647 replies to this topic

[Hayashi]

We're doing what we can to help highlight this to the devs, in addition to the support tickets that have already been submitted. This is a good example of an 'excellent thread' - finds an issue, supports it with data and gives possible ways to address it.

Though at the time of writing I'm seeing a couple of yellow names at the bottom. We'll probably see some action soon regarding this.

[Vapor Trail]

stjobe, on 14 March 2013 - 05:46 AM, said:

Absolutely. No weapon in BattleTech had splash damage,

Technically not true. Arrow IV, both homing and non-homing, as well as all the ballistic artillery.

Granted, the entire class of weaponry was artillery. But it sort of had splash.

Considering that armored targets aren't easily damaged by concussion/direct explosion, I'm expecting the systems in question used something like DPICMs. Which makes sense when you think about Arrow/FASCAM rounds.

[HRR Mary]

A well documented, completely tested, and all around well demonstrated post.

Thumbs up to OP, we need more constructive posts like this one to improve this game.

Sir Amaris, you may wear the name of the most hated man in BTech universe, but you sure deserve credits. I might even reward you with some French Bread and Croissants.

[Xendojo]

Hayashi, on 14 March 2013 - 08:06 AM, said:

We're doing what we can to help highlight this to the devs, in addition to the support tickets that have already been submitted. This is a good example of an 'excellent thread' - finds an issue, supports it with data and gives possible ways to address it.

Though at the time of writing I'm seeing a couple of yellow names at the bottom. We'll probably see some action soon regarding this.

I surely hope so. Splash has been in for some time now...and there have been adjustments made after the fact which may need to be revisited.

[Pando]

Great find, I always had suspicions.

[WANTED]

Hayashi, on 14 March 2013 - 08:06 AM, said:

We're doing what we can to help highlight this to the devs, in addition to the support tickets that have already been submitted. This is a good example of an 'excellent thread' - finds an issue, supports it with data and gives possible ways to address it.

Though at the time of writing I'm seeing a couple of yellow names at the bottom. We'll probably see some action soon regarding this.

Great to hear. I use to work in the game industry so I know how things go and people think the devs are not listening when in fact issues like this are being addressed behind the scene when discovered. I know it will be fixed asap if there is an issue which appears pretty likely. Great testing by OP and as you stated great data to back it up. This is how you write a constructive post and get the devs to listen.

[stjobe]

Vapor Trail, on 14 March 2013 - 08:07 AM, said:

Technically not true. Arrow IV, both homing and non-homing, as well as all the ballistic artillery.

Granted, the entire class of weaponry was artillery. But it sort of had splash.

Nitpicky, but correct

[Gevurah]

Vapor Trail, on 14 March 2013 - 08:07 AM, said:

Technically not true. Arrow IV, both homing and non-homing, as well as all the ballistic artillery.

Granted, the entire class of weaponry was artillery. But it sort of had splash.

Considering that armored targets aren't easily damaged by concussion/direct explosion, I'm expecting the systems in question used something like DPICMs. Which makes sense when you think about Arrow/FASCAM rounds.

Which makes sense.

Anti-tank missiles operate via a shaped charge high explosive projectile, generally using that charge to either penetrate armor or to hit copper/etc to liquify it and literally melt the armor.

Mortars and Artillery shells are literally designed as anti-infantry weapons; they typically are big exploding bullets which shower an area with shrapnel as it's wounding method. Air burst VT fused mortars are incredibly deadly against infantry but virtually worthless against armor.

[Nightcrept]

This mainly identifies the game mechanics for the missile weapons in game.
Hopefully though this isn't a bug and is simply by design.

Because if it is a bug we are looking at major game re-balancing. Especially srm's and lrm's will need adjusted to bring them back up to balance.

[Mad Porthos]

Prosperity Park, on 14 March 2013 - 07:10 AM, said:

Yup... I've found that SRM splash damage > SRM damage, too. Also, plain ol' SRM2 is dealing about 20-25 damage to a Commando if you shoot for the chest...


I guess it should also be noted that Ravens are getting killed by SRMs faster than normal because of this, too... it's not like only the Raven's SRMs get this accidental damage boost. You can use normal SRMs to take advantage of this loophole to kill Ravens until it's fixed.

