647 replies to this topic

[Gandalfrockman]

OneEyed Jack, on 13 March 2013 - 07:36 PM, said:

You haven't been paying attention. The missiles are actually doing more damage than they are supposed to do when splashing. Not just doing max damage to all affected locations, but doing more than max damage. A COM-1B has 12 armor on each front side torso, stock. I fired 4 total missiles and had done internal damage on both side torsos. That means missiles that were intended to do a combined 10 damage did at least 13 total in each 2 different locations, in addition to the damage they did elsewhere. 13>10

I have been paying attention, what your describing makes perfect sense, you have to remember that once armor is stripped or segments destroyed, excess damage gets transferred to other adjacent segments.
For example,
-One missile hits two sections (2.5 expected/5 actual)
-But each section transfers 50% to an adjacent section per missile! , potentially each other! (an additional 1.25 per section!)
- intended for one salvo from an ssrm2: 5dmg, Actual:15 Points of freaking damage!
-This number is a good fit for prosperity parks test results.

Thats with one missile, and only catching ONE extra section, heaven forbid you hit a commando and catch three or four sections!
If you multiply this effect across multiple sections, and multiple missiles you are going to see ALOT of extra damage.

Edited by Gandalfrockman, 13 March 2013 - 08:45 PM.

[WardenWolf]

Gandalfrockman, on 13 March 2013 - 08:42 PM, said:

I have been paying attention, what your describing makes perfect sense, you have to remember that once armor is stripped or segments destroyed, excess damage gets transferred to other adjacent segments.
For example,
-One missile hits two sections (2.5 expected/5 actual)
-But each section transfers 50% to an adjacent section per missile! , potentially each other! (an additional 1.25 per section!)
- intended for one salvo from an ssrm2: 5dmg, Actual:15 Points of freaking damage!
-This number is a good fit for prosperity parks test results.

Thats with one missile, and only catching ONE extra section, heaven forbid you hit a commando and catch three or four sections!
If you multiply this effect across multiple sections, and multiple missiles you are going to see ALOT of extra damage.

Not quite sure what your point is, sir, but this has nothing to do with destroyed armor or sections. It happens even while some armor is intact on all areas of a mech. Check out my embedded video up at the top of this page to see what I mean.

Edited by WardenWolf, 13 March 2013 - 08:48 PM.

[CMDR Sunset Shimmer]

Great job op... seriously great work.

I think the fix is clear. Removal of "Splash" damage on missile weaponry. There shouldn't be splash damage on this weaponry anyway as the warheads are supposed to do damage to singular locations as it sits... the fact that splash damage is even a thing doesn't really make sense from an "in universe" perspective.

I think that splash should simply be removed.

[Warrax the Chaos Warrior]

Jade Kitsune, on 13 March 2013 - 09:02 PM, said:

Great job op... seriously great work.

I think the fix is clear. Removal of "Splash" damage on missile weaponry. There shouldn't be splash damage on this weaponry anyway as the warheads are supposed to do damage to singular locations as it sits... the fact that splash damage is even a thing doesn't really make sense from an "in universe" perspective.

I think that splash should simply be removed.

I agree with this.

Even from a realistic/physics perspective, armor is highly resistant to unfocused concussion. That's why shaped charges exist. The concussion or splash damage from shaped charge would be deadly to anything living, but it's going to do absolutely nothing at all to armor designed to resist it.

edit: http://en.wikipedia....i/Shaped_charge

Presumably, any ordinance designed to penetrate armor works this way. A large radius blast would be used for anti-personnel ordinance, that is to say, AP rounds logically shouldn't have any splash to them.

Edited by Warrax the Chaos Warrior, 13 March 2013 - 09:13 PM.

[Deathlike]

This might explain why I get so many deaths by LRM to the head in a catapult...

Edited by Deathlike, 13 March 2013 - 09:07 PM.

[Jack Lowe]

post made me curious so I went to the test ground. Got the same results with an SRM6 on the commando as the earlier vid. wonder if he'd mind trying that with a single SRM6 to the chest of the centi on the test grounds. I tried it and was flabbergasted. Tried it again both times at 20m, right torso was totally stripped internals went yellow, CT went red in armor LT when orange. That's only 15 damage????? really?

[Haitchpeasauce]

PGI needs to either remove splash damage and spread the missile hits out, or keep splash damage and reduce the damage so that the total damage per missile is at most the rated damage.

But not both!

Also, splash damage should have no effect against an armoured target. At most, it should only matter for internals damage.

[CMDR Sunset Shimmer]

Warrax the Chaos Warrior, on 13 March 2013 - 09:06 PM, said:

I agree with this.

