171 replies to this topic

[warner2]

I agree, just remove it. The fact you're firing multiple war heads already gives you splash damage (i.e. damage to multiple panels). So it seems unnecessary. If anything, the missile grouping should be loosened up so that they spread damage more, giving them a particular niche of doing above average damage at the cost of spreading the damage over multiple panels. As it is, LRM+Artemis group very tightly together, too tightly IMO, reducing the damage spread too much.

Loosen the spread, remove the splash, then tune total damage, Job done.

[Radko]

Omni 13, on 21 March 2013 - 10:19 AM, said:

missles explode so yes, should have splash damage, just not as much as they have now XD

This argument doesn't really account for the inverse square law. The damage done by an explosive damage at a distance is orders of magnitude less than a contact detonation.

There's a reason tanks can shrug off artillery bombardments as long as they don't take a direct hit. (Not counting things like hits to the optics, which MWO doesn't model)

Livewyr, on 21 March 2013 - 10:19 AM, said:

You are aware that the RPG is a Rocket-Propelled-Grenade correct? It's not that big.. (trust me.. I know)

I'm not sure if you're appreciating how small an LRM is. 180 rounds per ton, minus overhead like storage and ammo feed, means the missile weighs perhaps ten pounds.

An RPG-7 weighs around fifteen pounds.

This distracts from the main point: We're talking about battlemechs, not watermelons.

Edited by Radko, 21 March 2013 - 10:26 AM.

[Chrithu]

They are explosives.

They should produce splash damage. But it shouldn't be additional to their damage on hit location.

So if a SRM is supposed to do 2.5 points of damage. A part of those 2.5 should be applied to the hit location and the rest should be scattered in a radius around the hit location as splash damage.

[von Pilsner]

RiotGearEpsilon, on 21 March 2013 - 10:08 AM, said:

Pilsner, what makes it a good game mechanic?

Presumably splash will be in the airstrike damage.
AOE weapons traditionally keep folks from bunching up too much.

[Livewyr]

Radko, on 21 March 2013 - 10:22 AM, said:

There's a reason tanks can shrug off artillery bombardments as long as they don't take a direct hit. (Not counting things like hits to the optics, which MWO doesn't model)

At distance.. yes.. but we're not talking about missile damaging a mech next to the target.. we're talking about a missile hitting one part, and damaging others.

A missile, or HE shell hitting the top of the hull of a tank will damage the turret near it...

[RiotGearEpsilon]

Right. 'Splash damage' has a different implication when we're talking about metal robots a dozen meters tall, as opposed to pulpy humans.

[Dan Nashe]

Livewyr, on 21 March 2013 - 10:17 AM, said:

I think missiles should do their damage in splash, across the area effect.

soo.. example being:

1.8 damage hits CT

Does 1pt to CT
Does .4pt to RT
Does .4pt to LT..

(And when total damage is brought down, scale accordingly.)

Assuming it worked in a non-bugged fashion this would be good because it would result in lrms softening up a target without relying on the missile spread pattern. Obviously these numbers may need to be higher or lower for balance, but the idea remains. This is the easiest way to prevent lrms working like ac 20s.

It also makes lrms unique. Kind of like guided artillery.I'm assuming they won't introduce the arrow IV. Mostly I think this would be less quirky than trying to design a spread that works perfectly. That said, I'm fine withgood missile spreads that just do x (1.4 or whatever) to the location they strike. As long as all missiles aren't homing in on the torsos. This would mean that lrms do more damage to big mechs than litle mechs, but that is a neat design too.


Point being, I'm happy either way as long as lrms spread their damage out in a way that doesn't deal 8 damage per missile :-)

Edited by DanNashe, 21 March 2013 - 11:13 AM.

[Radko]

von Pilsner, on 21 March 2013 - 10:25 AM, said:

Presumably splash will be in the airstrike damage.
AOE weapons traditionally keep folks from bunching up too much.

You're changing the subject.

Why is splash damage for SRMs and LRMs a good game mechanic?

