647 replies to this topic

[Tekadept]

HRR Insanity, on 14 March 2013 - 06:41 PM, said:

Or... you could just remove splash damage and solve the problem immediately.

My final bit didn't appear. Weird.
Well yes I advocate for it to be completely removed as i agree with your statement re mutiple tube launchers But I Wont hold my breath on them removing it.

[FactorlanP]

A single missile doing more then the listed 2.5 points of damage is simply silly design.

If a missile explosion intersects more than one hit location, the 2.5 points of damage should be spread across the two sections.

Why should a missile that strikes dead center on the chest of an Atlas cause 2.5 points of damage, but one that intersects two hit boxes cause more than 2.5?

The implementation of splash damage makes NO SENSE at all.

A missile SHOULD NEVER do more total damage than what it is rated to do....

Edited by FactorlanP, 14 March 2013 - 06:56 PM.

[Tekadept]

FactorlanP, on 14 March 2013 - 06:55 PM, said:

A missile SHOULD NEVER do more total damage than what it is rated to do....

I Agree, and that's the problem. A Missile of any type contains a warhead, that warhead can only do a certain amount of damage based on its payload. imagine modern day Harpoon Missiles used against ships. They carry a 488 pounds Warhead, but if they hit a certain part of a ship the warhead suddenly does the damage of a warhead that is equiavalent of 600 pounds. it just doesnt make sense.

[FactorlanP]

Tekadept, on 14 March 2013 - 07:05 PM, said:

I Agree, and that's the problem. A Missile of any type contains a warhead, that warhead can only do a certain amount of damage based on its payload. imagine modern day Harpoon Missiles used against ships. They carry a 488 pounds Warhead, but if they hit a certain part of a ship the warhead suddenly does the damage of a warhead that is equiavalent of 600 pounds. it just doesnt make sense.

EXACTLY!

Hopefully they will realize how nonsensical the current splash damage system is and fix it. SOON!

[Klunk]

Gotta agree with the people who are wondering why this is being called a bug. If missiles aren't supposed to damage adjacent sections on an impacted mech, why is splash damage in the game? Are lights being squished by this too often? I feel like the removal of lag shield was a bigger hit to the light chassis viability than streaks or LRMs.

[Klunk]

HRR Insanity, on 14 March 2013 - 06:41 PM, said:

Or... you could just remove splash damage and solve the problem immediately.

This would be a big nerf to all missiles. They would have to increase the damage to balance it.

[Wildstreak]

Gevurah, on 14 March 2013 - 07:47 AM, said:

Snipped extra stuff
Now splattapults are the big deal, and raven 3l's. Why? the core issue was never resolved.

So once this missile issue is resolved, the question then becomes will the devs need to modify armor values again back to base value?

Core issue - yes, when you don't address issues properly, you still get problems.

Armor - Leave it where it is. Even after making adjustments having doubled armor makes things more interesting in a shooter.

Deathlike, on 14 March 2013 - 06:16 PM, said:

Removing splash altogether will immediately nerf LRMs, and since LRM OP threads are the current norm, you will now get a surge of LRM are UP threads as a consequence. Guys, moving the targets is not an option. This has to be dealt with and fixed. Splash damage has always meant to be proportional damage, so they have to figure out the #s here and go from there. Removing splash will have unfortunate and unintended consequences.

No.
Missile launchers are not bombs or similar with AoE. They are just missiles that do damage to one location. They are not big enough to do AoE, for proof, here's a link with a picture of a person holding a LRM missile.
http://www.sarna.net...ot_LRM_Infantry
Even today, we have missiles that big and they do not do splash damage. You need a bigger missile to get splash damage.

[TOGSolid]

Klunk, on 14 March 2013 - 07:50 PM, said:

This would be a big nerf to all missiles. They would have to increase the damage to balance it.

Which isn't that big of a deal. Fiddling with the damages after the splash damage fix/removing it entirely is a simple enough matter. SRMs shouldn't be as dominant as they are right now though so I'm not sure why everyone is assuming they would need a buff. I think people are just too used to them being top tier weaponry.

[Skyfaller]

Nice work.