This may be true, but there are also those who in similar testing, have found that destroyed locations like arms and side torsos are still being "hit", possibly as central locations, by DIRECT FIRE WEAPONS and seeing excess damage reduced before transferring inwards to next more central location. There are those who theorize that since some hits may catch a ravens already destroyed arm hit mesh, damage then passed into side torso is being reduced illogically. So some would say, yes those splash may work better vs small mech and even raven, raven has some other bugs working in its favor.

Mind you, these same bugs seem to be protecting centurions and other zombie mechs too, with destroed shield arms stilll taking damages and passing reduced amounts of damage instead of full damage, inward to torsos.

Given whats being seen about splash damage, in conjunction with damage transfer that is said to be working as intended... this all goes a long way to explaining raven and streak supremacy. If you hace missiles doing 2.5 damage simultaneously to front and back central torso, left torso and right torso, then the standard raven streak salvo, 2 ssrm2 could be doing 10 damage to each location... even if reduced away from central "hit" location, the moment that armor and structure at one of those locations is breached and that location is destroyed, the damage to the mech would be made even more devastating, since splash damage still may be registering on destroyed parts and then be transferring in to locations damage in the same missile volley.

So for an instance, a mech with 10 armor and full structure left in central torso and right torso... but with no armor on left torso, takes two ssrm missiles to central torso, and two to left torso. The 5 points damage to CT spash the RT, and LT for the sake of argument doing a reduced 4 points of damage to each. Say the left torso only had 2 points of internal structure left. 4 points would destroy that whole left torso, though its splash and 2 of it would be done back to the central torso by damage transference. Then the streak that actually "Hit" the destroyed Left torso does its whole 5 points of damage to the non existant Left torso, transfering it to CT due to damage transference PLUS 4 POINTS splash damage simply done to cental torso from a destroyed area. Even if its not full damages transferring from these destroyed areas, its still seen that even after the initial destroying event, diect fire weapons like lasers, ballistics as well as missiles/spash are hitting these areas and passing damage inwards, creating these multiplicative effects.

Only the developers can really see exactly what is going on, andit seems that repeated working as intended comments are coming from those who do not see that combining the TT mechanics for damage transferrence with an area effect simulating splash damage system is resulting in excessive effective firepower for a number of weapons, whilst in some cases reducing effectiveness of others.

[Bubba Wilkins]

Nightcrept, on 14 March 2013 - 08:28 AM, said:

This mainly identifies the game mechanics for the missile weapons in game.
Hopefully though this isn't a bug and is simply by design.

Because if it is a bug we are looking at major game re-balancing. Especially srm's and lrm's will need adjusted to bring them back up to balance.

How so? you adjust a couple numbers on the missile damage attributes/stats to bring the overall effect back in line and go about your day.

[Vapor Trail]

Ok... some further testing...

Turns out SRMs have an approximate six to seven meter blast radius.

Six meters. Even as an approximate value it's huge for what is essentially a direct fire weapon.

No wonder a Commando takes it from toes to top-hat from an SRM strike.

Methodology: Use the 270m max range of SRMs to detonate them at a known point. Place the target outside this point and move it slowly closer until damage registers. Record distance. Repeat for veracity.

Demonstration Video:

Edited by Vapor Trail, 14 March 2013 - 08:53 AM.

[Trauglodyte]

MoonUnitBeta, on 13 March 2013 - 02:55 PM, said:

The issue is that you are doing 2.5 damage to say the CT, 1.5 damage to the left and right torso's. So thats 5.5 damage after just one missile. So the CT is down 2.5 damage, and both side torso's are down 1.5. You fire just one more missile, and it happens to hit the left torso, that's 2.5 damage on the left torso, and 1.5 to CT, and 1.5 damage to left arm. After two missiles, the CT has taken 4 damage and you only hit it once. That's a problem, and basically you do not have to do ANYTHING, except press a button when fighting lights. you don't aim, you don't even need to do anything except make the circle go red and *click*. Heck, you can be 2 feet away from him, run past him at 150kph, and according to the devs as long as your target was within the 45degree angle that the lock requires, you hit them! Yay! streaks lol!

