31 replies to this topic

[Impetus]

Yes we are waiting for missile netcode before looking at balance. But SRMs are doing less than half the damage they are supposed to. With the advent of missile tubing working properly we can now accurately test actual SRM damage. All mechs were standing still in this testing; aka the netcode issue does not play into this testing and this will still be an issue once netcode is fixed if this isn't looked at.

I put an srm2 in a raven 3L's arm to achieve precision shots with its one tube. Then jumped in the training grounds and tried to headshot some mechs. I video recorded the results of the jenner.

http://youtu.be/vetAb8vq91w

It took 56 ammo to headshot the jenner. At a rating of 2 damage per unit that's supposedly 112 damage.

I repeated this test two more times. The second time it took 74 ammo/148 damage. And the third time it took 64 ammo/128 damage.

I recall some dev saying testing grounds sometimes doesn't register damage properly, so I tested this with a friend. This time 58 units of SRM ammo were expelled for the headshot (116 damage). Also note SandLantern reported that no splash damage was dealt to any other part of his mech.

http://youtu.be/QaZh-GbyrG4

Even if the rated damage was calculated to include splash damage it would be completely incorrect. For reference an ac2 takes 15 ammo to headshot the same jenner (29-30 damage). If the jenner's head has 30 effective hp, 56 units of srm ammo had to deal .54 damage to kill it. For the 2 damage rating (with splash) to be accurate you would have to splash 3 extra body parts for 100% damage. In all tests no splash damage was even dealt. Splash damage also doesn't spill over for 100% damage.

Again, mechs were all standing still. Even when netcode gets fixed, this damage bug will still persist.

[Team Leader]

Did you check the damage on other body sections? Perhaps PGI in their infinite wisdom has done a damage reduction to heads from missiles, to avoid accidental headshots. Regardless, this is concerning and you should submit a ticket.

[Sand Lantern]

We didn't check anywhere else, but I can assure you that the only part of me that had taken damage was my head in the live environment. I guess I should have taken a screen shot to prove it but I didn't think of it at the time.

[TheBossHammer]

Good test, I would suggest though that you try it again though targeting the CT instead. It might be a problem with the head hitbox, not SRM's themselves. It would explain why headshots are so extraordinarily hard to land right now. Again though, good catch.

**I'd also try other weapons and see if the results are consistent. If Medium Lasers do the same thing, it might explain why they feel so weak at the moment.

Edited by TheBossHammer, 01 September 2013 - 10:15 AM.

[Impetus]

Good call. I will commence testing on other body parts. And yes I submitted a ticket simultaneously with this thread.

[Team Leader]

Good. This is some good testing.

[Royalewithcheese]

Good idea to check other body parts. The Jagermech originally had this reputation:



...partly because the cockpit was too big and located in center mass, and partly because it came out during lurmageddon. I don't remember the exact fixes, but I would be very surprised if one of them wasn't a severe reduction in missile damage to heads.

[Avalios]

It's not much of a secret that SRMs have probably the worst hit detection in the game, but it's nice to see some solid testing done regarding specifics. Keep it up!

[PEEFsmash]

It is very important to check other body parts, and make sure this isn't just a head thing.

I'm betting it is just a head thing, and frankly I'm okay with it. If this was the case against CT or other body parts, then we'd have a real problem.

[Impetus]

Testing on the CT has shown 2 damage being correct. I tested the CT with SRMs and then again with an AC2. These are the results.

Raven3L (1 tube srm2):
Centurion CT: 34 ammo/68 damage
Jenner CT: 22 ammo/44 damage
Atlas CT: 76 ammo/152 damage

JaegerS (1 ac2):
Centurion CT: 32 ammo/64 damage
Jenner CT: 21 ammo/42 damage
Atlas CT: 75 ammo/150 damage

Due to the SRM2 shooting two rounds there was an extra round fired on each CT. I ran the SRM test twice and each time produced the same ammo consumption on each CT.

However while messing around a little more I've found not all missiles are even connecting for damage at different angles. More testing will ensue.

[Selfish]

Splash used to be so bad for big hitbox mechs that they could headshot themselves if firing point blank into an opponent. The splatcat being the major culprit.


There are several "black holes" on mechs where all missiles go to die. They've persisted since closed beta, but only became extremely noticeable when missiles lost their splash. I can core an atlas in 3 salvos from my 8R, but use over 6 (~396 damage) and not even strip armor on their sides/back. The devs have acknowledged it, and that's what they were supposed to have fixed before thinking about rolling back SRM damage.

[Roland]

Ever since closed beta, head sections have been largely immune to missile damage, which is splash damage.

