RoF. There is no difference between being shot in the toe and being shot in the head.

4 toes gone, you're a gonner.

3 bullets in the brain - limited vision and poor stick precision, but normally you can make an emergency landing with reasonably good chance of survival.




With this said, this is the only sim I've yet flown that gives a good feeling of flight (if only that cross country cross wind bug could be ironed out )

Not worried at all, just curious about some things. I don't think i'm going to fly this until fall, you know the drill, so many beers, so many beaches, so little time so it's gonna have to wait a bit, after all things can only get better .

I've been flying a lot of 3v3 singleplayer quick missions lately. I usually get at least one flamer every mission. I aim for the cockpit and nose areas so that could possibly be why I see so many. I figure the game seems to do a pretty good job of mixing up flamers, engine stoppages, pilot kills, and wings folding up. It helps keep it interesting seeing your opponent die in several different ways. It's more fun than just having a single "death animation" so to speak.

Yes, but it's not like what you see is randomized or pre-canned. How the aircraft is destroyed depends on where the bullets strike.

If I was going to correlate RoF to all of the reading that I have done I would say that - even accounting for my bad shooting - structural kills do account for more kills than they should. Having said that, it's pretty good. The way that they happen is pretty believable. I would give it an 8/10.

I would also say that folks probably generally stay glued to an enemy's tail, shooting at him until they see clear proof that he is dead. It isn't usually enough to cripple a plane and see that it is clearly unable to fight any further and just leave him alone and return to the mission. In other words, I think RoF players are probably more bloodthirsty than the real pilots of WW1, on average.

Sometimes the AI planes don't understand they should go home and instead return into the fight after being damaged. They are tough guys. Today I had a lucky shot on a DFW and started an engine fire, the gunner kept shooting at me while burning all the way to the ground...

And I think you are bang-on brother. Before migrating over to multiplayer, if I damaged an AI plane and he bugged out in the dive I would move on quickly to another opponent or climb out. Now in multiplayer you seldom see that happening unless it is a real furball.

There is something about the global stats that changes people, and not for the better. Even I find myself being more "bloodthirsty" as you put it. However, I do try to let people land on occasion, but find that my mercy wears thin if somebody previously was strafing my burning virtual corpse.

Yes, all too often players show incipient serial-killer behaviour. Wish I could put a smiley after that, but sadly can't...

I am a mediocre shot at best, but all too often I get the impression that a short burst in the general direction of the enemy will pierce his fuel tank. Most if not all of my kills are the result of the enemy crashing due to a fuel leak.

If anything I would like to reduce the occurence of fuel leaks, because it is somewhat robbing me of my sense of achievement.

Does anyone else have the same feeling? Or am I just lucky?

One hole in that fuel tank, for real you would loose fuel pressure and you would be jiggered.. that's why on the Camel for instance, you would switch over to 'gravity tank', use the handpump if need be to get your pressure back up.. and hopefully the contents would then give you enough fuel to get back across the lines.
Alot of the stuff I've read makes mention of aeroplanes going down through holed fuel tanks.. I don't think it was uncommon..

I'm not questioning the fact that a single bullet can be enough to hole the fuel tank, I just find it hard to accept that my "just a short burst to let him know I am here" approach is a viable tactic

That said, I find the AI has my kind of luck:: As soon as I hear that first bullet strike, I know it's time to go home.

Haha.. join the club! My gunnery needs to improve somewhat too!