And although it is without saying that if the splash damage is the issue then it should be removed.

Question I have is though..why was there splash damage in the first place? In any missile.. I mean, I understand that 'realistically it should have an explosion' but if the game is based on hit boxes on specific sections then splash damage just makes things ridiculously complicated.

Why not simply remove the splash damage from the missiles (all of them.. SSRM, SRM and LRM) and instead of splash, have the missiles inflict a sort of 'knockdown' force.

Only the heaviest missiles would knock down the lightest mech of course... but for example an LRM20 striking an atlas from the front..the atlas is not moving.. the missile impact should make it take 2 steps back. If it was moving the missile impact would slow it down to near zero speed.

(effect exaggerated as an example but you get the idea).

This would make the missiles functional damage wise and functional utility wise.

[Kageru Ikazuchi]

Klunk, on 14 March 2013 - 07:50 PM, said:

This would be a big nerf to all missiles. They would have to increase the damage to balance it.

But it's only a big nerf to all missiles against some mechs ... this is why it is a balance problem. I think everyone assumed that missile damage was 2.5/1.8 per missile, and only that much.

X amount of armor should provide protection against X amount of damage.

Y weapon, when used effectively, should cause Y damage.

[Haitchpeasauce]

Thank you Thontor and Scop for spotting a mistake in my HP calculation.

I've updated the post and the values look much better:

http://mwomercs.com/...ost__p__2061375

That is to say, the Commando is taken even more damage than it should. 7 times much, just like Amaris found.

My view on splash damage:

It's a nice idea, and it's nice for the concept of crit seeking and the effect of weakening the enemy over time.

BUT the overall damage MUST equal base missile damage, or else the weapon is then excessive amounts of damage for its weight.

However, given that mechs are big metal robots, an explosion radius of 7m is a bit much for a tiny missile to do anything other than a shaped charge.

Put it this way:
There are 100 short range missiles per ton of ammunition. That means each srm must weigh at most 10kg, if not less.
There are 180 long range missiles per ton of ammunition. That means eachlrm must weigh at most 5.55kg, if not less.

Missiles of this size are comparable with modern rockets like the CRV7 with a U.S. M151 High Explosive Point Detonating (HEPD) round. They weigh about 10kg all up. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CRV7

I know this is a fantasy future setting with giant stompy robots, but the point here is that rocket design is more about penetrating armor rather than setting off area explosions, which is what bombs are for.

How about this. You can choose the type of ammo to equip on the mech: Shaped or Blast. Either way, the missile must deal the same overall damage, and is a choice between concentrating the damage or spreading it out.

Edited by Haitchpeasauce, 14 March 2013 - 08:52 PM.

[Haitchpeasauce]

Armor values should not be reduced because the rate of fire was also increased in this game.

The point here is that missiles are doing excessive damage, scaling up as the mech gets smaller, and doing damage far above that of lasers and ballistics for the same weight/ammo/heat requirements.

This is a very important balance issue that must be resolved, and is hitting the light mechs the hardest, but in truth is affecting everyone.

[BlueSanta]

Please remove splash damage in the March 19th patch. Leave it out permanently if need be. Please don't leave in an unbalanced component for 3 months.

Again.

[Cest7]

This needs to get fixed ASAP

[Kmieciu]

A single SRM impacting the enemy should do 2.5 points of damage. No more. No less.

When all six missiles connect, SRM6 should do 15 points of damage to a Commando, and 15 points of damage to an Atlas.

The same goes for streaks and lrms.

This issue is not open for debate. You simply can not argue that a medium laser should do 5 damage to an Atlas, but 15 to a Commando. The same goes for ballistics and missiles. If there is a bug with missiles, it should be fixed ASAP.

Edited by Kmieciu, 15 March 2013 - 01:38 AM.

[Teralitha]

This is exactly why we needed to be able to have custom matches for controlled enviroment testing all the way back in closed beta to do such testing back then, so it wouldnt be an issue now


EPIC FAIL.

Edited by Teralitha, 15 March 2013 - 02:07 AM.

