47 replies to this topic

[Lefty Lucy]

After reading a discussion about the effects of PPC minimum range, I decided to do some testing. The following test was performed in the training grounds. The mech used was a Dragon 1C with 3 PPCs.

A quick note about linearity for those of us who are less math-inclined. For a linear damage reduction from 90 meters to 0 meters, we would expect that the damage is reduced in exactly the same proportion as range, i.e. at half range we do half damage.

With this in mind, the expected damage for a PPC with linear damage drop off at 45 meters would be 5, and the expected damage for a PPC with linear damage drop off at 810 meters (540+270, or half-way between long range and max range) would also be 5.

Because we can't see damage numbers in game, I decided to simply test how many shots it takes to destroy the leg of a target mech at 810, 45 meters, and within the optimal range band. 1 "shot" is 3 PPC hits in the desired location (30 damage). I did this in 2 runs, one to compare 45 m to optimal range band, and one to compare 810 meters to optimal range band

Against the commando 1B (16 armor, 12 internal):
optimal: 1 shot, damage to RT
45 m: 4 shots
810 m: 2 shots, damage to RT

Against the Cicada 2A (12 armor, 20 internal):
optimal: 2 shots, RT armor stripped
45 m: 5 shots
810 m: 3 shots

Against the CPLT-A1 (48 armor, 30 internal):
optimal: 3 shots, some torso damage
45m: 11 shots
810 m: 6 shots

As we can see, the shots within optimal range removed the target limb in the expected number of shots, and shots at 810 meters removed the limb in the expected number of shots if we assume linear damage drop off (thus 5 damage per hit, rather than 10).

However, the shots within minimum range did *not* yield expected results for linear damage drop off within minimum range.

This indicates that minimum range damage drop off is very likely non-linear.

[Aurelus]

Um... Thanks?

[SkyCake]

That sucks... I always suspected this... should be fixed our at least explained by pgi

[Tickdoff Tank]

Good testing, and interesting results.

[Lefty Lucy]

Tickdoff Tank, on 13 April 2013 - 09:28 AM, said:

Good testing, and interesting results.

I guess the next step would be to test damage at various ranges within 90 meters and graph the results to find out what kind of a function it is.

[neviu]

Lefty Lucy, on 13 April 2013 - 09:59 AM, said:

I guess the next step would be to test damage at various ranges within 90 meters and graph the results to find out what kind of a function it is.

didnt someone do that already?

[Lefty Lucy]

neviu, on 13 April 2013 - 10:03 AM, said:

didnt someone do that already?

When?

[MURDERTRON]

I thought I had read somewhere that the PPC damage-at-range multiplier is linear from 0 at 30m to 1 at 90m. I just checked your numbers and the shot counts match perfectly with this model.

Neviu and I probably saw the same post.

[Lefty Lucy]

MURDERTRON, on 13 April 2013 - 10:19 AM, said:

I thought I had read somewhere that the PPC damage-at-range multiplier is linear from 0 at 30m to 1 at 90m. I just checked your numbers and the shot counts match perfectly with this model.

Neviu and I probably saw the same post.

I'll do a 60 meter test right now.

[Burnsidhe]

This is not a surprise. Minimum effective range on the PPC has always been 90 meters.

In theory, in the tabletop, you could still fire a PPC within 90 meters, with the side effect of doing ten points of damage to yourself for each shot.

MWO's approach seems like a good compromise.

[Lefty Lucy]

Burnsidhe, on 13 April 2013 - 10:34 AM, said:

This is not a surprise. Minimum effective range on the PPC has always been 90 meters.

In theory, in the tabletop, you could still fire a PPC within 90 meters, with the side effect of doing ten points of damage to yourself for each shot.

MWO's approach seems like a good compromise.

Minimum range mechanic in TT is simply a hit penalty. There's an an optional rule that allows you to fire within minimum range with a draw back, but I don't know the specifics off the top of my head.

Results from 30 and 60 meter tests:

-1B:
60 m: 3 shots to remove
30 m: 8 shots

-2A:
60 m: 3 shots
30 m: 10 shots

-A1:
60 m: 6 shots
30 m: 24 shots

Conclusion: Definitely not linear from 30-90 with zero at 30. I tested shots at 15 m, and they still did damage as well.

[Taemien]

SkyCake, on 13 April 2013 - 09:28 AM, said:

That sucks... I always suspected this... should be fixed our at least explained by pgi

They did, PPCs do reduced damages under 90m. You don't need to know much more than that. You can run the tests for kicks and giggles. But in the end, no one is going to run calculations in their mind saying, "I'm 60 meters away and can deal 5.69 damage right now..." Especially not on a live server.

