201 replies to this topic

[Toong]

Joseph Mallan, on 21 January 2014 - 04:45 AM, said:

No its not! Ammo blows up 100% of the time it is hit on TT. I carry lots of ammo and should explode in a spectacular fashion for doing so. I see so many players unwilling to pay for their decisions it's painful. Part of playing a thinking mans game is actually thinking about the consequences that your build brings to the dance. Gauss and Ammo blows up 100% when hit. It is both necessary and fun to watch. Even if it is my own Mech!

You seem to be forgetting that TT also had random rolls for determining hit locations. In a system that favors an equal distribution of damage, 100% ammo explosions make a little more sense because by the time you risk getting crits to ammo, the 'mech is already very near death. In Mechwarrior Online, where players can consistently deal high damage to single sections of the 'mech, a 100% ammo explosion chance would result in a lot of very premature deaths.

Again, I don't think you're thinking this through.

[Tesunie]

Toong, on 21 January 2014 - 07:16 PM, said:

You seem to be forgetting that TT also had random rolls for determining hit locations. In a system that favors an equal distribution of damage, 100% ammo explosions make a little more sense because by the time you risk getting crits to ammo, the 'mech is already very near death. In Mechwarrior Online, where players can consistently deal high damage to single sections of the 'mech, a 100% ammo explosion chance would result in a lot of very premature deaths.

Again, I don't think you're thinking this through.

My math kinda confirms that.
If it was 100% chance, these would be the numbers at best possible chances:
0.25 x 1.00 = 0.25 = 25%
0.16 x 2.00 = 0.32 = 32%
0.03 x 3.00 = 0.09 = 9%
Total crit chances per shot: 25% + 32% + 09% = 66%

At worse:
0.25 x 0.0834 x 1.00 = 0.02085 = 2.085%
0.16 x 0.0834 x 2.00 = 0.0267 = 2.67%
0.03 x 0.0834 x 3.00 = 0.0075 = 0.75%
Total crit chances per shot: 2.085% + 2.67% + 0.75% = 4.76%

So, you have a 4.76-66% chance of causing an ammo explosion with a single shot. Add in the common 3 weapons we all love to see... 2 PPC + AC20/Gauss. Suddenly, because of pin point convergence/accuracy, you now have a 14.29-198% chance of getting an ammo explosion from a single alpha (depending upon how many other crits are not ammo, and how many crits are ammo). With 100% explosion chance upon ammo destruction, combined with the need to take more ammo to do the same amount of "damage" (remember double armor), and you normally have much better odds than the worse possible of 14.29%. Probably close to 50-90% chance of causing an ammo explosion on a single alpha, and that includes as soon as the alpha that breaches your armor. So, we would see many "one shot BOOM" attacks happening, all over the place. There would be no safe hiding spot anymore (people would just aim for the legs, knowing people hide it there, and POP!). Case would become required if one wished to play the game for more than a few seconds... (And I shall presume that crit destruction upon section destruction is turned off, otherwise it's just madness. MADNESS I SAY!)

Edited by Tesunie, 21 January 2014 - 07:58 PM.

[Tesunie]

I'm actually getting kinda tempted to start taking screen shots from today and on and keep track of how many times I die from ammo explosions. So far, I can recall it happening to me 3 times so far since I started responding in this thread...
(And I don't get to play too much either!)

Edit at 6:00 Eastern: Just died again due to Ammo Explosion as the cause of death. (Right after posting this, I had also died a match before. That's twice within 3 matches.)

Edited by Tesunie, 22 January 2014 - 02:58 PM.

[OneEyed Jack]

Gaan Cathal, on 19 January 2014 - 02:54 PM, said:

It's a box of woblobium with ting feeders that allow for purple-spectrum shift to minimise ammo explosion.

Ammo can explode. CASE stops ammo explosion propagating.
You can put ammo in limbs. Ergo it makes intuitive sense to be able to put CASE in limbs.
Maybe if you had a clue what 'intuitive sense' was, you'd not rage at people for not having memorised the (self-contradictory) fluff for a niche wargame from the 80s.

Ooh-ooh, you really got me there with your brilliant attempt to pass your rather.... specific definition of what makes sense off as a problem with the IP and suggesting I had to be "nerd raging". First of all, if you have a problem with a. IP it doesn't make much "intuitive sense" to batch and whine while playing a game based on it. Second, I simply call 'em as I see 'em. I don't need to be angry to know a Hodor when I see one. But if it makes you feel like a big man to claim that disagreement with you is "nerd rage" you go right ahead.

Gaan Cathal, on 19 January 2014 - 02:54 PM, said:

Hodor,Your Tech Manual is an insufficient source, since I have a superior source in the form that I tested putting CASE in a limb in MW:O and it doesn't work. My experimental method is clearly detailed, and supports the conclusions reached in simulation using Smurfy. You may peer review at your leisure. Hodor

Or read a document with only the most tenuous relationship with the subject matter, that works too. Hodor, Hodor, Hodor!

