Sable Dove, on 21 November 2013 - 11:11 AM, said:
The Locust shouldn't even die as fast as the Locust does. It kills the fun because despite being small and fast, the Locust is not difficult to hit. Especially since it lacks jumpjets.
It's profile also doesn't help it too much either, it's got the longish nose that the other lights seem to have (excluding the Commando and Spider). Otherwise, it's small enough and fast enough that, I find if it is cleverly used, can be a great asset to any team. You just have to use it right, distract, and lure people into nice little traps.
Did that once when I had a couple heavies behind me. I kept scouting ahead, finding an enemy. The targets kept chasing me for the "free locust kill" as I dodged and ducked behind cover. By the time the target knew I had set a trap for them, the Jager and friends already dropped him... Was such a good game.
Dimento Graven, on 21 November 2013 - 04:18 PM, said:
If you haven't figured it out by now, even though I've out right said it, here it is again:
I'm not obligated to respond to every post, I can pick and choose which ones I respond to.
All you've done is prove how much you like to argue, regardless of how wrong you've been proven to be, by other posters in this thread, and by PGI themselves through their actions of actually applying some fixes to the Spider.
If it hadn't had something wrong with it, they wouldn't have done anything else other than apply the thong.
No, I don't expect you to respond to every post. However, I do kinda expect you to read most of the posts when you are making a reply in the thread that you were following in. Can't keep a current conversation in the topic and stay up to date with the discussion without doing so. You might not have had to respond, but reading it would have been nice. And, seen as some/most of it was in direct response to you, with hard work, time and testing on my part to create a proper reply, it would have been nice to have seen some kind of response, besides complete, and silent, dismissal...
How wrong I was? Did you read... oh, wait... that's probably the problem. You didn't read my posts about my own findings about the spider, with screen shots to back up my concept. The concept was, yes, there is a "problem" with the Spider, but many of the spider's "problems" are also found on other mechs. I was proving that point.
Then, the Atlas was broken by your own words... but you wouldn't want to admit that, would you? (No, I'm not saying anything was wrong with the Atlas Hit Boxes, but if one geometry got changed and was considered a fix to a "broken" mech, than that same logic must apply to another mech with it'***** box geometry being changed to "better represent the physical representation of the mech". (Not an exact quote, just summarizing.)
As far as your apparent response to my work...
Dimento Graven, on 20 November 2013 - 01:39 PM, said:
I don't have to respond to your EVERY post in this thread, nor do I give a {Scrap} about "static" screen shots. Also, here's my response: You're analysis is wrong. Why: REASONS!
It's about the same level of response I got with full motion video posts.
Plus the fact that the appeared to me to be obvious ploys to hijack the thread from discussing the Spider's issues.
As a reminder on the responses that happened because of your own videos (which was more than one word "REASONS" for the record, which is by far vastly MORE response than you have given me or anyone else who posts evidence/videos/screenshots saying anything against your point of view). I requoted them for you.
Tesunie, on 12 November 2013 - 04:15 PM, said:
Right arm destroyed= Damage to CT. Isn't that more of a penalty most times? (It isn't reduced either from what I know.)
Left arm destroyed= Damage to right torso. Something isn't right there. (Damage isn't reduced here either from my knowledge.)
"Random" convergence= Try to actually hit the target, instead of having your reticule just off target so your weapons are focused behind the mech. (One med laser did not hit target.) (After you destroyed the left torso, and showed the right side being destroyed, you suddenly had "proper convergence".)
Check this out with the Cicada too then. Last time I used it as target practice, it was having the arm damage transfer problem with that mech too. I'd destroy it's right arm, damage would apply fully (not reduced) to the CT. Left arm, damage would apply full to the right torso (and some damage to the left torso). This is, as far as I have experienced, still not a Spider problem only.
Hit detection, damage transfer is broken, somewhere. Not necessarily just the Spider.
I agree with you that something is off... but disagree with your "random deconvergence" concept, providing my own proof later...
Tesunie, on 12 November 2013 - 04:44 PM, said:
Tested myself. The Cicada no longer appears to have this problem. However, in my testing, this is what I saw:
Right arm destroyed= Damage transferred to the right leg once, then applied to Left Torso there after (from shooting the arm stub.)
Left arm destroyed= Damage transferred to the right torso, then applied to the CT.
I found out in my testing, by shooting the left arm nub, that the Spider'***** box for it's legs includes an invisible section that "cups" each side of the torso, which was why my Right Arm transfer went to the leg instead of the left torso. I was shooting down too low from the arm when it got destroyed, clipping the invisible hit box.
I'll do more testing on a bit... (Sorry, no video as I don't have the software and wish not to load it onto my computer, for reasons I've already stated.)
