38 replies to this topic

[Zyllos]

I would take this guy's suggestion: Apply Streak SRM Location Seeking to LRM

[Coralld]

Well it looks like LRMs no longer have that crazy arc to them which is good. Now all that needs to be done is to get rid of splash damage, its causing to many problems and is broken as hell.

I want to see how missiles function with out splash damage before buffing their damage. If they need it then by all means increase it to acceptable levels.

[MuKen]

hammerreborn, on 24 May 2013 - 08:27 AM, said:

And this couldn't have been posted in the thread that you clearly noticed because you linked to it?

Everyone needs to be a special little snowflake I guess.

Maybe because the topic isn't specifically about this hotfix, and in that thread a huge discussion about this could even be viewed as a derailing tangent.

Too many people have a default reaction to attack unless they convince themselves not to, instead of leaving things alone unless there's a compelling reason to criticize.

Edited by MuKen, 24 May 2013 - 03:04 PM.

[80Bit]

Take a look at the new SRM pattern before you request splash damage be altogether removed.

[Keifomofutu]

80Bit, on 24 May 2013 - 04:23 PM, said:

Take a look at the new SRM pattern before you request splash damage be altogether removed.

They got nerfed in the first place because of splash damage. Get rid of additional balancing headaches then just give them a normal damage buff without having to worry about what will happen to commados. And agree about reverting the flight path changes.

[Unbound Inferno]

Their last fixed reduced splash leaves it just fine. We oughta have some damage buff to missiles, and this does nicely to add an increased chance to knock off another segment.

The larger one was just too damn big. Seems fine to me now though.

[Xeno Phalcon]

Just a thought but perhapes instead of removing it they should rework how it functions. Treat it somewhat like machineguns, very low damage but with a high crit chance vs internals. This would make openeing hits less of a issue but getting pounded when your armors gone is a serious problem. (Well obviously, having stuff blow up in your mech is never a good thing.)

[Keifomofutu]

Xeno Phalcon, on 24 May 2013 - 04:37 PM, said:

Just a thought but perhapes instead of removing it they should rework how it functions. Treat it somewhat like machineguns, very low damage but with a high crit chance vs internals. This would make openeing hits less of a issue but getting pounded when your armors gone is a serious problem. (Well obviously, having stuff blow up in your mech is never a good thing.)

Hellz to the no enough of that uselessness.

[zorak ramone]

80Bit, on 24 May 2013 - 04:23 PM, said:

Take a look at the new SRM pattern before you request splash damage be altogether removed.

The flight pattern changes don't matter.

As long as splash damage is coded such that SRMs and LRMs both do more damage to mechs with closer-together panels and tend to always hit the CT (because splash radius ensures that CT is almost always hit), then it doesn't matter what the damage values or flight patterns, or whatever are. The weapon can't be balanced because of inconsistent behavior.

Remove splash, and then we can start talking about what flight patterns and damage values are appropriate.

[80Bit]

zorak ramone, on 28 May 2013 - 06:57 AM, said:

The flight pattern changes don't matter.

As long as splash damage is coded such that SRMs and LRMs both do more damage to mechs with closer-together panels and tend to always hit the CT (because splash radius ensures that CT is almost always hit), then it doesn't matter what the damage values or flight patterns, or whatever are. The weapon can't be balanced because of inconsistent behavior.

Remove splash, and then we can start talking about what flight patterns and damage values are appropriate.

No, because the current flight path of SRMs will cause a significant number of the missiles to miss a light mech alltogether.

Go into test grounds with SRM4 or 6. Stand more than 50 yards away from a light. Watch 20-30% of your miss totally miss the target. Now assume that each missile that does hit is doing straight damage and voila! You see that missile damage without splash in inadequate.

Of course flight patterns changes matter. Anyone saying "remove splash damage" need to add "and increase damage per missile" or they are speaking from ignorance.

Edited by 80Bit, 28 May 2013 - 01:26 PM.

[Karr285]

80Bit, on 28 May 2013 - 01:24 PM, said:

No, because the current flight path of SRMs will cause a significant number of the missiles to miss a light mech alltogether.

and the problem with this is??? You mean you cant just use a splatcat and be effective vs everybody?
however If they remove splash altogether I would suggest a 10-20% decrease in missile spread by default before Artemis so that it gives a better chance to land all the missiles or most of them, as long as the decrease doesn't all of a sudden = 90% of missiles hitting an assaults CT.

Edited by Karr285, 28 May 2013 - 01:49 PM.

[Victor Morson]

Until they can take the time to properly fix splash damage, let's just get the base damage buffed enough folks!

[Stoicblitzer]

they are deadset on having splash damage for some reason.

Edited by Stoicblitzer, 28 May 2013 - 04:44 PM.

[Renthrak]

If it's a problem, why not remove splash damage from LRMs, but leave it on SRMs? It felt like SRMs were just about balanced even with splash damage at one point, though I could be mistaken since the focus has been LRM issues.

