20 replies to this topic

[Aaren Kai]

Okay, so why is it damage transfer is 50% when a side torso is destroyed? Is this too much? Why should mechs with side torsos that come up along the sides of the CT get a 'shield'?

Isn't the CT now exposed from that side? Should shots that come in from that side start to do internal damage to the core? Shouldn't people be trying protect that side instead of showing it to the enemy?

I've heard some say that the armor slags and still provides protection... Well then should a slagged side torso and busted internals be a nerf to the mechs effectiveness? Maybe reduce torso twist or something for this magical damage mitigation?

[Braggart]

damage transfer should be 100%, this gives certain mechs and incredibly large advantage.

Having a small Ct is already a large enough advantage, it does not need to be increased by only having 50% damage passed through.

Just another one of PGI's terrible balance ideas.

[Levi Porphyrogenitus]

Seems to work just fine to me. It's especially important with legged mechs. With 100% damage transfer, suddenly that side torso (and very likely an XL) gets popped super fast just by hitting the leg a few more time. No transfer would be even worse. 50% is a fine middle ground for the damage transfer mechanic.

Plus, if you shoot somebody from head-on and hit a destroyed side torso, would you rather the shot pass through harmlessly or do 50% damage to the CT?

[Braggart]

Levi Porphyrogenitus, on 18 May 2013 - 01:41 PM, said:

Seems to work just fine to me. It's especially important with legged mechs. With 100% damage transfer, suddenly that side torso (and very likely an XL) gets popped super fast just by hitting the leg a few more time. No transfer would be even worse. 50% is a fine middle ground for the damage transfer mechanic.

Plus, if you shoot somebody from head-on and hit a destroyed side torso, would you rather the shot pass through harmlessly or do 50% damage to the CT?

http://mwomercs.com/...x-localisation/

review hitboxes and tell me why exactly a stalker should only take 50% damage to his CT after you blow out his side torso............... There is a reason why the stalker takes more of a beating than the atlas. It is a broken mechanic that favors certain mechs much more than others, creating problems with balancing chassis.

[trollocaustic]

a stalker with a busted side torso just lost half his weapons, said side torso is VERY weakly armored for a assault and is easy to hit.

Can't count how many times I ended up not having any weapons whatsoever.

Stop complaining, the stalker doesn't have a cockpit that's hitbox is disjointed.

[Deathlike]

Stalkers are strong, but also fairly easy to take apart like Atlases.

At best, your argument would be better efforted against something like the Centurion... assuming you hate its magic zombie power.

Edited by Deathlike, 18 May 2013 - 02:30 PM.

[Sayeko]

are you guys sure its 50%?... feels more like 20-30% in testing grounds..

[Diablobo]

It seems like leg damage should have the 50% transfer, the side torsos 100%, and the arms should have no transfer at all.

[trollocaustic]

Arms are destroyed, they get blown off, so there is no transfer. And adding 100% side torso would make nearly all assaults useless.

[aniviron]

NO

[Aaren Kai]

Lightbulb!

[Braggart]

trollocaustic, on 18 May 2013 - 06:17 PM, said:

Arms are destroyed, they get blown off, so there is no transfer. And adding 100% side torso would make nearly all assaults useless.

really, cause the fact they carry the most firepower, have the most armor, and most internal structure in the game isnt good enough for them to be used.

Give me a break. % transfered favors heavier mechs more.

[Kaspirikay]

Stalker is the mech that abuses this mechanic. Its side and CTs are so small and compact, you have no choice but to allow it to use its sides to absorb damage. The only way is to rear end it. This makes the stalker a much more tankish mech compared to the Atlas, which is very, very wrong.

Edited by Kaspirikay, 18 May 2013 - 06:52 PM.

[Sable Dove]

Because mechs with the huge side torsos are either easy to kill, or very slow, depending on whether they take an XL engine (easy to kill), or a standard (slow and/or runs hotter).

An XL in a Stalker, for instance, is virtually a death sentence, and a Standard means it's going to be very slow, meaning an agile mech can simply core it from behind with little worry (although the Misery gets around this by having buffs to its turning ability).

[Wraith 1]

I think the damage transfer is alright, it rewards skill both in torso twisting and in scoring solid hits on the CT.

I do think the hit boxes could stand to be tweaked a bit though. Smaller sides on the Stalker and Raven, larger sides on the Jenner, etc.

[Jay Z]

^ This. Jenners have almost non-existant side torsos that are covered by the tiny arms anyway and have a nice big giant CT with hit me written on it. Other than the ocasional legging, I only die from CT shots. Side torso deaths are very very rare as it can only occur if a 4xPPC, 2xAC20 misses the CT (somehow) and lands on the side torso.

[Keifomofutu]

Wraith 1, on 18 May 2013 - 09:13 PM, said:

I think the damage transfer is alright, it rewards skill both in torso twisting and in scoring solid hits on the CT.

I do think the hit boxes could stand to be tweaked a bit though. Smaller sides on the Stalker and Raven, larger sides on the Jenner, etc.

It doesn't require skill in Stalker's case. That CT really is a skinny little popsickle stick. It is very rare that you see a stalker go down without losing at least one side torso first. It isn't uncommon to see one running around with both down after taking fire from an entire lance. The hitbox needs some revision.

[Fate 6]

Deathlike, on 18 May 2013 - 02:29 PM, said:

Stalkers are strong, but also fairly easy to take apart like Atlases.

At best, your argument would be better efforted against something like the Centurion... assuming you hate its magic zombie power.

SHHHH, do not speak of my undead Centurion. May it live forever in SRM heaven. All hail the undying CN9-A!

[trollocaustic]

Quote

It doesn't require skill in Stalker's case. That CT really is a skinny little popsickle stick. It is very rare that you see a stalker go down without losing at least one side torso first. It isn't uncommon to see one running around with both down after taking fire from an entire lance. The hitbox needs some revision.

And without it's ST, which are fragile, it's basically a useless dong that walks.

Edited by trollocaustic, 19 May 2013 - 04:32 AM.

[Bagheera]

trollocaustic, on 18 May 2013 - 02:27 PM, said:

a stalker with a busted side torso just lost half his weapons, said side torso is VERY weakly armored for a assault and is easy to hit.

Wow. I really wish people would stop posting misleading info on this game. It's like they are completely unaware that ALL MECHS OF A GIVEN WEIGHT HAVE EXACTLY THE SAME MAXIMUM ARMOR VALUES. Were there another mech the same weight as a Stalker, the armor values would be identical. Same crap people posted about the Jager before it was released. "Jager is going to suck, it doesn't have any armor!" /facepalm.

Stock armor values are as meaningless to theorycraft as they are foolish to bring into a match. If your stalker has weak side torsos compared to other assaults, then you are skimping too much on armor. If you are maxing armor and still think they are too weak - surprise, you are experiencing the hitbox distortion that pretty much everyone in this thread is talking about.