Trees

A couple thoughts:

Trees should be removed from the ends of runways. This was usually just good sense, in order to eliminate an obstacle to taking off and landing.

I'm hoping the new damage models will reflect more realistic encounters between planes and trees. Touching a few limbs or leaves should not be so deadly as it is now. I have seen a photo of a P-47, taken after it got back to its base, with a section of telephone pole embedded in the leading edge of a wing.

Making trees collidable was a big step, I am not sure our puters could handle much more than basic hit box. I would assume the new DM will make for better results though if you just skim a tree or what have you.

Then the hit boxes for trees should be slightly shrunk to fake the ability to hit the outer branches.

As it stands you hit a leaf your considered as having collided with a mountain.

Because the games collision system has no sense of mass, take the troops destroying helicopters for example, a compromise hit box I would rather deal with then the current situation.

The current hit boxes are so over the top it's just as unrealistic as when they didn't exist.

Scale the hit boxes down to like 85-65% of the geometries bounding box.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Scale the hit boxes down to like 85-65% of the geometries bounding box.

 

 

I'd say that 65% is too much, and that 85-90% would be just enough. But I agree with the sentiment and feel this is an excellent suggestion. I wonder how much work it would be though and weather it's feasible at this late stage of development.

The current hit boxes are so over the top it's just as unrealistic as when they didn't exist.

Is it really ?

I think you're being a little bit dramatic ...

Before, you could fly through any trees without damage.

In real life, no one in their right head intentionally flies through trees by choice - you might get away with it, but you might die :).

Most people avoid doing things that carry a significant risk of death.

In the sim now, people will avoid flying through trees, because in game they'll die.

End result - in real life people avoid flying through trees, & in DCS people avoid flying through trees.

How is this less realistic than people simply ignoring the presence of trees as they used to ?

Is it really ?

I think you're being a little bit dramatic ...

 

Before, you could fly through any trees without damage.

 

In real life, no one in their right head intentionally flies through trees by choice - you might get away with it, but you might die :).

 

Most people avoid doing things that carry a significant risk of death.

 

In the sim now, people will avoid flying through trees, because in game they'll die.

 

End result - in real life people avoid flying through trees, & in DCS people avoid flying through trees.

 

How is this less realistic than people simply ignoring the presence of trees as they used to ?

+1

Is it really ?

I think you're being a little bit dramatic ...

 

Before, you could fly through any trees without damage.

 

In real life, no one in their right head intentionally flies through trees by choice - you might get away with it, but you might die :).

 

Most people avoid doing things that carry a significant risk of death.

 

In the sim now, people will avoid flying through trees, because in game they'll die.

 

End result - in real life people avoid flying through trees, & in DCS people avoid flying through trees.

 

How is this less realistic than people simply ignoring the presence of trees as they used to ?

+1

The way it is now is way way way better than it ever was before. 2.1 is headed in the right direction for sure IMHO.

from what they said in the new damage model. if you clip the wing tip, you will only damage the wing tip. not the entire wing.

so the new damage model will improve it for ww2 aircraft at least.

the helicopters are pretty good with collisions. i have knocked off all sorts of parts from skids to tails and main rotors. and it always felt realistic for what i was doing.

Is it really ?

I think you're being a little bit dramatic ...

 

Before, you could fly through any trees without damage.

 

In real life, no one in their right head intentionally flies through trees by choice - you might get away with it, but you might die :).

 

Most people avoid doing things that carry a significant risk of death.

 

In the sim now, people will avoid flying through trees, because in game they'll die.

 

End result - in real life people avoid flying through trees, & in DCS people avoid flying through trees.

 

How is this less realistic than people simply ignoring the presence of trees as they used to ?

I'm being no more dramatic then how the new trees effect helicopters in there current state.

Yes you should avoid trees at all costs but watching the outer most leaves rip you out of the sky feels just as cheesy as watching bob fly through them entirely.

For you wing jocks the new model is fine however you aren't the only thing flying around.

And in case you think its a PBK issue down low I give you exhibit A.

No one seems to object to removing trees at the ends of runways. Could we see this happening in an update?

I'm at work, so I only had time to watch the first 1/2 of that video, but to that point, what I saw was someone having a nice time with some nice flying, and displaying a healthy respect for the trees - which is more realistic than just flying through them...

What point is the video making? I didnt see any contact with trees? Not sure what you need, seemed like lots of low fast flying with no issues...

Point of the video is as described although in hind sight to vague.

"If if you think I want the hit boxes smaller because I can't handle them in the current state you would be incorrect."

PBK - Person behind keyboard

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

But its not fine in its current state. The current collision of trees is the opposite extreme of when they were not collidable. Just because they are no longer ghosts does not automatically make it O.K

Take a the following scale.