This actually explains a lot. I was in a game last night and had a Hunchback 4SP roll up on me. I had red armor on both side torsos but my center armor was yellow. He let loose a volley of double SRM6s and 4 Md Lasers and I went from yellow to dead. It should be noted that I run a Standard 300 engine at all times. There is no way that he hit 100% of all of his weapons dead center on my torso and ripped straight through the internals.

[Matthew Craig]

Just a note to say we've been looking into this and should have a full response later today.

[Lynxal]

As I didn't see it pointed out elsewhere I think there is an issue with your assumption on armor values and weapon damage. The trial mech's don't have max armor and it also doesn't appear the same as the stock versions. The armor also appears to be random in some instances. Shoot a commando in the head with an AC 2 and he goes down in 12-14 shots. Shoot a Jenner and he goes down in 15. Atlas/Cat etc appear to at least have normal heads and take 17 shots with an AC2. Hit them in the head with a medium laser commando and jenner go down in 6 shots, mediums+ go down in 7. Hit a commando in the head with a small laser and he goes down in 9-10 shots.

The stock commando 1-B comes with 12 armor in the head. With an AC2 that should require 14 shots every time.....but I can consistently down it in 12 leaving only 9 armor in the head. Why doesn't a small laser take a commando out in 9 shots every time....most of the time it takes 10.

I don't think it's possible to run detailed numbers on trial mechs because you have no idea what their armor values are, or if they are even the same each drop as I have seen variable results and it seems unlikely the weapon damage is changing each time. While, it could be that the weapons are doing damage differently than in real games the only way to get variable results is if the armor is changing each time on the trial mechs. If you say the AC2 does 2.25 dmg per hit explaining why I can kill a commando in 12 hits then why does it sometimes take the correct 14?

Is there an explanation for this I haven't considered?

Do I think that missiles are doing more than stated total damage due to splash, yes, do I think the exact numbers are correct, no.

Amaris the Usurper, on 13 March 2013 - 01:59 PM, said:

COM-1B (208 total HP)
6 missiles fired -- 48% -- 18 damage/missile
6 missiles fired -- 56% -- 15 damage/missile
6 missiles fired -- 56% -- 15 damage/missile
6 missiles fired -- 54% -- 16 damage/missile
In the following test, two missiles each were fired from the left, front, and right of the target, in order to get a better feel for what uniformly distributed damage would look like:
6 missiles fired -- 63% -- 13 damage/missile

Streak SRM damage is amplified by 420 to 620% against the Commando. Each missile does roughly the same damage as a Gauss slug, and this is from a fire-and-forget weapon weighing (with ammo) 2.5 tons. I am not making these numbers up. Try it yourself.

JR7-D (253 total HP)
14 missiles fired -- 59% -- 7.4 damage/missile
20 missiles fired -- 51% -- 6.2 damage/missile
16 missiles fired -- 61% -- 6.2 damage/missile


Methodology

I conducted all tests in the Testing Grounds mode. I have assumed that all 'mechs present have their stock armor layout. This can easily be checked by firing, at a given location, some combination of non-missile weapons that does the same amount of damage as the location has armor points. The internal structure may be checked in the same way after the armor has been removed. In doing a few of these checks, I did not notice any discrepancies.

Clearly, I have also assumed that the damage system works (in its other particulars) on Testing Grounds in the same way that it does in multiplayer matches. This is harder to check, but I am aware of no reason to doubt the assumption.

The total HP for a given mech may be calculated as follows:

[total HP] = [stock armor HP]+[total structure HP],

where

[total structure HP] = ([max. armor HP]-18)/2+15.

This is because

• the head always has 15 structure HP and 18 maximum armor HP, and
  
• otherwise, the amount of internal structure HP for a given location is always half the maximum armor HP for that location.

I have assumed that the "health percentage" readout over the target gives the current HP (armor plus structure) divided by the total HP, from which the total number of armor and structure HP destroyed can easily be calculated. Again, the assumption about how the health percentage works can be checked.

In testing, it is important not to blow off limbs with HP remaining, because not all of the resulting drop in the health percentage is due directly to weapon damage.

