42 replies to this topic

[Atheus]

Thontor, on 23 April 2013 - 12:12 PM, said:

Only one I didn't know was streaks benefiting from Artemis.

I knew about the damage reduction when damage transfers, but are we sure this is intented? This sounds more like a bug. I asked about it in ATD but did not get a response.


Another one you didn't have on there...

Did you know that the armor stays on a component after it is destroyed, as long as the armor is not destroyed in order to destroy the component in the first place?

Easiest way to see this is to destroy a mechs side torso from the front, and you will notice the rear armor is still there... And if you shoot from the rear, you have to go through that armor even though the component it is attached to no longer exists. Works the other way too... Go through the rear armor to destroy the side torso, and the front armor will still be attached, providing full protection.

You can also test this by overriding shutdown until a limb or side torso is destroyed. Overheating damages internals, but leaves the armor intact. Attached to apparently nothing.

I just fooled around with this eccentricity in testing grounds, and sure enough, destroying a side torso from the rear leaves all the front torso armor intact - however the strangeness does not stop there! If after you destroy a side torso from the rear, then destroy the leg from that side and keep shooting it so it transfers damage to the side torso - the destroyed side torso's armor immediately vanishes, and the damage is instead transferred to the CT, however if you shoot the destroyed side torso from the front, you just chip away at the armor normally.

Thanks for pointing that out - I'll update the initial post (though I think it's a bit too complex to go into the poll.)

SMDMadCow, on 23 April 2013 - 12:18 PM, said:

The current trial Dragon is community created, not a TT design.

True, but there's only so much detail that I can include in a single question. I do admit it requires a certain amount of knowledge beforehand to avoid being slightly misled by the suggestion, though, which somewhat defeats the purpose of the post. I should have said "stock mechs" rather than trial mechs, I suppose (although the new "champion" mech stands out as a notable exception to that as well). I'll go ahead and change it to "stock mech", but to go any further at this point would just be corrupting the poll data unfairly.

Edited by Atheus, 23 April 2013 - 12:36 PM.

[ThePieMaker]

ammo in the head is used up first (followed by the CT) making it an unexpectedly reasonable place to store ammo?


That is wrong.
The order that ammo is used from is (from first to last): Centre Torso, Side Torsos, Arms, Legs, Head

[Krzysztof z Bagien]

PPC damage dropoff under 90m is definitely not linear, despite Thomas saying it is.

[Atheus]

Krzysztof z Bagien, on 23 April 2013 - 12:33 PM, said:

PPC damage dropoff under 90m is definitely not linear, despite Thomas saying it is.

My evidence supports this statement. My best guess is the (linear) function they're using to attenuate damage is getting applied twice, for whatever reason, so when it's supposed to do 50% damge it's doing 50%^2 = 25%, when it's supposed to be doing 25% damage, it's doing 25%^2 = 6.25%.

[Agent 0 Fortune]

Quote

integrated Engine Double Heat Sinks work like 2.0 SHS, but manually installed DHS only count as 1.4 SHS?

I believe that is only the first 10 DHS in the engine, so if you have a 300 Engine with 12 HS, only 10 of them function at 2.0x, it would be easy enough to test in the mechlab by checking Heat Efficiency (although I don’t even know how that works).

Quote

when hitting a destroyed component (such as a destroyed side torso) only 50% of the damage is transferred to the next part of the mech (CT)?
I knew that (52 votes [35.62%])
I sort of knew that, but did not know the details (48 votes [32.88%])
I did not know that (46 votes [31.51%])

I need citation for that, it is news to me. I knew damage transfer was in but I didn’t know it was reduced.

Quote

artemis causes streak SRM's to lock on faster, even if you don't have any artemis missiles on your mech?
I knew that (50 votes [34.25%])
I did not know that (96 votes [65.75%])

I damn well better not, I have to pay 1 ton and 1crit slot, to give that benefit away for free to SSRMs is unacceptable.