[Stoicblitzer]

Renthrak, on 28 May 2013 - 04:49 PM, said:

If it's a problem, why not remove splash damage from LRMs, but leave it on SRMs? It felt like SRMs were just about balanced even with splash damage at one point, though I could be mistaken since the focus has been LRM issues.

I agree. SRMs, even without state rewind, felt much closer to "right" with the old splash damage than what we have now.

Edited by Stoicblitzer, 28 May 2013 - 04:52 PM.

[Levi Porphyrogenitus]

Removing splash damage from missiles will let them balance their damage effectively and without having to try all kinds of crazy things to mitigate the always-broken effects of the splash damage.

No splash would mean that Streaks are fixed instantly. SRMs and SSRMs can get a hefty damage buff and SRMs can be a weapon to fear in close quarters once more (SSRMs need a reload time increase too).

No splash would mean that LRMs are fixed mostly. HSR will help them hit fast-moving lights (I assume splash is intended to help with that). Increased base damage will keep them as potent weapons without having the CT-coring mechanic that both they and Streaks currently have.

[Franchi]

Roll everything about SRM's back to what they were just before the last LRM apocalypse (caused by the ******** splash addition) Problem solved.

[LCRacerX]

I suspect that splash damage was added due to software limitations.

Not to be the TableTop guy, but this is how it operates there :

20 LRMs in flight. That 20 is grouped into 5's & each gets a chance to hit. & lets say all 20 hit.
They would group into chunks of 5 & each find 5 hit locations,doing 5 damage per chunk. Each chunk of 5 has the same chance of hitting any hit location as the other groups of 5. So some might hit the same, but the probability is against a concentrated impact.

By nature, LRMs are a "splash" damage weapon, but only in the perspective of the entire missile salvo. Not the chunks.

I suspect they added splash damage to retain the feeling that it's a "softening" weapon, but something about building that into the software was too taxing or difficult. So they said, "let's just give them some small amount of splash & it'll be good." The side effect is that the missile seeking code finds the center mass all the time, hitting mostly the RT/LT/CT & that means most splash always impacts the CT.

Take away splash & implement proper 5-missile group seeking behavior & it's not a problem.

[zorak ramone]

Victor Morson, on 28 May 2013 - 02:13 PM, said:

Until they can take the time to properly fix splash damage, let's just get the base damage buffed enough folks!

As you may have gathered from my reply in your thread, I am COMPLETELY in favor of restoring SRM damage. IMO, MWO's balance was the best its ever been after the projectile HSR and before the SRM/LRM nerf.

I'm just saying that they should remove splash damage and buff SRM damage, starting with 2.5 per missile and maybe even higher if that isn't high enough. If they decide to fix splash damage, they need to decide why exactly they need it in game ... because I don't see its purpose.

Renthrak, on 28 May 2013 - 04:49 PM, said:

If it's a problem, why not remove splash damage from LRMs, but leave it on SRMs? It felt like SRMs were just about balanced even with splash damage at one point, though I could be mistaken since the focus has been LRM issues.

Stoicblitzer, on 28 May 2013 - 04:52 PM, said:

I agree. SRMs, even without state rewind, felt much closer to "right" with the old splash damage than what we have now.

I agree with both of you. However, the problem with splash is that it makes SRMs do inconsistent damage based on panel geometry, and in the case of homing missiles, it creates the whole always-hits-CT problem.

It would be better to remove splash and simultaneously buff missile damage. Given that SRMs, back when they were actually balanced in the context of PPC/GR snipers, were probably doing MORE damage than 2.5 per missile, the final, splash-less SRM damage might need to be more than 2.5.

LCRacerX, on 28 May 2013 - 09:01 PM, said:

I suspect that splash damage was added due to software limitations.

Not to be the TableTop guy, but this is how it operates there :

20 LRMs in flight. That 20 is grouped into 5's & each gets a chance to hit. & lets say all 20 hit.
They would group into chunks of 5 & each find 5 hit locations,doing 5 damage per chunk. Each chunk of 5 has the same chance of hitting any hit location as the other groups of 5. So some might hit the same, but the probability is against a concentrated impact.

By nature, LRMs are a "splash" damage weapon, but only in the perspective of the entire missile salvo. Not the chunks.

I suspect they added splash damage to retain the feeling that it's a "softening" weapon, but something about building that into the software was too taxing or difficult. So they said, "let's just give them some small amount of splash & it'll be good." The side effect is that the missile seeking code finds the center mass all the time, hitting mostly the RT/LT/CT & that means most splash always impacts the CT.

Take away splash & implement proper 5-missile group seeking behavior & it's not a problem.

The 5-missile group thing was just a way to reduce dice rolls.

Missile flight path can be altered to get the whole "damage spread all over" effect in the absence of splash damage. If fact, it would be even better since there wouldn't be the effect where missiles hit all over, but due to splash, ever missile hits the CT.