This is because back in closed beta, one volley of missiles could pretty much headshot an atlas, and SRM's could headshot almost any mech if you were able to hit them roughly near to where their cockpit was.

[Heat Seeking Civet]

Roland, on 01 September 2013 - 11:58 AM, said:

Ever since closed beta, head sections have been largely immune to missile damage, which is splash damage.

This is because back in closed beta, one volley of missiles could pretty much headshot an atlas, and SRM's could headshot almost any mech if you were able to hit them roughly near to where their cockpit was.

At the same time though, some cockpits were twice the size they should have been.

[Amaris the Usurper]

The splash damage radius for SRMs was reduced from 1.8 m to 0.05 m by the May 24th hotfix (http://mwomercs.com/...052013-updated; Paul later simplified the numbers to "drastically reduced," but they are still quoted on the last page). We should be seeing very close to 2 damage per missile against armor, regardless of the circumstances.

Have you tested an AC/2 side-by-side with the SRMs against the locations/angles (other than the head) that seem to be taking reduced damage? If the AC does full damage, as against the head, the same mechanism is probably behind both issues.

Based on PGI's descriptions of their efforts at implementing HSR, different hit-detection algorithms are used for lasers, missiles, and projectile weapons. The fact that you are seeing reduced damage against a stationary target in a live test suggests that something is fundamentally wrong with the hit detection algorithm. It is possible that missile-HSR is compensating for lag correctly, thereby producing the same broken behavior that would manifest if the target were standing still.

[Sybreed]

Roland, on 01 September 2013 - 11:58 AM, said:

Ever since closed beta, head sections have been largely immune to missile damage, which is splash damage.

This is because back in closed beta, one volley of missiles could pretty much headshot an atlas, and SRM's could headshot almost any mech if you were able to hit them roughly near to where their cockpit was.

if I remember correctly, PGI nerfed missile damage by something around 50% in early closed beta. LRMs and SRMs could headshot Atlases in 2 or 3 volleys. It's possible this is the result of this nerf here. Still, interesting tests.

[SweetJackal]

Team Leader, on 01 September 2013 - 10:10 AM, said:

Did you check the damage on other body sections? Perhaps PGI in their infinite wisdom has done a damage reduction to heads from missiles, to avoid accidental headshots. Regardless, this is concerning and you should submit a ticket.

Remember the Early Closed Beta? The 4 SRM 6 Catapult that would headshot -everything- instantly?

Pretty sure that the Head location got damage reduction relating to missiles after that.

[Angel of Annihilation]

Impetus, on 01 September 2013 - 10:56 AM, said:

Testing on the CT has shown 2 damage being correct. I tested the CT with SRMs and then again with an AC2. These are the results.

Raven3L (1 tube srm2):
Centurion CT: 34 ammo/68 damage
Jenner CT: 22 ammo/44 damage
Atlas CT: 76 ammo/152 damage

JaegerS (1 ac2):
Centurion CT: 32 ammo/64 damage
Jenner CT: 21 ammo/42 damage
Atlas CT: 75 ammo/150 damage

Due to the SRM2 shooting two rounds there was an extra round fired on each CT. I ran the SRM test twice and each time produced the same ammo consumption on each CT.

However while messing around a little more I've found not all missiles are even connecting for damage at different angles. More testing will ensue.

Looks about right when you consider both armor and the internal HPs. Also something to consider is that the entire reason the damage on SRMs was upped to 2.0 was to compensate for the hit registration issue, not that they felt that SRMs were suppose to be doing 2.0 damage. The 2.0 damage is supposed to be temporary. Therefore yes, expect to miss with a certain percentage of SRMs, even when they look like they are hitting.

[Alistair Winter]

Great job! Good work.

But am I the only one who never ceases to be amazed that it's so simple for players to uncover potentially very significant bugs? There have been a number of threads like this one, where people have been experimenting with SSRMs, MGs and what have you. I would have expected PGI to carry out these kinds of tests immediately for every time they make a change to certain, if not all, weapons. I don't want to bring up LRMapocalypse, but I just did.

[Shadowdusk]

I agree. I had to stop using SRM 6 and SRM 4 because they were doing {Scrap} damage. Medium Lasers were doing far more damage. I thought SRMs were strong but something went wrong last patch.

[Oktoglokk]

Same.
I was really looking forward to running a 5xSRM6 Kintaro, but size and CT issue aside, it was a real chore to manage even 300 damage a game with it. Absolute best I ever managed, expending all 700 missiles, overwhelming majority of shots good square hits, was ~630 damage.