hmm maybe tanks could get that blur ping, explosion effect when a tank shell hits but doesn't destroy you. After all, even a puny sherman shell that fails to penetrate a tiger is still going to stun the crew.
Jetrohmm maybe tanks could get that blur ping, explosion effect when a tank shell hits but doesn't destroy you. After all, even a puny sherman shell that fails to penetrate a tiger is still going to stun the crew.
Interesting thought that! i wonder if it could be made applicable to tank crew in BF2...
I think breaking down a single target into "systems" for purposes of damage would fantastic and a wonderful attempt at more realism (usually a good thing).
1. Can it be done at all?
2. If so, can it be done witha reasonable outlay of time/effort? A cost vs.benefit analysis. It wouldn't be worth going 10 miles to get a cup of coffee but it mught be worth going 1000 miles to get a work of art.
3. If so, will any other part of development of FH2 be adversely affected? That is, would too much time/assets be given to damge localization at the expense of some other aspect of the work?
4. The Law Of Unintended Consequences: what Pandora's Box might be opened? Say, a single mortar round (or accumulation of rounds) hits near a track, or enough mg fire hits an engine deck, and the system interprets the damage points as sufficient to result in disabling those systems. Or is assigning damage points or reassessing damage capabilites of speciifc weapons on those systens for the very many new damage systems necessary just so imponderable or incalculable as to be a wormball of confusion?
Along the same lines, landmines should only disable a tank not destroy it.