[BoPop]

they're just doing too MUCH spread damage right now, that's all, and perhaps a little too much damage as well. and the fact that they tweaked on cockpits and legs making them more vulnerable, or somethin, added to it being like swiss cheese. kindof a double wammy.

wish a command console added armor or hitpoints to your cockpit.

[Radko]

Livewyr, on 21 March 2013 - 10:26 AM, said:

At distance.. yes.. but we're not talking about missile damaging a mech next to the target.. we're talking about a missile hitting one part, and damaging others.

A missile, or HE shell hitting the top of the hull of a tank will damage the turret near it...

This is untrue, unless the explosive is extremely large.

This is what happens when a rocket hits a tank:



As you can see, the shaped charge produces pinpount damage which can harm and even penetrate the armor.

The omnidirectional part of the explosive merely leaves a scuff mark.

Edited by Radko, 21 March 2013 - 10:31 AM.

[Commander Kobold]

Radko, on 21 March 2013 - 10:22 AM, said:

This argument doesn't really account for the inverse square law. The damage done by an explosive damage at a distance is orders of magnitude less than a contact detonation.

There's a reason tanks can shrug off artillery bombardments as long as they don't take a direct hit. (Not counting things like hits to the optics, which MWO doesn't model)

well they do splash, and the missiles are getting direct hits, also if the LRMs where shaped charges I do think they'd do more than 1.(whatever it is) damage.

[MrPenguin]

Guys! guys!
I only misunderstood what the op was talking about!

So please stop yelling at me

[Commander Kobold]

Radko, on 21 March 2013 - 10:27 AM, said:

You're changing the subject.

Why is splash damage for SRMs and LRMs a good game mechanic?

one could easily say why isn't it a good mechanic (when it's not broken as it is now)?

MrPenguin, on 21 March 2013 - 10:30 AM, said:

Guys! guys!
I only misunderstood what the op was talking about!

So please stop yelling at me

there there

[silentD11]

Each missile should damage each part of the mech, LRMs should have their damaged raised, also ECM should be removed. This is the only solution for this game.

[RiotGearEpsilon]

You are forgiven, MrPenguin.

Radko, on 21 March 2013 - 10:30 AM, said:

This is what happens when a rocket hits a tank:



As you can see, the shaped charge produces pinpount damage which can harm and even penetrate the armor.

The omnidirectional part of the explosive merely leaves a scuff mark.

That's an awesome picture to illustrate the concept.

Edited by RiotGearEpsilon, 21 March 2013 - 10:32 AM.

[Vasces Diablo]

Braggart, on 21 March 2013 - 10:09 AM, said:

They shouldnt. They already do more damage than their tabletop selves.

No actually. Armor values were doubled (increased 100%) while LRM damage was only increased 80%, so MWO LRMs actually do less damage than the TT version. Factoring in the "lock on" issue makes them more accurate than TT version, so in the end, it's prob about the same.

[FrostCollar]

This game does need splash damage!
...for the Arrow IV

LRMs don't need splash damage. They already cause damage over a larger area due to how the missiles can spread out.

[Radko]

Omni 13, on 21 March 2013 - 10:30 AM, said:

well they do splash, and the missiles are getting direct hits, also if the LRMs where shaped charges I do think they'd do more than 1.(whatever it is) damage.

Shaped charge rockets have been used since the 1940s at least. This isn't lostech.

Besides. Even if it is omnidirectional, it would need to explode directly against the armor to do meaningful damage, due to the inverse square law.


But aside from all that nerd crap, here's my problems:

1) It makes my mech feel like a rickety pile of cardboard if a piddly little LRM can hurt it by exploding ten feet away.
2) It is clearly proving difficult to model the damage in a remotely balanced way.
3) It doesn't add anything to the gameplay.

[Odins Fist]

I guess the term "SHAPED CHARGE" is lost on some people... (faceplam)

[Taemien]

Ok I don't understand where the argument of realism came from, but in BattleTech missiles are shaped charges (unless they are fragmentation ammo, which do no damage to mechs, only double dmg to infantry). And shaped charges don't do splash like what is happening in game. Here's a video:



There.. realism argument is done. Lets get back to the game itself.