-1 = Trees are ghosts and can be flown through

0 = Trees are collidable but have minor play

+1 = Trees are collidable 100% and are light brick walls

For all practical purposes the game isn't going to have realistic collisions with trees. So one would aim for a middle ground. Deadly but not unstoppable forces which is what the scale above illustrates.

Since trees are simple objects that get referenced all over terrain and randomly scaled. The work involved wouldn't be much. Modify the hit box for the 5 or so models of trees to allow some play and rebuild the map. FIN.

One thing I've not considered is how much that would affect LOS which might be a negative of tweaking the box. But I don't know what the engine uses to determine the new LOS rules.

If that is the case I'll live with the current situation.

Hi gents,

i had last night a little dance with the threes close to the runway as i was on final. Was a little bit to low and touched the threes a little bit with my Fw190.

I got a smal collison sound and got my left wing damaged and my left gear. Landed with the left gear half broken. So looks like you can touch the threes but it depends on speed and where you hit them.

I also had a complet destruction as i hit the threes at a low level running with about 600 Km/H, instand explosion.

regards

Little_D

I rather have collidable trees than nothing, but the OP makes a point. If there is a relatively easy way to reduce the box to mimic the outer branches and create a brushing sound when hitting them, even better.

I don't think anyone hits the trees on purpose, but sometimes in a fight we need to scrape the trees, and that swishing sound is another piece of the puzzle that makes an enthusiastic simmer come back to fly time after time. In another world, when I used to brush the trees, it was always and amazing feeling like "I made it". Especially when the scrap was good and I won it :pilotfly:

It may sound silly, but it is part of game play, contrary to some features that are simply visually pleasing, like wave caps, grass and such.

But I heard the other day a swishing sound when grazing a tree in Normandy, so I am not sure how the box stands right now. Or I might be wrong, I am not sure. But just the sound is a good thing, even if the box is not reduced.

No one seems to object to removing trees at the ends of runways. Could we see this happening in an update?

Re. Vinnie's comments: As well as trees obstructing runway approaches, some trees should be removed from alongside roads and railways.

Whilst trees are probably the most important single natural feature of the Normandy map, they are very uniform, and make it hard to detect road and rail traffic, even from the air. From the ground, in Combined Arms, enemy AI tanks have the advantage of X-ray vision, and can hit you through several rows of trees before you can see them.There should be some random gaps of three or four trees every few hundred metres to add realism in both scenery and action. Perhaps these corrections, both as to runways, roads and rail, could be covered in the same update.

Mich.

It may make finding 'traffic' harder than we're used to - or would like, but I'd have expected roads to run alongside hedgerows at that time, and hedgerows to be fairly continuous.

It probably depends where you look, but if anything, there seem to be more trees in RL.Normandy than there are in DCS.Normandy :

one more that seems relevant : (seems the regular orchards and weird spindly trees were really there...)

Re. Vinnie's comments: As well as trees obstructing runway approaches, some trees should be removed from alongside roads and railways.

Whilst trees are probably the most important single natural feature of the Normandy map, they are very uniform, and make it hard to detect road and rail traffic, even from the air. From the ground, in Combined Arms, enemy AI tanks have the advantage of X-ray vision, and can hit you through several rows of trees before you can see them.There should be some random gaps of three or four trees every few hundred metres to add realism in both scenery and action. Perhaps these corrections, both as to runways, roads and rail, could be covered in the same update.

Mich.

I agree with Weta43 that there are, in fact, too few trees on the map and that vegeatio should be denser than it is. I strongly advise against forcing the map to compromise just beacsue the AI tanks are bugged. The AI should be fixed, and the map should be broken just to compensate for something else that's not working properly.

With regard to airfields;

I'd like to see trees AND WINDSOCKS! (which are inside the perimeter fence) removed from the areas near the runways and thresholds, and from the grass areas between taxiway/apron and runway. However, I don't think DCS need to remove the trees before the threasholds which are beyond the perimeter fence. The thresholds are already set back from the fence by a few hundred yards. The ALGs in reality had trees right up to the fence.

Le Fresne Camilly Normandy 24 July 1944

http://aws-cf.caradisiac.com/prod/photos/4/9/2/814492/5236945/big-52369457d4.jpg

...The ALGs in reality had trees right up to the fence...

But in real life the contact with a twig at the very top of a tree didn't destroy your fighter aircraft. :)

But in real life the contact with a twig at the very top of a tree didn't destroy your fighter aircraft. :)

This is also true.

But the culprit is the tree-damage model, not the presence of the trees.

I would rather DCS fix the damage modelling, rather than force the map to compromise for something else that is not working well.