I tested myself, something seemed wrong, retested as well again. First test results showed a problem you didn't see, but that was because my lasers deconverged and hit the leg after the arm was destroyed. Same problem you had, I later found it in testing after I carefully repeated the process.
Tesunie, on 12 November 2013 - 04:59 PM, said:
Found some more problems with the mechs:
Spider: Damage transfer for arms is wonky. Leg "cupping" I had seen was my lasers deconverging after arm was destroyed and it focused on the background (far away).
I would also like to present the "But I should have hit it" convergence as it doesn't count an arm that isn't there anymore. (If anything, the side hit box or destroyed arm hit box needs to enlargen to cover the actual visual space the mech takes up.)
(Picture omitted for space)
Now, for some interesting news...
The JENNER! Yup. Something is wrong with the Jenner. Didn't you know? Well, I do now.
I present the evidence.
Arm destroyed= Damage transferred directly to the CT.
(Picture omitted for space)
And a curious "dead spot" that damage goes in, but nothing comes out (AKA: A damage black hole that doesn't do damage when hit). This occurs when the arm is destroyed, and I could repeat this shot several times (and did) with no effect. Probably wouldn't find it again if I tried, but I will try in a few more moments. Also seemed to only exist on the right side, could not get it to "work" on the left side.
(Pictures omitted for space)
The Jenner only seemed to have problems with it's right arm. I could not see or replicate any problems with the left arm and damage transfer nor with damage disappearing.
I agree that the hot box for the shoulder area (destroyed arm hit box most likely) seemed a little too small. I have my reticule in the picture on the mech visually, yet it was not on the mech in actuality. It sounds like this problem was now corrected, which is a good thing.
Brought up Jenner, as I found that it also suffered from the wonky hit transfer as your spider video. While trying to replicate the problem by shooting just the destroyed arm hit box, I found a hole under the arm in the side torso, where damage went in, and never came back out.
Tesunie, on 12 November 2013 - 05:25 PM, said:
Another round of victims... I mean... visit to the testing grounds (I had killed my last test subjects)... and more revealing information.
Spider: All damage transferred correctly this match around. No discernible problems. (This time.)
(Pictures omitted for space)
Jenner: Found that black hole, and with a lot of ease. It's a rather large hole to be honest. It's the entire "circle" of the arm joint from what I can tell. More photos.
Look in spoiler, as I have a few pictures of me repetitively shooting the hole.
(Pictures omitted for space)
Blackjack: I was not fast enough to get this data, and I need to test it again to be certain, but by shooting only the arms, I caused damage to it's CT after the right arm exploded off. Needs further testing...
So, just by 3 visits to the testing grounds, I saw problems with the Spider occur, the Jenner, and the Blackjack.
(And yes, I tested the Spider problems, inside a Spider! What irony!)
My conclusion from my tests: This is not "just" a Spider problem, but a problem effecting all mechs (or more than just the Spider).
As a final note, I could only get the damage transfer problem with the spider to occur once, but got it to occur on the Jenner twice (didn't test the Jenner first round through). Only tested the Blackjack once, as I started to get more ambitious.
Farther testing, in response to your video. This is a lot of "responses" to a video that you say got no chance of being looked over, viewed, and then was quickly dismissed without reason. I didn't dismiss your video, in fact I proved your video correct as well. However, all I proved was that it was a problem not specific to the Spider, as the Jenner (and others) had strange hit transfer as well.
Sable Dove, on 12 November 2013 - 08:15 PM, said:
The lasers de-converge because you destroyed the arm, and due to nearly-instant convergence, your weapons converge 150m behind the Spider because that's now what you're aiming at.
Damage transferring to the wrong component is far from Spider-specific.The same effect or worse can be replicated with the following, and likely most other mechs:
CPLT-A1
SDR-5D
RVN-2X
JM6-DD
VTR-9B
JR7-F
BJ-1
DRG-1N
The Jagermech is probably the worst of the bunch. While most mechs only suffer from this when an arm is destroyed, shooting the Jagermech's intact arms often sends damage to any part of the torso, or occasionally, legs.
Then you aim behind the Spider and your weapons again converge on the ground behind it.
Congratulations, you've proven that the Spider has similar hitbox issues to virtually every other mech in the game. So far, the Commando is the only one that I've tested that doesn't have the problem, and it appears that the reason is that it simply does not have hitboxes for destroyed arms at all (or they're so small that I couldn't find them).
For the record: most destroyed-arm hitboxes appear to float just beside the mech, leaving a small gap between the side torso and the destroyed arm hitboxes. Additionally, most mechs have very small/tiny destroyed-arm hitboxes. To the point that they might as well not even exist. See the Centurion for a good example of how destroyed-arm hitboxes should be on all mechs.
