34 replies to this topic

[shabowie]

Thontor, on 13 March 2013 - 06:40 PM, said:

duh?

So my whole participation in this is I don't think it's happening in actual play. Why are you responding to me with screenshots from the testing ground?

[Monky]

There ya go, confirmed on live.

[shabowie]

If its only happening on mechs so small that the splash damage radius hits multiple locations dead center on a perfectly stationary mech I wonder how long it has existed. Remember they are just now starting to address damage bugs they say have existed since the creation of the damage system, LOL!

Thontor, on 13 March 2013 - 06:49 PM, said:

you asked if anything other than a Commando was being used, i posted screenshots of something other than a Commando.

I also said assuming it was happening in actual play, to which you responded with training ground screenshots and only now live footage of it happening in actual play with a commando. Don't you see how that didn't address what I was asking?

Edited by shabowie, 13 March 2013 - 07:03 PM.

[Amaris the Usurper]

deforce, on 13 March 2013 - 05:34 PM, said:

the mechs in test grounds are DEF not at full armor, and very far from it.

It is easy to show that this statement is false.

[Voidsinger]

I would question the need for splash damage due to distance anyway.

Because the way MWO (and BT) allocates armour has no area component, splash is already factored in.

Adding splash based on area, and not body parts is a double dip on smaller mechs. The alternatives:

• Have armour dependent on surface area. This would mean a variable amount of armour points per ton depending on the size of the mech, and variations in maximum armour. Extremely complex.
  
• Have splash damage be applied to the same body part if in area of effect. This would mean a missile could do up to 7 times the listed damage to a single location. Imagine the howls of rage from larger mech pilots unaffected by the current splash issue.
  
• Simply make splash potentially effect adjacent locations regardless of area. This equalises the effect across all mechs.
  
• Remove splash altogether. This also equalises the effect across all mechs.

Right now, smaller mechs are yet to feel the full effect. However, when Host State Rewind for Ballistics and Missiles is added, we can expect the entire light weight class, and possibly the medium class to become unplayable due to splash damage effects of ballistics and missiles hitting with a much higher frequency.

[shabowie]

All of the missile warheads should be doing point damage instead of splash anyways, like a HEAT warhead in rl.

http://en.wikipedia....on_and_accuracy

Mechs are armored vehicles like modern day tanks. Concussion and fragmentation from a conventional explosive isn't going to damage it unless its a freakin massive explosion.

If splash damage gets removed it may require missiles get a slight damage buff or become too weak.

Edited by shabowie, 13 March 2013 - 08:09 PM.

[Vapor Trail]

I'm still kinda wondering about the stats.

Something's screwy.



Did this tonight.

This (possibly) means 72 missiles did full damage (180 total). The remaining six did exactly .5 damage.

My current theory is this:
I made actual contact with 72 missiles. These missiles counted as 2.5 damage for stats, and no more.
Of the 18 missiles I missed with, I hit close enough to other mechs with six missiles did splash damage of 0.5 per missile to a single location.

A single SRM might do 2.5 damage in direct contact, and splash of 0.5 damage to each location.

If a medium laser does 5 damage (3% on the commando) and a SRM 2 does 15 (9% on that commando) then each SRM is doing 7.5 damage. Meaning each SRM is doing 5 damage over the 2.5.

Without confirmation, what I think might have happened in the test is each SRM dealt 0.5 damage to 10 locations (arms, legs, Front torsos, and Rear torsos... or some combination similar).

I won't say this is what is happening, but it's the easiest thing I can think of that seems to fit all the observed facts.

---

[Edit] Well, not all. Oneshotting a Commando with a single SRM 6 still hast to be figured out. Doing at least 24 damage with a single SRM6 means doing 4 damage to a single location per SRM.

2.5 damage in contact +0.5 damage from splash doesn't cover it. Unless there are three location sections to splash on the commando rear... meaning that there's 1.5 damage done through splash, and 2.5 damage done through contact.

Edited by Vapor Trail, 13 March 2013 - 08:36 PM.

[Monky]

I would like to note - this bug is with all missile weapons. 3-4 LRM 5 volleys completely destroys all armor on a stock light as well. that's 30-40 damage, completely stripping and killing an entire mech with a minimum of 98 armor. Tested against Jenner. Noticing huge difficulty for Cent and other mechs with narrow CT and wide L/R Torso.