Quote

ammo in the head is used up first (followed by the CT) making it an unexpectedly reasonable place to store ammo?
I knew that (86 votes [58.90%])
I did not know that (60 votes [41.10%])

I was under the impression that all ammo is depleted equally in every location. Otherwise under the old rearm rules (75% free) it would jump your ammo up above 75% since it would fill up all used ammo to 75% but some ammo bins wouldn’t be touched so in their you would have 80-90% ammo reload, and that wasn’t the case.

Quote

ammo explosions deal as much damage as all the ammo in that crit slot would do to another mech? (e.g. 1 full ton of AC/20 ammo explodes for 7x20=140 damage) which carries over to other parts of the mech (reduced by 50% each time it crosses parts)?
I knew that (106 votes [72.60%])
I did not know that (26 votes [17.81%])
Huh? (14 votes [9.59%])

Need citation, as far as I can tell you take 1 hit from the ammo explosion, so an AC20 exploding does 20 damage to you internals, while an SRM2 would do 3 damage. Otherwise you would almost never survive an ammo explosion.

[Bagheera]

Great thread. Did not realize that about Endo calculations.

There has to be more tid-bits we can add.

[Atheus]

SMDMadCow, on 23 April 2013 - 12:18 PM, said:

The current trial Dragon is community created, not a TT design.

It would be more correct to say "the basic variants of our mechs were taken from the TT" as their effectiveness is solely based on opinion.

I forgot to respond to the second part of this - it is not just a matter of opinion that stock mechs barely function within MWO. They were designed for a system in which it is typical to fire constantly, and hit occasionally, whereas MWO you fire occasionally, and hit almost constantly. One of the main aspects of designing a mech for MWO is a reasonable heat efficiency, but stock variants filled with single heat sinks usually have a heat efficiency of about 1.0 or worse, and have mismatched weapon systems that are quite difficult to aim and use simultaneously.

It is not a matter of opinion to say that a car designed to function well on a race track will turn laps faster than a car designed to function well for commuting, but would not function as well as a daily driver. This is objectively true, and easily measurable. Sure, saying they "barely function" is my own choice of adjective to describe the data, but that doesn't change the fact that stock variants are designed for a different game, and don't work well in this one.

[Atheus]

Agent 0 Fortune, on 23 April 2013 - 02:49 PM, said:

I believe that is only the first 10 DHS in the engine, so if you have a 300 Engine with 12 HS, only 10 of them function at 2.0x, it would be easy enough to test in the mechlab by checking Heat Efficiency (although I don’t even know how that works).

Yes, but you have to manually install the last 2 heat sinks, don't you? (I went ahead and touched up the poll question to make it a bit clearer anyway).

Agent 0 Fortune, on 23 April 2013 - 02:49 PM, said:

I need citation for that, it is news to me. I knew damage transfer was in but I didn’t know it was reduced.

Just go into testing grounds and shoot at a mech's leg for a while, paying attention to how much % each shot is reducing your target's health. After you destroy the leg, each shot will do 50% as much damage, then after you destroy the side torso, each shot will do 25% as much damage. It's documented in various places on the wiki as well, but the proof is in the pudding.

Agent 0 Fortune, on 23 April 2013 - 02:49 PM, said:

I damn well better not, I have to pay 1 ton and 1crit slot, to give that benefit away for free to SSRMs is unacceptable.

Well it damn well does. Verify for yourself if you want, but I just verified it again this morning. The difference is not subtle.

Agent 0 Fortune, on 23 April 2013 - 02:49 PM, said:

I was under the impression that all ammo is depleted equally in every location. Otherwise under the old rearm rules (75% free) it would jump your ammo up above 75% since it would fill up all used ammo to 75% but some ammo bins wouldn’t be touched so in their you would have 80-90% ammo reload, and that wasn’t the case.

I didn't test this in game, but http://mwowiki.org/w...quipment_(CASE) spells it out pretty plainly. If the info there is wrong, then I'm wrong.

Agent 0 Fortune, on 23 April 2013 - 02:49 PM, said:

Need citation, as far as I can tell you take 1 hit from the ammo explosion, so an AC20 exploding does 20 damage to you internals, while an SRM2 would do 3 damage. Otherwise you would almost never survive an ammo explosion.