Another response to your video. Well, you certainly has gotten more than just "REASONS" as a response. Plus, we proved your video accurate and correct. However, we also proved that it wasn't a problem with just the Spider, like you were trying to skew the data into making it seem. Besides that one point (that it was a spider only problem), we agreed with everything else about your video about hit transfer damage being incorrect.
Tesunie, on 14 November 2013 - 06:11 PM, said:
I shall try tonight to find this "hole" in the CT of the Spider. As far as I know, the micro Black Hole Experimental Defense Device (B.H.E.D.D. for short, pronounced Bed) has been removed, as the Jenner pilots where complaining that the black hole phenomena was really a miniaturized wormhole, with damage that went into the new experimental device being sent through the wormhole and into their CTs. Upon the removal of the device, it has now been placed into NAIS for further study as a possible new form of transportation, communications or other possible uses.
(AKA: As far as I know, the hole in the CT of the spider (near it's belly button) has been removed. It was closed up about 3 patches ago, as I understand it.)
Also, the challenge was to find similar problems in other mechs. Not to find problems of the same exact properties in other mechs. There is a hole in the Jenner's right side torso, behind the arm. It may not be as significant as other problems, but it is worth taking note. Also, the "damage transfer is broken in the spider" was also repeated in the Jenner 2 out of 2 tests, in the Blackjack 1 out of 1 tests (needs more testing) and in the spider 2 out of 3 tests (the first test was admittedly botched by myself as I hit other parts after the arm was destroyed, as the lasers deconverged when the arm was no longer there, or I only had really 2 viable tests, which leaves it to a 1 out of 2 tests). The damage transfer bug is not specific to the spider, and I saw it far more often in the Jenner to be honest.
The "I hit it!" remarks can be largely contributed to "I lost convergence on my target, and I shot the hill behind the Spider, so my weapons went between arms and torsos harmlessly" as demonstrated with my laser demonstration. This would also explain a lot of the "I shot two Gauss (ACs, etc) at the spider, and they didn't do proper damage! It was like it did half damage", as you probably only hit with one weapon, and the other went behind the spider.
Also, if people were only complaining about the damage transfer bug, then there wouldn't be complaints about Spiders not dieing, as they would still be taking damage, just maybe not always where you hit them (or expect/thought you hit them). There are other issues that can not be tested in the testing grounds, such as HSR and HR, which are probably the main causes of the problems seen in live matches.
If hit boxes was the only problem with the Spider, which it may or may not be a problem still, then it should be more consistent and visible on the Testing Grounds, which is really isn't. I could see, after my testing, a possible argument that the shoulder/destroyed arm hit box could use to be enlarged to better match the graphics, but that in itself is a rather minor problem. We are talking about only a few pixels (relatively speaking) of hit box adjustment. If a couple of pixels are messing up your aim that much, then you are probably being too picky. (Should it be perfect? It is a worthy goal, but perfection is not needed, but near-perfect is still rather good.)
As far as hit transfer and "holes", other mechs are also effected. This means that the problems are still not Spider specific. It also leads me to see the outcry of "The Spider has bad hit boxes" to be false, as hit boxes should show up more regularly as a problem. I shall be doing further tests tonight on all mechs in the testing grounds, instead of just mistakingly testing only the spider, as running tests on only the spider will show that the Spider might have a problem, but not if other mechs experience similar problems. By testing only the spider, one limits their field of data, which leads to false conclusions and bad evidence. You can't conclude that the "Spider has these issues" without also testing it on other mechs. If other mechs also show the problem (or all of them from time to time), then you would have to conclude that "All mechs have these issues", whatever those issues are.
I'm trying to encourage better testing to provide better results. As I stated in another post in this thread, you can post a bunch of videos showing problems with Spiders, but it wont prove, nor disprove, that the issue is only a Spider problem, no matter how many times it is posted or how many videos of it comes up. You also, at the same time, can't casually discredit other videos showing the "Spider problem" with other mechs showing the same problems because of some obscure reasons (such as a lack of ping being provided before and after match of all participants, or slightly low quality video that is still clear enough to see the distance meter and the health remaining percentages gauge, such as the video someone posted with a Cataphrat taking damage from several mechs and all weapons system types for 15 seconds with no health decrease).
Though not directly in response to your video, you did post several videos about this hole in the belly button. I, and several others in this thread, was unable to find this hole in the latest patch. This has lead up to believe that the hole was "patched", pardon the pun...
I also go farther into why we should be testing other mechs, besides just the Spider. If we want more accurate data, we need to be unbiased in it's collection, which means when we find an issue with one mech, we test it on all other mechs possible. Example: If the XL400 engine in equipped on the Victor (I might have engine size wrong here), it seems to cause severe lag and making several people DC, if not the Victor pilot themselves. Once the engine is removed or changed, the problem seems to go away. Was tested with other mechs that could also take that engine size, but the problem persisted with only the Victor still. Instead of blaming the XL400 engine for all the problems, it was narrowed down by testing till it was found that it's only when the Victor takes that engine that problems seem to crop up, for whatever unknown reason we did not find out.