Edited by Monky, 13 March 2013 - 10:18 PM.

[TheRuslan]

I agree, to remove splash until hitbox system is fixed. We can aim. So hitboxes must be made for that.

[Voidsinger]

TheRuslan, on 14 March 2013 - 01:04 AM, said:

I agree, to remove splash until hitbox system is fixed. We can aim. So hitboxes must be made for that.

I don't think we need splash damage at all.

For Battletech, they already had an absolute system that did not require it.

For MWO, unless you'd like to go to the trouble of calculating the actual surface area, and dividing by the number of points allocated to a location to get an effective armour thickness, then any "splash damage" will only unfairly hurt smaller mechs, which have thicker armour per point than a bigger mech with a larger surface area would have.

The only way a splash damage system would work is as another poster suggested, divide the damage from the weapon into percentile points and apply it based on the percentage of surface area of a location hit.

The only real winners from any kind of splash damage system based on distance from the hit, are assault mechs, which have the largest distance between where hit locations are determined. They effectively gain a bonus amount of armour.

[ClaymoreReIIik]

This is explains a LOT.

[John MatriX82]

It may be a testing ground bug, as well as in the live game SRMs (and PPCs) have several issues with hit detection, often never registering damage at all (no, no lag or ping shooting involved, you literally alpha static targets and no damage is registered at all or very little damage is dealt).

[Gaan Cathal]

John MatriX82, on 14 March 2013 - 03:08 AM, said:

It may be a testing ground bug, as well as in the live game SRMs (and PPCs) have several issues with hit detection, often never registering damage at all (no, no lag or ping shooting involved, you literally alpha static targets and no damage is registered at all or very little damage is dealt).

There is already proof posted in this thread, and the thread linked in the OP with evidence that the effect being discussed does occur in live play. To say nothing of the fact that 'keep this bug because that bug' is the worst design ethos it is possible to feasibly invent.

[Vapor Trail]

Gaan Cathal, on 14 March 2013 - 05:34 AM, said:

There is already proof posted in this thread, and the thread linked in the OP with evidence that the effect being discussed does occur in live play. To say nothing of the fact that 'keep this bug because that bug' is the worst design ethos it is possible to feasibly invent.

Agreed. The only time you keep a bug (turn it into a "feature" instead of a bug) is when it demonstrably improves gameplay without a significant downside.

Case in point: the original Tribes. Skiing was a bug. The only real downside to it was the learning curve associated with learning how to do it. The decision to turn skiing from bug to feature turned what would have been a pretty damned mediocre FPS, (Seriously. Does anyone else actually remember what it was like playing the original Tribes without knowing how to ski? Blech.) into what Tribes turned into, a shooter that rewarded skill, tactics, twitch, planning, teamwork, and luck all at the same time.

Well... at least Tribes and Tribes II. The sequel that shall not be named managed to take the formula for Tribes and Tribes II which made competitive games so much fun, gutted it, stuffed it, and handed it to the casual player and told them it was a fluffy teddy bear, while discarding the essence of that formula. Tribes: Ascend, from what I've played of it is a lot closer to what the originals were than TSTSNBN, but the changes made to turn it into a F2P title ruined it for me. For the record, when I played competitively, I played Farmer, HD, and HoF almost to the exclusion of all the offensive roles. Not to say that I couldn't cap or play HO... but I played with guys that excelled at those. They played what they were good at, I played what I was good at.

A maximum of two turrets? Puh-leeeeeeeze. As a competitive Farmer/HD I was responsible for the most, if not the entire initial turret and sensor deployment for the whole BASE, not to mention upkeep and replacement of the deployable defenses, upkeep of the static base defenses, as well as most of the base itself (inventory stations and sensors), not to mention little things like disrupting enemy MO/HO and spotting inbound enemy cappers in my spare time.

Just knowing where the turrets were deployed and keeping them repaired/replaced was a full time job.

...Ah, nostalgia...

[Kmieciu]

Splash damage needs to be removed. A SRM6 hits 6 components. Each of them takes 2.5 points of damage. 6*2.5 = 15 damage in total. 15 damage for 4 points of heat is three times more effective than a medium laser! We don't need additional damage!

Edited by Kmieciu, 15 March 2013 - 01:50 AM.