66 replies to this topic

[Diablobo]

Remember when missiles did about twice as much damage on paper as they do now? Then they figured out that splash damage was making them do too much damage. Not able to fix it right away, they decided to cut the damage drastically to compensate until they could figure out how to fix it.

So here we are today with splash damage supposedly fixed, but with the damage values still halved. If they cut the damage to fix splash, and splash is fixed, then why is damage still at the low end?

Doesn't the damage need to be increased now that splash is not an issue?

[Dude42]

Been wondering that all day.

[Roland]

They just increased the damage, dude.

[Sephlock]

Roland, on 24 May 2013 - 09:51 PM, said:

They just increased the damage, dude.

Didn't the patch notes say that damage wasn't changed- they just changed the splash?

[Diablobo]

Roland, on 24 May 2013 - 09:51 PM, said:

They just increased the damage, dude.

The increase is not enough. The numbers were about twice as high pre-splash. We have doubled armor values remember? Wasn't that the original rationale behind double damage missiles?

[Sephlock]

http://mwomercs.com/...052013-updated/

[Diablobo]

Ok, so if splash damage and flightpaths are fixed, and missiles still suck....what does that leave?

[Karenai]

Roland, on 24 May 2013 - 09:51 PM, said:

They just increased the damage, dude.

To 0.9 from 0.7 where it was for two months.
We still have splash, 5cm worth of it... down from 3m. So that is why they cannot bump the damage, because there is still splash, theoreticly...

[Ninthshadow]

Sephlock, on 24 May 2013 - 09:52 PM, said:

Didn't the patch notes say that damage wasn't changed- they just changed the splash?

From the patch notes:

Quote

LRMs

- Speed 120 (up from 100)
- Damage 0.9 (up from 0.7)

They then reduced the reduced the splash to stop the CT problem and scaled back the new trajectory.

From the hotfix:

Quote

LRM flight path has had it's drop point moved back along the path by 23% when using indirect firing. Splash damage drastically reduced. Damage per missile and all other aspects have not been changed.

The flight path change makes it so that when you have indirect firing capabilities, the missiles don't come down at 80'ish degrees. They now come down between 60-70 degrees allowing you to take cover much easier. Stay out in the open and you're still going to feel the pain.

I have been somewhat confused where both the "LRM is now god!" and "LRMs suck again!" extreme posts are coming from since the hotfix. I understand splash damage is still very much in the pipeline for fixing (?) but this sounds like a good enough holdover to me.

EDIT: Clarified where the second quote is from.

Edited by Ninthshadow, 24 May 2013 - 10:11 PM.

[Sephlock]

People are just lying. This one dude is claiming that 1 volley from an LRM20 mech will core his Raven 3L... They just don't want missiles to be viable because moving behind cover is SUCH a bother.

[Diablobo]

Karenai, on 24 May 2013 - 10:01 PM, said:

To 0.9 from 0.7 where it was for two months.
We still have splash, 5cm worth of it... down from 3m. So that is why they cannot bump the damage, because there is still splash, theoreticly...

Do you have a source for the splash still being here? I thought they got rid of it completely. I would be even more upset if they left it. Splash damage is for Quake rocket launchers, not Battletech missiles.

[Diablobo]

That just made me wonder about the Quake rocket launcher....It seems like the problem with splash damage is not that they are not working right, it's that they are using the wrong projectile model. Obviously a grenade is treated differently than a bullet in the game engine. If MWO is using grenades instead of bullets to model the missiles, they are going to have splash. All they need to do is treat each missile like a bullet.

Of course, the problem is going to be in making them fly right, but I bet they are using the explosive projectile model in the Cryengine instead of the regular bullet. If they can get a regular bullet to arc like a missile, that should fix the splash problem.

Edited by Diablobo, 24 May 2013 - 10:41 PM.

[NachoFoot]

Splash damage should spread to the areas that the missiles did not hit. That's why its splash damage and not direct damage.

I believe splash damage was concentrating on the same area it hit (which was most often the CT).

[Dude42]

Diablobo, on 24 May 2013 - 10:38 PM, said:

That just made me wonder about the Quake rocket launcher....It seems like the problem with splash damage is not that they are not working right, it's that they are using the wrong projectile model. Obviously a grenade is treated differently than a bullet in the game engine. If MWO is using grenades instead of bullets to model the missiles, they are going to have splash. All they need to do is treat each missile like a bullet.

Is that what a missile is to you? A Flying Bullet!?

I have no words.

[Victor Morson]

Without splash, they're useless.

They don't need CT bias'ed splash, mind you, but they need that splash damage. 0.9 per missile without notable splash is worthless. They need to up the individual missile damage to at least 1.2 if they're not going to splash or LRMs will never, ever be usable.

I am so sick of getting this "Terrible LRM -> Too good LRM for a day or two -> Terrible LRM" cycle. These things need TUNING not complete wild mood swings.

[jeffsw6]

Diablobo, on 24 May 2013 - 10:00 PM, said:

Ok, so if splash damage and flightpaths are fixed, and missiles still suck....what does that leave?

The flight paths are not fixed. LRMs will still path over buildings twice as tall as an Atlas and strike mechs standing right against those buildings, etc. Good luck finding cover on ... any map, period.

[jakucha]

jeffsw6, on 24 May 2013 - 10:45 PM, said:

The flight paths are not fixed. LRMs will still path over buildings twice as tall as an Atlas and strike mechs standing right against those buildings, etc. Good luck finding cover on ... any map, period.

I don't know about that, I'm finding cover even near the center of Caustic Valley.

[Diablobo]

Dude42, on 24 May 2013 - 10:41 PM, said:

Is that what a missile is to you? A Flying Bullet!?

I have no words.

Then why do they only do 1 damage (in TT) for EACH missile? 10 missiles spread over 10 places for one point a piece. If that's not getting hit by 10 flying bullets, I don't know what is.

You might want to see a doctor. He might be able to fix your speech problems.

Edit: the missiles do their entire damage to ONE spot, not separate areas. That's still one big bullet, the only difference is, the bullet does variable damage.

Edited by Diablobo, 24 May 2013 - 10:51 PM.

[Deathlike]

jeffsw6, on 24 May 2013 - 10:45 PM, said:

The flight paths are not fixed. LRMs will still path over buildings twice as tall as an Atlas and strike mechs standing right against those buildings, etc. Good luck finding cover on ... any map, period.

Although the traditional thinking is to stand behind cover, you actually still have to move from behind cover to a "less static location" while behind that building or hill. Amazingly, it's works best that way.

[jeffsw6]

jakucha, on 24 May 2013 - 10:48 PM, said:

I don't know about that, I'm finding cover even near the center of Caustic Valley.

It depends on if the LRM-firing opponent mech has a spotter on his team who also has you selected. If he does, you are trashed, regardless of where you are standing. The same bug still exists. My belief is they tried to adjust it, and missiles aren't nose-diving over HUGE buildings anymore, but they are still going over buildings that are DESIGNED TO BE EFFECTIVE COVER from LRMs if you are standing right against them.

The maps are designed for LRMs to work a certain way. Now that their pathing / trajectory is hugely buffed (when the opponent has a spotter) the maps no longer "work right."