47 replies to this topic

[Baddicus Wolf]

RockWolf, on 13 April 2013 - 08:17 PM, said:

Ok here is why the shot damages were not linear. The distances weren't!!!


It is a quick sketch and simplified with rectangular triangles. You have to think that you actually measuring distances from your cockpit. The further you are away from the opponent, the lower the difference is between the readings and the weapons range.
Another aspect is the height of the target. If the target is lower than your straight(with the horizon) line of sight, the its the opposite effect, you are overestimating. Just my food for thought.

If we are at 45M and X is just a little bit more than 45M (based on your diagram), then our damage should be slightly higher than half (5.5-6 damage) if they are truly using a linear drop-off because the point of fire is closer to the 90M full damage as opposed to the 0M-0damage point. The results are showing approximately 1/4 (2-2.5 damage) at 45M.

In other words, your diagram further points out how the dropoff is not linear.

Edited by Baddicus Wolf, 14 April 2013 - 11:12 AM.

[Lefty Lucy]

Baddicus Wolf, on 14 April 2013 - 11:11 AM, said:

If we are at 45M and X is just a little bit more than 45M (based on your diagram), then our damage should be slightly higher than half (5.5-6 damage) if they are truly using a linear drop-off because the point of fire is closer to the 90M full damage as opposed to the 0M-0damage point. The results are showing approximately 1/4 (2-2.5 damage) at 45M.

In other words, your diagram further points out how the dropoff is not linear.

Not to mention that the height difference between the fire point on the arm and the eye of the atlas is maybe 5 meters. Compared to a 45 meter range, the actual distance fired would be very close to the distance shown in your HUD anyways. The angle would be .111 radians, and cos(.111) = .993, so the "actual" range would only be 1.006 times the measured range, or 45.3 meters.

That could not explain the *dramatic* differences between the linear damage model and the non-linear damage model that we've been seeing.

[Baddicus Wolf]

Thomas Dziegielewski, on 13 April 2013 - 07:45 PM, said:

It's linear.

Testing grounds yes? It has issues.

I am inclined to believe that you believe it is linear even though the evidence dramatically suggests otherwise. One thing I would double check is that the function is not running twice somehow. If it really is just a simple function, it is possible that it is being called from two different locations. Possibly at the time the weapon is fired, and another time at impact. Just an idea.

[Demos]

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.

Man, knowing the rules would be quite helpful...

According to original rules it's only harder to hit within minimum range.
Theres an optional rules with the possibility to destroy the weapon and damage your mech.

[Lefty Lucy]

Demos, on 14 April 2013 - 01:00 PM, said:

Man, knowing the rules would be quite helpful...

According to original rules it's only harder to hit within minimum range.
Theres an optional rules with the possibility to destroy the weapon and damage your mech.

Yep. Lots of TT "rules quotes" in here gettin' those rules wrong.

[RockWolf]

Baddicus Wolf, on 14 April 2013 - 11:11 AM, said:

If we are at 45M and X is just a little bit more than 45M (based on your diagram), then our damage should be slightly higher than half (5.5-6 damage) if they are truly using a linear drop-off because the point of fire is closer to the 90M full damage as opposed to the 0M-0damage point. The results are showing approximately 1/4 (2-2.5 damage) at 45M.

In other words, your diagram further points out how the dropoff is not linear.

Yeah it is and it isn't. Depends of the point of view. From the pilots point of view it isn't. From the coders it is.

[Lefty Lucy]

RockWolf, on 14 April 2013 - 07:25 PM, said:

Yeah it is and it isn't. Depends of the point of view. From the pilots point of view it isn't. From the coders it is.

In game the drop off isn't linear. We have enough evidence of this that I think it is conclusive. If the devs think it *should* be linear, then it is a bug.

[Baddicus Wolf]

Also, as Lefty pointed out a few posts back, the difference between X & Y (45m vs 45.3m) is negligible. Even if it goes the other way and you get 45m and 44.7m, the difference is still small enough that it puts the lie to the linear drop-off theory. The direction of difference doesn't matter.