Jump to content

[Bug] Missile Tubs Not Lining Up Properly.


10 replies to this topic

#1 SirLANsalot

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 1,540 posts
  • LocationWashington State

Posted 15 April 2013 - 04:58 PM

This ones an interesting bug in mechlab with the Heavy Metal.

Ever notice when on the highlander HM if you place the LRM and SRM together that for some reason, the LRM's get regulated to the small pod on the side, and not the big launcher in the torso. Example, Trying to place an LRM 15 or 20 on the mech, the torso properly shows the 3 or 4 sets of 5 tubes for the LRM's. However when you go to place an SRM 6 or 4 or anything else, it shoves the LRM's to the side launcher, whcih only has 2 sets of 5 tubes for LRM's and the big side torso takes the SRM. It dose this REGARDLESS of how you place them in the mech. Usually one would think that the first thing I put in would be the torso mounted launcher and the 2nd one, no matter what it is, becomes the side one.

The atlas mechs get this fact right, and when SRM's are placed they go to the SRM pod, and when LRM's are placed they go to the LRM torso. The Heavy Metal, and I assume all the other highlanders will be doing this too, will need to have this fixed.

A copy was sent to support as well, but I wanted to put this here to see if anyone else has noticed this "bug"

#2 whitelie

    Member

  • PipPip
  • 48 posts
  • LocationUSA

Posted 18 April 2013 - 05:48 PM

Actually I don't think that's a bug, since that's how it was in the original art:

http://www.sarna.net..._Highlander.jpg

I do believe, however, that there is a bug with the normal highlander variants where you can save it with the missiles in the torso and srm's in the side pod, but whenever you switch mechs in the mechlab and go back to it, or when you take it into battle, the missiles will have moved to the side pod and the srm's into the torso.

Edited by whitelie, 18 April 2013 - 05:49 PM.


#3 Reno Blade

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Blade
  • The Blade
  • 3,462 posts
  • LocationGermany

Posted 19 April 2013 - 03:08 AM

1.) LRM/SRM tubes are limited per section/hardpoint. (Eg. Atlas has 10 tube launchers. LRM20 will shoot 2x 10)
2.) The order of equipping the launchers on newer designs like the Highlander decide what place they will go in.
If you equip LRM20 and then SRM6, the SRM will be the side-pack.
If you equip the SRM6 and then LRM20, the LRM will be the side pack.
If you equip the LRM20 on the Arm, you will have a 10 tube launcher that fires 2x 10 missiles (or maybe a 6-tube).

#4 Muzakman

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Rage
  • Rage
  • 102 posts
  • Twitter: Link
  • LocationChicago

Posted 19 May 2013 - 10:21 AM

I've observed this issue as well. If the behavior of SRM pods *always* having priority for the in-torso mount is intended, then I believe that the defect is then in how that intention is being conveyed.

That said, I do not believe that this is intentional behavior. I am able to mount an LRM20 in the chest along with an LRM 5 in the side pod, with all firing off in one volley. I cannot, however, mount an LRM 20 + SRM4/6 and get a one-volley firing pattern, no matter what order I place components in.

It's in the prioritization of SRM pods vs. LRM pods that the defect arises; for some reason, SRM's and SSRM's always get first choice at mounting points! This seems to be regardless of size. NARC, interestingly, exhibits what I would call "intended" behavior.

I have tried these order of operations:
a: mount LRM <-- goes internal
b: mount SRM <-- takes over internal mount

a: mount SRM <-- takes internal mount
b: mount LRM <-- takes external

a: mount NARC <-- takes internal
b: mount SRM <-- takes over internal, moves NARC to external

a: mount LRM <-- internal*
b: mount NARC <-- external*

a: mount NARC <-- internal *
b: mount LRM <--- external *

* - expected behavior

Edited by Muzakman, 19 May 2013 - 10:27 AM.


#5 BrokenDog

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 151 posts
  • LocationMiddlesex(UK)

Posted 27 May 2013 - 03:12 AM

This is still a problem. Been playing with 733, 733P and 733C all week. The torso missile slots will shuffle as soon as you take the mech out of load out section. You can not put LRM15 in top slot and LRM10 in side slot in the torso. You save it and looks like it has taken, look at any other screen, then come back and they have swapped round.(showing 10 tube holes in each position). This is on all three chassis.

#6 Muzakman

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Rage
  • Rage
  • 102 posts
  • Twitter: Link
  • LocationChicago

Posted 05 June 2013 - 05:57 AM

Is anyone aware of whether this is by design or is a defect in the placement logic? I'm keen to know since I'm at the point of proficiency with my HGN's (732, 733, 733P, HM) that I care a whole bunch which missiles come out of which tubes.

It decreases the overall firepower of my HGN when I can't have volley fire for my LRM 20 if I want to have SRM's as well. I can see how in terms of design it could be an intentional limitation, but if it is, I'm not yet understanding it.

#7 Muzakman

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Rage
  • Rage
  • 102 posts
  • Twitter: Link
  • LocationChicago

Posted 26 June 2013 - 06:37 AM

To F/U on this a bit, I noticed that the 733-C behaves as expected w.r.t. missile tube placement; I can put an LRM/20 and an SRM/6 in the LT, and the LRM will properly be housed internally with all the right tubes alongside the external missile pod of the SRM6

#8 Celar

    Rookie

  • 1 posts

Posted 15 July 2013 - 01:17 AM

I noticed that the order of the loadout doesn't get saved. Meaning that I can put LRM/20 first to LT and then LRM/10 second, and in the screen it does show 20 tubes in the inner location, but after you switch screens it only shows 10 tubes in the inner location and also in the loadout screen it shows that LRM/10 is first and LRM/20 second. I tested this with energy weapons in Raven and the order doesn't get saved there either, although in that case it doesn't matter...

#9 nubcake

    Member

  • PipPip
  • 39 posts

Posted 28 July 2013 - 05:20 AM

Bug is still there after 3 months.
Bump.

#10 Redshift2k5

    Welcoming Committee

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Stone Cold
  • Stone Cold
  • 11,975 posts
  • LocationNewfoundland

Posted 28 July 2013 - 05:30 AM

I don't think it is a "bug". Have a good look at both the old artwork linked above and MWO's new rendering:

Posted Image

I understand that you would prefer to put the LRM in the chest and the SRM in the pod, but based on the default locations this seems to be an intentional part of the design and not a "bug".

#11 nubcake

    Member

  • PipPip
  • 39 posts

Posted 29 July 2013 - 12:03 AM

View PostRedshift2k5, on 28 July 2013 - 05:30 AM, said:


I don't think it is a "bug". Have a good look at both the old artwork linked above and MWO's new rendering:
snip
I understand that you would prefer to put the LRM in the chest and the SRM in the pod, but based on the default locations this seems to be an intentional part of the design and not a "bug".


It might be so, but it surely looks like a bug or oversight. Not only that, it also looks ugly (with SRM tubes being way larger than packed lrm side-pod).

Check previous post (highlighted what I consider a bug):

View PostCelar, on 15 July 2013 - 01:17 AM, said:

I noticed that the order of the loadout doesn't get saved. Meaning that I can put LRM/20 first to LT and then LRM/10 second, and in the screen it does show 20 tubes in the inner location, but after you switch screens it only shows 10 tubes in the inner location and also in the loadout screen it shows that LRM/10 is first and LRM/20 second. I tested this with energy weapons in Raven and the order doesn't get saved there either, although in that case it doesn't matter...


Hopefully it will be fixed in UI 2.0.
There are some problems with different launchers in Victor as well.
It seems logical to be able to align different sized launchers to "proper" tubes, but currently there is no way to do so.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users