49 replies to this topic

[Darkrook]

I haven't noticed any difference on ravens taken hits. The patch notes said they tweaked the hitboxes.Can we have some type of numbers or test that was conducted that show this. Was in a game and didnt see the raven take any srm or laser dmg, and was 100m to 200m away. I haven't tried any ac5/10 or gauss yet.

I don't want some guy coming in here saying i have no problem hitting them, i can careless, i just want to see some numbers the Devs have for us

[Odins Fist]

+1

[Psikez]

daemur, on 19 March 2013 - 08:02 PM, said:

The change was made to the Raven leg hitbox and resulted in the box not being drawn so tightly to the actual legs of the mech due to their small size. As for the Raven overall they are still small and fast lights which remain difficult to hit, though two ac20's to the face and you can be pretty sure you got one.

Cheers,
daemur

So we should spam broken missiles at their legs and not bother trying to shoot ac20s at them at all, got it

[Gaan Cathal]

Levi Strauss, on 19 March 2013 - 09:54 AM, said:

Just popped by to see what the new scapegoat is. I'm sure there will be rivers of tears as there always are.

Cry on.

Gaan Cathal, on 19 March 2013 - 09:59 AM, said:

RVN-3L, still. Twenty minutes after the patch we'll have a whine about how the new hitboxes have glitched and are now reflecting PPC shots.

Called it.


Or close enough anyway.

[Tennex]

its not the hitbox. its the ECM and sSRMs.

have you ever been whooped by a raven with no ECM.

Edited by Tennex, 19 March 2013 - 08:09 PM.

[Nonsense]

Tennex, on 19 March 2013 - 08:09 PM, said:

its not the hitbox. its the ECM and sSRMs.

have you ever been whooped by a raven with no ECM.

You can leg them rather easily now...especially since lots of builds strip leg armor.

[Targetloc]

daemur, on 19 March 2013 - 08:02 PM, said:

The change was made to the Raven leg hitbox and resulted in the box not being drawn so tightly to the actual legs of the mech due to their small size. As for the Raven overall they are still small and fast lights which remain difficult to hit, though two ac20's to the face and you can be pretty sure you got one.

Cheers,
daemur

"Dual AC20 is your answer to everything!!"

"Because it solves everything."

[Saint Scarlett Johan]

Nonsense, on 19 March 2013 - 08:10 PM, said:

You can leg them rather easily now...especially since lots of builds strip leg armor.

If lights are stripping leg armor then they are bad. And should feel bad.

[FrostCollar]

JohanssenJr, on 19 March 2013 - 08:21 PM, said:

If lights are stripping leg armor then they are bad. And should feel bad.

Many lights strip leg armor and throw ammo in there after. It's not exactly a recipe for success.

[armyof1]

JohanssenJr, on 19 March 2013 - 08:21 PM, said:

If lights are stripping leg armor then they are bad. And should feel bad.

Feel bad isn't nearly enough, I think having all their light mechs taken from them without any compensation would be more appropriate.

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

daemur, on 19 March 2013 - 08:02 PM, said:

The change was made to the Raven leg hitbox and resulted in the box not being drawn so tightly to the actual legs of the mech due to their small size. As for the Raven overall they are still small and fast lights which remain difficult to hit, though two ac20's to the face and you can be pretty sure you got one.

Cheers,
daemur

wasnt the TORSO the hitbox problem as the LT, RT and CT are all part of the "beak" so you can shoot it in what looks like the CT but still hit RT or LT kinda arbitrarily?
So why were the legs fixed and not the problem bit?

[Vermaxx]

Mechwarrior Buddah, on 19 March 2013 - 08:42 PM, said:

wasnt the TORSO the hitbox problem as the LT, RT and CT are all part of the "beak" so you can shoot it in what looks like the CT but still hit RT or LT kinda arbitrarily?
So why were the legs fixed and not the problem bit?

Because they didn't agree it was a problem, and gave us a token fix to shut people up.

It wouldn't even BE a problem without the GOESFASTWITHECM version of the Raven. The other two are too slow to benefit from lagshield, and generally carry weapons inferior to a Jenner.

[Darkrook]

Gaan Cathal, on 19 March 2013 - 08:09 PM, said:

[size=4]



Called it.


Or close enough anyway.

Levi and Gaan, this isn't a cry thread, if you could read you would know that, its a thread asking Dev's about numbers with the ravens in which they stated the hit box was broken. I'm just putting in what i've seen in a game against ravens, and last game i tried ac10 out, and it went thru the raven also, but it didnt go through the commando.

[Stoicblitzer]

daemur, on 19 March 2013 - 08:02 PM, said:

The change was made to the Raven leg hitbox and resulted in the box not being drawn so tightly to the actual legs of the mech due to their small size. As for the Raven overall they are still small and fast lights which remain difficult to hit, though two ac20's to the face and you can be pretty sure you got one.

Cheers,
daemur

i thought 2 AC/20s to the face killed anything.

[Henry Pride]

I got killed pretty often this evening by dual AC20 Jagermechs, out of full runnin. Hitbox fix appears to be in a good way. I got serveral hits after this patch....

U cant hit a Raven? Aim better

[Gaan Cathal]

Mechwarrior Buddah, on 19 March 2013 - 08:42 PM, said:

wasnt the TORSO the hitbox problem as the LT, RT and CT are all part of the "beak" so you can shoot it in what looks like the CT but still hit RT or LT kinda arbitrarily?

Could you explain for me why you think that large side torso boxes on a mech forced to run an XL engine is an advantage?

[Darkrook]

Henry Pride, on 19 March 2013 - 08:54 PM, said:

I got killed pretty often this evening by dual AC20 Jagermechs, out of full runnin. Hitbox fix appears to be in a good way. I got serveral hits after this patch....

U cant hit a Raven? Aim better

OR PUT 2 AC20's in, that seems to be the fix

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

Gaan Cathal, on 19 March 2013 - 09:02 PM, said:

[/size]

Could you explain for me why you think that large side torso boxes on a mech forced to run an XL engine is an advantage?

the picture I saw in another thread was the broken hitboxes send several shots into the same location to three different torso locations becauser of the way that the hitboxes are broken. Broken hitboxes arent a advantage you say?

[Gaan Cathal]

Mechwarrior Buddah, on 19 March 2013 - 09:07 PM, said:

the picture I saw in another thread was the broken hitboxes send several shots into the same location to three different torso locations becauser of the way that the hitboxes are broken. Broken hitboxes arent a advantage you say?

Link?





Those are the Raven hitboxes, barring that the legs now extend slightly beyond the mech's graphics. Are you saying that the side torsos and centre torso have an overlap error where a single spot may register as one or the other? Or that you consider the extent of the side torso towards the front unbalanced?

Edit:

For the record, my personal theory is that people are attributing an issue reported on many other mechs, where damage is taken to the wrong location (the most obvious example being when frontal torso hits are taken to the rear armour or vica versa) specifically to the Raven when it occurs on that target. It may well be that something in the Raven's hitbox layout makes it more prone to this bug of course, which would be useful information r.e. sorting said bug out.

Edited by Gaan Cathal, 19 March 2013 - 09:14 PM.

[Rozav]

From my experience with the 3L this evening, it's inconclusive. I was able to hit ravens ok with my trebuchet.

When fighting in my raven vs. a Stalker and a JM, the JM was either new or can't aim very well. I beat the JM easily, and the Stalker legged me which ultimately won him the match.