Find content
Not Telling
Hola!
I'll make it short and sweet. Are there any sources apart from this that you can recommend for a background research?
My motivation is to iron out a IIC variant description, giving it a proper background. The best I can remember in this regard was a hint somewhere that Clan Nova Cat forces fought against it and got surprised by the torso weapons, hidden behind armored panels. I'll be damned if I can find it again though. Internet cookies for you if you can help me pinpoint the source of that particular information (is it legit?).
Thanks in advance =)
Topics I've Started
Autocannon - Damage Decay
09 July 2012 - 09:55 AM
In this thread I want to present one of many possible solutions to keep current and future Autocannons in check. Damage decay is an easy way out to prevent the more powerful Autocannons (ACs) from breaking the balance. The more serious offenders are Ultra and Rotary ACs and I have focussed on these compared with standard ACs as a base line.
One could argue that accuracy of rapid fire weapons decreases rapidly with increasing caliber, hence the sharp drop of concentrated damage in a single area with each additional shot. Furthermore one could claim that it turns them more into AOE weapons at some point, where the theoretical maximum damage is spread over a wider area. In order to keep things simple and feasible, I have omitted such secondary effects and gave concentrated damage top priority. Otherwise this would cut too much into the territory of dedicated AOE weapons, such as Long Toms and Arrow IVs.
Below you see a table with all kinds of ACs, UACs and RACs listed with their damage values for each shot. The maximum damage tops out at 40 dmg with the RAC20 for 6 shots fired in rapid succession, the minimum is 2 dmg for the AC2 with a single shot. This table deals with damage alone and does not account for reload times, travel times, ammunition and so on. As I said before, it is one of many possible ways to balance damage for Autocannons or other weapons with multiple shots. The values below are just one of many possible sets. I hope this suggestion will prove useful for those in need of a working solution.
One could argue that accuracy of rapid fire weapons decreases rapidly with increasing caliber, hence the sharp drop of concentrated damage in a single area with each additional shot. Furthermore one could claim that it turns them more into AOE weapons at some point, where the theoretical maximum damage is spread over a wider area. In order to keep things simple and feasible, I have omitted such secondary effects and gave concentrated damage top priority. Otherwise this would cut too much into the territory of dedicated AOE weapons, such as Long Toms and Arrow IVs.
Below you see a table with all kinds of ACs, UACs and RACs listed with their damage values for each shot. The maximum damage tops out at 40 dmg with the RAC20 for 6 shots fired in rapid succession, the minimum is 2 dmg for the AC2 with a single shot. This table deals with damage alone and does not account for reload times, travel times, ammunition and so on. As I said before, it is one of many possible ways to balance damage for Autocannons or other weapons with multiple shots. The values below are just one of many possible sets. I hope this suggestion will prove useful for those in need of a working solution.
Arms and Legs - multiple hitzones
23 June 2012 - 11:54 AM
I would like to suggest the following to tackle two known problems/exploits: legging and weapon stripping
1. The reason why legs have been tempting targets in the past was that they had only a fraction of armor
compared to a fully armored torso PLUS they could be hit from all sides PLUS damage heavily affected
mobility and general survivability.
Solution:
Split up each leg into 3 different parts (foot, lower, upper) and give each of them the full armor and internals
according to standing specifications. This will make them about as hard to kill as the torso above.
2. It was equally not unheard of to see people deliberately strip enemy Mechs of their means to fight back to
grief or ridicule them. Arm-heavy Mechs suffered the most on average. Arms shared roughly the same
problems as legs but were a bit harder to hit from all angles. Although it was much easier to rip them off.
Solution:
Split up each arm into 2 different parts (lower, upper) and give each of them full armor and internals
according to standing specifications.
If such a system is already in place, please consider this thread superfluous and void.
Otherwise I hope this will turn MW:O into a more pleasant experience. Thank you for your attention.
Cheers
1. The reason why legs have been tempting targets in the past was that they had only a fraction of armor
compared to a fully armored torso PLUS they could be hit from all sides PLUS damage heavily affected
mobility and general survivability.
Solution:
Split up each leg into 3 different parts (foot, lower, upper) and give each of them the full armor and internals
according to standing specifications. This will make them about as hard to kill as the torso above.
2. It was equally not unheard of to see people deliberately strip enemy Mechs of their means to fight back to
grief or ridicule them. Arm-heavy Mechs suffered the most on average. Arms shared roughly the same
problems as legs but were a bit harder to hit from all angles. Although it was much easier to rip them off.
Solution:
Split up each arm into 2 different parts (lower, upper) and give each of them full armor and internals
according to standing specifications.
If such a system is already in place, please consider this thread superfluous and void.
Otherwise I hope this will turn MW:O into a more pleasant experience. Thank you for your attention.
Cheers