Even from a realistic/physics perspective, armor is highly resistant to unfocused concussion. That's why shaped charges exist. The concussion or splash damage from shaped charge would be deadly to anything living, but it's going to do absolutely nothing at all to armor designed to resist it.

edit: http://en.wikipedia....i/Shaped_charge

Presumably, any ordinance designed to penetrate armor works this way. A large radius blast would be used for anti-personnel ordinance, that is to say, AP rounds logically should have any splash to them.

Well frankly, the LRM's/SRM's as we see them in battletech, and by extension, Mechwarrior, deliver a shaped charge intended to damage a battlemech's armor.

Idealy if they want splash damage, they should look at THUNDER LRM's which we see in 2 years time...

Regardless, I think it's clear with the missiles the problem lies in splash damage... which was an issue we saw back in closed beta too.

[shabowie]

Just make the warhead a HEAT style warhead that only damages the location it strikes. Mechs are walking tanks, splash damage from concussion or fragmentation shouldn't damage them.

http://en.wikipedia....ti-tank_warhead

[Dr Killinger]

Wow, great work. I vote for complete removal of splash damage, a la tabletop (I know that's pretty much a swearword on these forums, but I think it makes sense in this case).

[OneEyed Jack]

Deamhan, on 13 March 2013 - 08:19 PM, said:

Hmmm. I was looking over my weapon stat for the streak and......

502 shots fired with 333 hits.

Each time the weapon is fired (launching two missiles) it counts as a shot.
As long as one of those two missiles hit, it is considered a "hit".

So while this is not perfectly accurate, it would be a close proximation.

At 66.33%, 502 shots is 1004 missiles with just a 66.33% hit rate meaning that roughly 666 (rounded up from 665.9532) hit for a total damage of 1,041 dmg. which is 1.56 dmg per missile. Now if about half of these "hits" is because only one of the missiles hit and not both, then you can increase the dmg per missile by 50%.

.78 + 1.56 = 2.34

This brings it much closer to the 2.5 per missile.

Nope, it counts every missile. Unless you're suggesting that I've fire my LRM60 Stalker nearly 30,000 separate times since they began recording.

Quote

But lets go extreme and assume that every hit was only from one missile. So instead of 666 missiles, it is 333 missiles for 1,041 dmg. That is 3.126 dmg per missile but with only one missile out of two per shot, that is only 3.126 dmg per shot. Not only is it still only .6 off from the 2.5 dmg per missile but in this particular case, it is less damage per shot than max. With the max being 2.5 dmg * 2 missiles for a total of 5 dmg per shot.

Are you seriously suggesting that a 25% increase in damage is no big deal? It's a big deal to me.

Furthermore, if you'd read my first post in this thread, you'd see I had specifically tested it on larger mechs, which have larger hit boxes, thus less damage splashing onto different locations. That damage was basically exactly 2.5/missile, allowing a slight tolerance do to the mech health being rounded off to whole percentages. This shows that the problem is affecting smaller mechs, with smaller hit boxes, mech more than larger mechs. So it really throws the entire thing out of balance and gives Streaks an even greater advantage against lights than they are supposed to have,

Deathlike, on 13 March 2013 - 09:07 PM, said:

This might explain why I get so many deaths by LRM to the head in a catapult...

Nah, that's ,cause yer, head's so fat.

No, really, Cats have large heads and they are located pretty much center mass when viewed from the front. As such, they're going to take a lot of incidental head hits even when people aren't trying. Anything hitting in a big cluster in your frontal center mass will likely hit your head. Though, I've mastered all 4 cats and I don't think I've ever died from missiles to the head. Plenty of other things to the head, but never a missile.

[BrkDncr]

Haitchpeasauce, on 13 March 2013 - 09:14 PM, said:

PGI needs to either remove splash damage and spread the missile hits out, or keep splash damage and reduce the damage so that the total damage per missile is at most the rated damage.

But not both!

Also, splash damage should have no effect against an armoured target. At most, it should only matter for internals damage.

Splash damage should be more realistic. Each missile should only be able to transfer a maximum amount of energy to the target, which currently is 2.5 points. I don't know what type of charge is on the missile to comment on if it should splash or not. i would like to see splash damage from near misses though...

[Inyc]

Papaspud, on 13 March 2013 - 05:16 PM, said:

This is the way it works in game too. I was wondering why my ssrm's were causing 3.7 damage when I looked at my stats.

If I divide my missile damage by my missiles hit, I come out slightly under damage for all of them (1.74 LRM, 2.32 SRM).

Where can I get the stronger missiles?

[Deathlike]

OneEyed Jack, on 13 March 2013 - 09:36 PM, said:

Nope, it counts every missile. Unless you're suggesting that I've fire my LRM60 Stalker nearly 30,000 separate times since they began recording.