I know I very rarely even look how far away I am from my target, letting my feel for the weapons I'm using determine if I'm doing adequate damage. As in I can tell when I'm within 450, 270, 180, and 90 meters.

Kudos to the OP for taking the time to run the tests, but anyone using this as evidence in a case to get PGI to say something to make them feel better about themselves is just wasting their time.

[Airwind]

http://mwomercs.com/...damage-formula/

here it is..

[Lefty Lucy]

Taemien, on 13 April 2013 - 10:49 AM, said:

They did, PPCs do reduced damages under 90m. You don't need to know much more than that. You can run the tests for kicks and giggles. But in the end, no one is going to run calculations in their mind saying, "I'm 60 meters away and can deal 5.69 damage right now..." Especially not on a live server.

I know I very rarely even look how far away I am from my target, letting my feel for the weapons I'm using determine if I'm doing adequate damage. As in I can tell when I'm within 450, 270, 180, and 90 meters.

Kudos to the OP for taking the time to run the tests, but anyone using this as evidence in a case to get PGI to say something to make them feel better about themselves is just wasting their time.

Uh... I dunno, good for you for not paying attention to numbers? I find it to be easy and useful to keep an eye on my range numbers in game.

[Hedonism Robot]

I think I might know why this is happening.

I was actually testing this today as well and found somewhat similar results. I am not entirely sure the drop off is non-linear or that what I might have been experiencing is due to the range listed as the distance between the center of two mechs. For instance say I fire my cataphract at an atlas and the shot hits the arm of the atlas. For some reason in the game horizontal distances are extremely out of proportion with the average mech seeming to be 10-20m wide (takes about 2 seconds to pass someone standing still while moving at 40 kph). This means that the arm could be protruding 10 m from the center of mass the targeting computer reads and it's possible that my arm sticks out 10m from my center of mass.

A 10-15 m deviation would have a much more noticeable effect on a 90m gap then a 800 m one. This is just a theory and I would be interested if anyone else has noticed anything similar to this.

[One Medic Army]

I suggest using a single PPC hit, and incrementing the range by 9m, then using an AC/2 to figure out exactly how much armor was left.

Theoretical: shoot at 45m (5 expected dmg) at commando arm. Then fire AC/2 shells until armor breached.
If armor is breached in 7 AC/2 shots, then it did between 4-6 damage. If you can fully remove armor without damaging internals you can be more accurate, possibly throw a single Small Laser hit in to tighten up the possible damage range.

[Lefty Lucy]

One Medic Army, on 13 April 2013 - 03:04 PM, said:

I suggest using a single PPC hit, and incrementing the range by 9m, then using an AC/2 to figure out exactly how much armor was left.

Theoretical: shoot at 45m (5 expected dmg) at commando arm. Then fire AC/2 shells until armor breached.
If armor is breached in 7 AC/2 shots, then it did between 4-6 damage. If you can fully remove armor without damaging internals you can be more accurate, possibly throw a single Small Laser hit in to tighten up the possible damage range.

Sure, that would get you good numbers to do a regression, but I was mostly just trying to answer the question "is drop off linear," where a less-controlled experiment was fine.

[AnubiteGroove]

Taemien, on 13 April 2013 - 10:49 AM, said:

They did, PPCs do reduced damages under 90m. You don't need to know much more than that. You can run the tests for kicks and giggles. But in the end, no one is going to run calculations in their mind saying, "I'm 60 meters away and can deal 5.69 damage right now..." Especially not on a live server.

I know I very rarely even look how far away I am from my target, letting my feel for the weapons I'm using determine if I'm doing adequate damage. As in I can tell when I'm within 450, 270, 180, and 90 meters.

Kudos to the OP for taking the time to run the tests, but anyone using this as evidence in a case to get PGI to say something to make them feel better about themselves is just wasting their time.

I also find number crunching mid-battle to not be an issue. It's as simple as "I am this far, he is that weak, I have this heat level, is it worth it?"

[OneEyed Jack]

AnubiteGroove, on 13 April 2013 - 05:09 PM, said:

I also find number crunching mid-battle to not be an issue. It's as simple as "I am this far, he is that weak, I have this heat level, is it worth it?"

That's kind of the point. It's not about number-crunching mid-battle, it's about having a general idea if it's worth taking the shot.

[Burnsidhe]

Lefty Lucy:

Yes. There was a 90 meter computer firing lockout for PPCs, because within 90 meters, the PPC had a disturbing habit of 'feeding back' into the 'mech that fired it.

ER PPCs are improved enough that they don't 'feed back' and damage the firing 'mech within 90 meters.