Clearly you've never suffered an ammo explosion from a full ton of ammo. Your citation is in the same link above.

Edited by Atheus, 23 April 2013 - 04:16 PM.

[blinkin]

last i saw mechs with endosteel that had tonnage ending with a 5 got 0.25 tons so the endosteel is acting right. this tends to be less useful because it is an odd amount. i stick to jenners and catapults so i likely would have noticed if i were losing tonnage anywhere especially on my catapult C4, SRM cat (any tenth of a ton is incredibly important).

[Atheus]

blinkin, on 23 April 2013 - 04:53 PM, said:

last i saw mechs with endosteel that had tonnage ending with a 5 got 0.25 tons so the endosteel is acting right. this tends to be less useful because it is an odd amount. i stick to jenners and catapults so i likely would have noticed if i were losing tonnage anywhere especially on my catapult C4, SRM cat (any tenth of a ton is incredibly important).

http://mwo.smurfy-net.de/mechlab

Just grab any x5 ton mech with nothing in it and equip endo-steel. Smurfy's works straight from the game files. I wish it weren't true, as an extra 8-9 points of armor is certainly not something I want to throw away just for the sake of rounding either, but in MWO, that's what we've got, for whatever reason.

On another subject, Bryan Eckman seems to be saying that the 50% damage reduction when direct damage is transferred between mech parts is a bug.

[ThePieMaker]

Thontor, on 23 April 2013 - 12:37 PM, said:

http://mwomercs.com/...mmo-being-used/

His information is incorrect.
I have AC/20 ammo in my side torso, arm and head.
Side torso ammo is used first, then the ammo in the arm, then lastly the head.

[blinkin]

ThePieMaker, on 23 April 2013 - 05:20 PM, said:

His information is incorrect.
I have AC/20 ammo in my side torso, arm and head.
Side torso ammo is used first, then the ammo in the arm, then lastly the head.

how on earth do you find this out? all i have ever seen is an ammo counter. do you just count how often you suffer ammo explosions?

[Atheus]

ThePieMaker, on 23 April 2013 - 05:20 PM, said:

His information is incorrect.
I have AC/20 ammo in my side torso, arm and head.
Side torso ammo is used first, then the ammo in the arm, then lastly the head.

How do you know this? The panel that shows ammo in the cockpit is not functional any more.

[Agent 0 Fortune]

Thontor, on 23 April 2013 - 06:03 PM, said:

His information is based on convincing evidence and repeatable testing... what do you have?

I have an in-game ammo indicator screen in my cockpit.
And I played in closed beta when you could choose not to rearm and look at the ammo remaining in each location.

(not that I have actually done either of the things i mentioned).

[TruePoindexter]

MustrumRidcully, on 23 April 2013 - 02:03 AM, said:

I believe that someone (was it Left Lucy) recently endeavoured to find out how PPC damage drop off at close range worked, and it might not actually be as you describe it here.

The methods were a little suspect due to parallax and with PPC hit detection being wonky already there's no way for a player to really know what distance the PPC actually traveled. When PPCs stop having strange hit detection (missing despite a clear hit, hitting rear armor despite striking the front, hitting through cover etc) then we can test and be assured of our accuracy.

[ThePieMaker]

blinkin, on 23 April 2013 - 05:22 PM, said:

how on earth do you find this out? all i have ever seen is an ammo counter. do you just count how often you suffer ammo explosions?

Back when the ammo counter worked I decided to keep track of my ammo consumption for a couple hours.
Every round my AC/20 ammo was taken first from the side torso, then the arm, then finally the head.
Ammo stored in the legs is also used before the ammo in the head. Figured that out by the same testing later on. You could say it is random...but I think several hours of tests yielding the same results is pretty good...
The OP is wrong when he says that ammo in the head is used first. The ammo in the head is always used last.

When OPLoN said "Ammo gets used and depleted in the order of the rotating image of Ammunition Loaded Screen (ALS) inside Cockpit"
He was wrong
So once again, ammo is used up in this order: Center Torso, Side Torso, Arms, Legs, and lastly Head
Trust me, I am not wrong.