[Gevurah]

Matthew Craig, on 14 March 2013 - 08:53 AM, said:

Just a note to say we've been looking into this and should have a full response later today.

That's great! Glad to hear our feedback is being listened to.

That said...
This really needs to be hotfixed. It's been complained about for months in various capacities (ravens are OP, streak/srm cats are OP, nerf missiles, etc etc) ... this is a game breaking issue that should be at least given a temporary band-aid until a longer term fix can be enacted. I'm sure the player base would be greatly appreciative.

[Nightcrept]

Bubba Wilkins, on 14 March 2013 - 08:46 AM, said:

How so? you adjust a couple numbers on the missile damage attributes/stats to bring the overall effect back in line and go about your day.

If it is a game feature that has been balanced against since say nov then all the efforts to balance especially lrms and srms in terms of not only damage but flight characteristics will need to be adjusted. Not to mention possible counter issues.

In game though I am not seeing the major changes this should be causing if it was a new bug.

[Royalewithcheese]

Has there been any attempts to test this in-game? I have noticed that SRMs are ridiculously powerful against Training Grounds targets, (like 3 3xSRM6+A core an Atlas) but I haven't noticed this in actual matches. My SRM total hits and damage done:

Hit: 4982
Damage: 11603

Of course, this doesn't rule out the damage numbers being recorded incorrectly.

[Felicitatem Parco]

Hayashi, on 14 March 2013 - 08:06 AM, said:

We're doing what we can to help highlight this to the devs, in addition to the support tickets that have already been submitted. This is a good example of an 'excellent thread' - finds an issue, supports it with data and gives possible ways to address it.

Though at the time of writing I'm seeing a couple of yellow names at the bottom. We'll probably see some action soon regarding this.

Matthew Craig, on 14 March 2013 - 08:53 AM, said:

Just a note to say we've been looking into this and should have a full response later today.

The premonitions are true!

[Amaris the Usurper]

Lynxal, on 14 March 2013 - 08:55 AM, said:

As I didn't see it pointed out elsewhere I think there is an issue with your assumption on armor values and weapon damage. The trial mech's don't have max armor and it also doesn't appear the same as the stock versions. The armor also appears to be random in some instances. Shoot a commando in the head with an AC 2 and he goes down in 12-14 shots. Shoot a Jenner and he goes down in 15. Atlas/Cat etc appear to at least have normal heads and take 17 shots with an AC2. Hit them in the head with a medium laser commando and jenner go down in 6 shots, mediums+ go down in 7. Hit a commando in the head with a small laser and he goes down in 9-10 shots.

The stock commando 1-B comes with 12 armor in the head. With an AC2 that should require 14 shots every time.....but I can consistently down it in 12 leaving only 9 armor in the head. Why doesn't a small laser take a commando out in 9 shots every time....most of the time it takes 10.

I don't think it's possible to run detailed numbers on trial mechs because you have no idea what their armor values are, or if they are even the same each drop as I have seen variable results and it seems unlikely the weapon damage is changing each time. While, it could be that the weapons are doing damage differently than in real games the only way to get variable results is if the armor is changing each time on the trial mechs. If you say the AC2 does 2.25 dmg per hit explaining why I can kill a commando in 12 hits then why does it sometimes take the correct 14?

Is there an explanation for this I haven't considered?

Do I think that missiles are doing more than stated total damage due to splash, yes, do I think the exact numbers are correct, no.

In response to your points,

• I did not assume that the pilotless 'mechs present on testing grounds had maximum armor.
  
• I did assume that each 'mech had its stock armor (and structure) layout (these layouts are common knowledge).
  
• I tested the above hypothesis repeatedly (as described in Methodology) and did not find any contradictions.
  
• If I had (falsely) assumed maximum armor, the damage results would have been even higher.
  
• A COM-1B has 12+15 = 27 total HP in the head; I just repeated your small laser test on Testing Grounds, and it took 9 head hits to destroy the 'mech, as it should.
  
• I just repeated your AC/2 test, and it takes 14 shots (28 damage) to destroy the 'mech, as it should.

Edited by Amaris the Usurper, 14 March 2013 - 09:25 AM.