[Nightcrept]

I think one problem is that splash damage also effects splash damage for ground hits near the target as well.

So It maybe a possibility that the splash damage modifier is working in a lot of other areas as well, making the devs leery about messing with it too much.

Merchant, on 14 March 2013 - 07:53 PM, said:

Core issue - yes, when you don't address issues properly, you still get problems.

Armor - Leave it where it is. Even after making adjustments having doubled armor makes things more interesting in a shooter.

No.
Missile launchers are not bombs or similar with AoE. They are just missiles that do damage to one location. They are not big enough to do AoE, for proof, here's a link with a picture of a person holding a LRM missile.
http://www.sarna.net...ot_LRM_Infantry
Even today, we have missiles that big and they do not do splash damage. You need a bigger missile to get splash damage.

While I can't speak for BT and TT rules. IN real life that missile appears to be about the size of a hellfire missile and it can do a LOT of area damage.

They seem to be treating the missiles as proximity explosions rather then penetrates. In a case like that you calculate damage not by were the weapon hits necessarily but by the area covered and distance from the central point. That could result in some weird calculations that may account for the large numbers.

[OneEyed Jack]

Nightcrept, on 15 March 2013 - 02:12 AM, said:

While I can't speak for BT and TT rules. IN real life that missile appears to be about the size of a hellfire missile and it can do a LOT of area damage.

They seem to be treating the missiles as proximity explosions rather then penetrates. In a case like that you calculate damage not by were the weapon hits necessarily but by the area covered and distance from the central point. That could result in some weird calculations that may account for the large numbers.

Sure, but it doesn't make sense for a BattleMech to take significant damage from a non-shaped proximity charge, anyway. Combined with the general problems now shown to be caused by splash damage and it just makes sense to remove it... or at least greatly reduce it to the point that it has an insignificant effect in combat, but will be a minor annoyance if you fire your SRMs into a wall at point-blank.

[Nightcrept]

OneEyed Jack, on 15 March 2013 - 02:32 AM, said:

Sure, but it doesn't make sense for a BattleMech to take significant damage from a non-shaped proximity charge, anyway. Combined with the general problems now shown to be caused by splash damage and it just makes sense to remove it... or at least greatly reduce it to the point that it has an insignificant effect in combat, but will be a minor annoyance if you fire your SRMs into a wall at point-blank.

Sounds good to me.

The only issue with that is that some players are looking at this as an opportunity to nerf the hell out of missiles. I have no issues with removing splash damage though.

The simplest way to explain the issue to people who are a bit confused is this.

Missiles in game are behaving balance wise as they should. But the mechanic they use is broken and needs fixed. So if it is done properly you shouldn't see a nerf or buff to them in game. So the mechanic needs changed in the server somewhere.

[Kattspya]

Tekadept, on 14 March 2013 - 07:05 PM, said:

I Agree, and that's the problem. A Missile of any type contains a warhead, that warhead can only do a certain amount of damage based on its payload. imagine modern day Harpoon Missiles used against ships. They carry a 488 pounds Warhead, but if they hit a certain part of a ship the warhead suddenly does the damage of a warhead that is equiavalent of 600 pounds. it just doesnt make sense.

I find realism arguments to be fairly pointless. I love realism and whenever realism can be had without sacrificing gameplay or when pseudorealism can be had through handwavium I'm all for it. What I can't stand is flawed realism arguments for realism which yours is.

It makes a load of sense that not a harpoon but a torpedo can punch way above its weight depending on where it hits. A torpedo detonating somewhere under the center of the keel of a ship will break that ships back. It will go down like someone droped a several ton bomb. The same could be said for a typhoon striking near or under the waterline, striking the magazine and so on. But it does make sense.

But your underlying argument is really physical force X doesn't get bigger than physical force X depending on where it hits which is correct.

Apparently all I'm saying is that your analogy is flawed which is fairly pointless of me. Which is why I don't usually go into these things. Goshdarnit.

EDIT: The filter apparently doesn't like the contraction of god damning specific things. I'm guessing it works when separated. Stupid filter.

Edited by Kattspya, 15 March 2013 - 03:13 AM.