Tesunie, on 15 November 2013 - 10:50 AM, said:
http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Spider
http://www.camospecs...n=Detail&ID=372
Look at the Spider's in those links. They are small, thin and tiny. They have been in every case of Battletech as far as I know of. It has laser weapons, which take up less volume than any missiles (ammo feeds, ammo bins, missile tubes, etc), meaning it can easily be more compact than other mechs of it's size. It also was designed to be small and compact. The Cockpit is so small actually, that it doesn't even have an Ejection system in most cases. Even when you look at it and say a Commando is larger, a commando has large, hollow, missile tube weapons that would take up more volume of space. Otherwise, the Commando and the Spider are about the same size, but the Spider is just thinner and more compact still.
For it's tonnage, it is fine. It's taller than a Commando, by about a Commando's head full head or more. It's only 5 tons more than a Commando. As a counter, it is thinner than the commando, with leaner arms and leaner torso. Commando is 25 tons, the Spider is 30 tons. Add in jump... well...
(Pictures omitted for space)
So one of the "problems" with the spider is it's profile? My gosh. We can't have that, now can we! Even though it's the classic spider look, given to it for a long time...
They don't have a lot of space inside them? Read up on the Orion, and why mechanics seemed to love it. Why? It had a lot of nice and roomy conduits in it so that repairs were easier to preform. Mechs like the Spider probably have even less space. Also, compare mech sizes to tanks of the same tonnage from today. Mechs are often times three or four times larger than their tank counterparts. This indicates that mechs probably have a lot of empty space inside, or a lot of lighter materials are used in it's construction.
"When you look at the mechs next to one another, the spider has roughly the same size/volume as one arm of an Atlas. Given those dimensions either the Atlas has huge amounts of empty space inside it or it should be at least 200 tons, probably closer to 250 tons." You nailed it in one. The Atlas probably has a lot of open spaces, for repair crews to get into as well as other materials or reasons. Think of your cars engine compartment on this a bit. How much space do you have around the engine and other parts of the car? Often times, the frame is even made with hollow tubes of metal as well. Your car has a lot of open spaces inside it and probably weighs up to 2 tons max. A tank, which would maybe be the size of 2-4 cars, can weigh many many tons, because it is more compact, with heavy armor on the sides, but even then there are still hollow sections for work crews among other things.
Now, I'm not saying that the Spider might not have problems of it's own, but it's profile helps prevent a lot of damage people think they are dealing to it. Combine that with HSR, HR and possibly (though I haven't seen much proof of it yet) Hit Box issues, with the Jump and it's speed... it's becoming a focal point for the problems in this game. Many of these problems effect every mech in the game, but seems to be more prominent in the Spider. Much of the reason for it's prominent appearances in the Spider is as much how the Spider is designed, along with being the fastest mech with jump, on top of how thin it is, on top of HSR/HR issues, on top of a (though I doubt) possible hit box issue... As I've stated before, it is a perfect storm effect.
Am I saying nothing is wrong with the spider? No. I'm not sure if something is wrong with the Spider directly. Could it be a multitude of other things wrong with the spider beyond itself? I can tell you that one is true, which is what masks any problem the Spider itself might actually have, as we can't tell which is Spider specific, and which is a general problem in the game itself.
Once more, though not in direct response to your videos or posts, I went farther into depth as to several factors that could explain why the Spider could/would/may be effected by generalized problems more often than other mechs. One of those possible issues mentioned was Hit Boxes, even if I couldn't find any data to confirm or deny this claim yet.
All these responses, which was well thought out, tested, and evidence presented. Yet, you say we refuted your videos without cause, justification, or testing of our own? Really? This is why I asked if you actually read these posts. They all involve your videos to some extent, and were responses to such videos.
I may be incorrect. I am human. However, you need more of a statement other than "REASONS" as to why I am incorrect. What PGI has changed (which I still have not managed to test yet for myself) doesn't prove or disprove what I have said, seen as I believe I've stated several times that hit boxes could be wrong, but we players (key word players) are not able to accurately determine this for ourselves. Don't make me quote the times I've said this...
And just to point it out, encase you missed it:
Clarification:
Remember.. this is hit box tuning. As in when a Mech registers damage, it goes to the appropriate component on the Mech. This has nothing to do with hit detection which is part of HSR and is being investigated on a different development train.
UPDATE (Nov 14)
You will see the first pass at the above specified Mechs on the Nov 19th patch.
I just want to clairify one other thing. The above Mechs are NOT the only ones being looked at. ALL Mechs will be undergoing this evaluation and any updates will be released in packs like above.
9