Edited by ThePieMaker, 23 April 2013 - 09:29 PM.

[Agent 0 Fortune]

Atheus, on 23 April 2013 - 03:05 PM, said:

Yes, but you have to manually install the last 2 heat sinks, don't you? (I went ahead and touched up the poll question to make it a bit clearer anyway).

I was actually shocked and appalled to discover that a mech that cannot carry 10 engine heat sinks (smaller than 250 engine) only gains the 2.0x benefit of the heat sinks in the engine.

It seems like every day I find something new (or in this case old) that PGI has done to **** me off.

[diversion ahead]
In closed beta I had a 3x AC5 HBK-4G I like to play, but it only had 7 single heat sinks, but at the time it was a legal build, and I had fun with an old ****** mech with under performing weapons, which would over heat on neutral maps (and on Caustic, 7 heat sinks would cool at about 0.5 heat per second standing still)
Suddenly when PGI introduced double heat sinks they decided that you had to have 10 heat sinks, and I could no longer build or play that mech, which despite being a turdboiler, was pretty fun. Now I find out that, not only did PGI take away one of my favorite mechs, it doesn't even give the proper 2.0x heat sinks for the 10 heat sinks it requires you to carry.

I thought the double-standard on heat sinks 2.0x vs 1.4x was stupid anyway, but to find out that they kept it that way and willfully screwed the medium (and some light) weight class, really ticks me off.
[/diversion]

[blinkin]

ThePieMaker, on 23 April 2013 - 09:19 PM, said:

Do you think I am some kind of lackey?

Back when the ammo counter worked I decided to keep track of my ammo consumption for a couple hours.
Every round my AC/20 ammo was taken first from the side torso, then the arm, then finally the head.
Ammo stored in the legs is also used before the ammo in the head. Figured that out by the same testing later on. You could say it is random...but I think several hours of tests yielding the same results is pretty good...
The OP is wrong when he says that ammo in the head is used first. The ammo in the head is always used last.

Trust me, I am not wrong.

not saying anyone is wrong, BUT before i can completely trust the results of a process, i need to understand the process. currently i have absolutely no explanation of where these numbers come from.

i can easily come up with a quick experiment to test the 50% damage reduction from hitting a damaged component, so i didn't know that before, but if i choose to disbelieve then it is on me to provide some evidence. the specific ammo usage however, is a little black box that i can't fathom how to peer into.

my statement in the previous post was a genuine attempt to divine your methods. it was the most reasonable method i could come up with, short of decompiling the code and reading through line by line.

and the previous post was directed at anyone debating these numbers. as far as i can tell in that specific portion of the debate "thar be monsters in those seas".

Edited by blinkin, 23 April 2013 - 09:39 PM.

[Atheus]

Agent 0 Fortune, on 23 April 2013 - 09:01 PM, said:

I have an in-game ammo indicator screen in my cockpit.
And I played in closed beta when you could choose not to rearm and look at the ammo remaining in each location.

(not that I have actually done either of the things i mentioned).

Ok so it turns out the ammo inventory panel in my highlander's cockpit works (it didn't work in my awesome, catapult, or my hunchback when I was looking earlier).

I just noticed it in a match I played a moment ago, so I can only say that the gauss ammo in my CT was used before my Head, which confirms that wiki article (and thus I) was wrong about that. I'll just delete that poll question, since the ammo order isn't of any particular interest if the head isn't used first.

[blinkin]

Atheus, on 23 April 2013 - 09:45 PM, said:

Ok so it turns out the ammo inventory panel in my highlander's cockpit works (it didn't work in my awesome, catapult, or my hunchback when I was looking earlier).

I just noticed it in a match I played a moment ago, so I can only say that the gauss ammo in my CT was used before my Head, which confirms that wiki article (and thus I) was wrong about that. I'll just delete that poll question, since the ammo order isn't of any particular interest if the head isn't used first.

ok this is beginning to make sense now. for the longest time NONE of the panels in the cockpit worked and all of my mechs were perpetually empty. i will have to start watching those panels then.