Are you seriously suggesting that a 25% increase in damage is no big deal? It's a big deal to me.

Furthermore, if you'd read my first post in this thread, you'd see I had specifically tested it on larger mechs, which have larger hit boxes, thus less damage splashing onto different locations. That damage was basically exactly 2.5/missile, allowing a slight tolerance do to the mech health being rounded off to whole percentages. This shows that the problem is affecting smaller mechs, with smaller hit boxes, mech more than larger mechs. So it really throws the entire thing out of balance and gives Streaks an even greater advantage against lights than they are supposed to have,


Nah, that's ,cause yer, head's so fat.

No, really, Cats have large heads and they are located pretty much center mass when viewed from the front. As such, they're going to take a lot of incidental head hits even when people aren't trying. Anything hitting in a big cluster in your frontal center mass will likely hit your head. Though, I've mastered all 4 cats and I don't think I've ever died from missiles to the head. Plenty of other things to the head, but never a missile.

I've died too often with missiles to the head, for whatever the reason. So, I figure this is primarily responsible for this (outside of the huge head hitbox).

[One Medic Army]

Inyc, on 13 March 2013 - 10:01 PM, said:

If I divide my missile damage by my missiles hit, I come out slightly under damage for all of them (1.74 LRM, 2.32 SRM).

Where can I get the stronger missiles?

Apparently you need to shoot more light mechs.

[Inyc]

I guess this explains why my Awesome feels so horribly vulnerable to missiles... I was pulling my hair out trying to understand how I can trade equal volleys of SRMs with atlas or Stalker that are already damage, land more of them than they do and still get wrecked or die faster. I'm taking twice to thrice as much damage from the SRMs compared to them!

My Centurion suffers from this too. I guess I just picked the wrong chassis, lol.

[Amaris the Usurper]

Missiles that strike objects or terrain sufficiently close to the target will still deal a small amount of splash damage; this is especially true with LRMs. For example, try shooting LRMs near the foot of a 'mech on Testing Grounds (or in a live match), and observe the small damage done. Also, it is possible to blow your own head off with SRMs (this requires you to use a Raven and stand below the elbow of an Atlas), and Commandos have been known to self destruct from the splash damage of SRMs striking the water ahead of them (although this is rare).

It is at least plausible that, if any splash damage is done by missiles that do not impact the target directly, these will still be counted as "hits" in the statistics. The damage done is very slight and would skew the results downward.

LRMs frequently miss small moving targets, but, in my tests, all missiles typically hit the target, since I have only fired at large stationary targets (Atlas or Awesome) from the front. Given the frequency with which LRMs miss in practice, this could be a major factor.

Also, the main reason (I think) that Streaks have done less damage than conventional SRMs in most people's tests is that they are more likely (due to guidance) to strike peripheral areas of the target and do less damage, whereas we can easily make sure that all SRMs hit the center of mass and deal splash damage to a larger number of components.

Also, I noted at the end of my original post that SRM knee shots deal relatively little damage to an Atlas (much less than the nominal value of 2.5 per missile). It would not surprise me if other 'mechs display similar bugs.

Controlled testing has repeatedly shown moderately to massively amplified missile damage, especially when SRMs are fired from close range at the torso. On the other hand, many people's statistics show values closer to the nominal ones. The two effects mentioned above could help to explain the discrepancy, although no one has been stating that a given missile should always do the same amount of damage as it would if it struck the center torso, so perhaps there is no discrepancy. Mainly I am trying to show how the high damage values observed for torso hits might fit into the overall picture.

[Brilig]

I'm sure someone said it before, but if all this is true. I wonder how it was missed during testing.

[Monky]

Brilig, on 13 March 2013 - 11:18 PM, said:

I'm sure someone said it before, but if all this is true. I wonder how it was missed during testing.

It did take us a week and a half to stumble into it after testing grounds was released. I'd be willing to cut some slack over this one, as they probably didn't think to test against the target's armor value instead of the damage report (which apparently is also bugged as it can't detect the extra damage being done).

Edited by Monky, 13 March 2013 - 11:23 PM.

[Dagada]

another small tidbit to add to the fuel of this issue in regards to people using their statistics to gauge the dmg their streaks or other missiles are doing is we dont know what pgi records for dmg done, since we dont know if missile have a single dmg component or two components such as impact dmg and then splash dmg. the tracker might not be tracking all of the variables and it also might not track any additional dmg done from any bugs these tests are showing to be in existance. As with the laser beam duration bug if pgi doesnt have the proper tools to track these things then their telemetry and statistics might show completely diffrent numbers from actual game play.

will be intresting to see what if anything pgi does other then post a small comment in reply to this thread.