Wow. That's an absolutely brilliant observation! If it had the remotest bearing on what you were quoting, it might not even make you look stupid. My comment that you so remarkably misinterpreted was in regards to the allowed placement, in distance from the gun, of ammo... In TT. It had not the least reference or association to CASE in any way. Let alone CASE in MWO. If you want to fling snide remarks, you should probably have a clue what you're remarking about, even if you don't know what you're talking about.

Just sayin'.

[Tesunie]

OneEyed Jack, on 22 January 2014 - 03:17 PM, said:

Just sayin'.

That's okay, he's also trying to pass of some strange and incomplete (about a third of the actual equation) math to try and prove his point... (Stjobe I think didn't realize what was really off about it, as it looks SO close to being right. He took it, expanded on it, and it looks okay.)

At 100% ammo explosion chance, with 2 ammo in the legs, and 4 other crits slots taken, that's a 2/6 (1/3; 0.33; 33%) chance of hitting ammo.

His real chances of causing an ammo explosion in the leg, if ammo exploded 100% of the time when destroyed:
0.25 x 0.33 x 1.00 = 0.0825 = 8.25%
0.16 x 0.33 x 2.00 = 0.1056 = 10.56%
0.03 x 0.33 x 3.00 = 0.0297 = 2.97% (This one isn't completely accurate, as only 2 crits can actually land on ammo max, but it has 3 chances to land crits on ammo, or another crit location)
Total crit chances per shot: 8.25% + 10.56% + 2.97% = 21.78% chance a single shot would hit ammo and make it explode. (Presuming it causes enough damage to destroy the location, like a PPC/AC10-20/Gauss, just the common weapons we see on most mechs for a high pin point alpha.)


So, leg ammo exploding 21.78% of the time form a single shot, add in 2-3 shots, like the famous 2 PPC, AC20 meta that's kinda catchy right now... and that 40 pin point alpha can breach the leg armor of most mechs in one shot, sometimes two... Thats a (21.78% x 3 weapons hitting =) 65.34% chance that one of those weapons will crit,, hit ammo, destroy it (as it deals a base of at least 10 damage) and make it explode with the 100% chance. 65.34% chance of that. As soon as armor is breached.

Much different from his "For reference, 100% explosion chance translates to only ~14% chance of actual explosion using the above example", huh?

Edited by Tesunie, 22 January 2014 - 03:37 PM.

[Yiazmat]

Tesunie, on 22 January 2014 - 02:34 PM, said:

I'm actually getting kinda tempted to start taking screen shots from today and on and keep track of how many times I die from ammo explosions. So far, I can recall it happening to me 3 times so far since I started responding in this thread...
(And I don't get to play too much either!)

Edit at 6:00 Eastern: Just died again due to Ammo Explosion as the cause of death. (Right after posting this, I had also died a match before. That's twice within 3 matches.)

I can count on one hand how many times i died from it last year. You should probably take your ammo out of the side torsos ;D

[Tesunie]

Yiazmat, on 22 January 2014 - 04:10 PM, said:

I can count on one hand how many times i died from it last year. You should probably take your ammo out of the side torsos ;D

But, I've been hearing on this thread that, no matter how much ammo you have, and no matter were you place it, the chances of it blowing up are so slim as to be almost nonexistent... So, it should be safe no matter where I place it...

I guess... maybe the Battlemaster's side trosos are not as small as people claimed it to be, which means not as "XL safe" as I've heard the legends tell. (Really, I didn't have too many other places to put it, but I think I'll keep it there for now, and keep posting when I go POP here... maybe it will make a point?)

[Tesunie]

Died by Ammo explosion in my Dragon, right arm destruction. 8:50 Eastern time. (About 6-10 matches between deaths caused by Ammo.)

(I paint between matches.)

Edited by Tesunie, 22 January 2014 - 05:48 PM.

[Xanquil]

Your title is correct, but ammo explosion is not the thing that balanced ACs verses Energy. As it is, without fixing the real problems, ammo explosion is fine where it is.
As for the real problems there are many posts about them elsewhere.

[Yiazmat]

any real problem in the game is belatedly ignored by the dev team, so why not add more bandaids? it's all they're capable of.

[El Bandito]

My LRMander and Quad AC5 Jager welcomes the 100% ammo explosion on crit. Not that they will be in the thick of the battle anyway.

Edited by El Bandito, 23 January 2014 - 01:03 AM.

[Naduk]

This needs to happen
If it does and 100% turns out to be to high it can be dialed down bit by bit untill it finds it's sweet spot
Just like machine guns did

[Gaan Cathal]

Tesunie, on 21 January 2014 - 02:24 PM, said:

Once more, you are short cutting the math, as you also have chances of doing two crits and three crits in a single hit.
You have a 25% chance of getting a single crit.
You have a 16 % chance of getting two crits with the same hit.
You have a 3% chance of getting three crits with a single hit.

Herpaderp. I completely forgot that a single hit can produce multiple crits. (Why does that exist anyway?) You're right on straight summation to 42% not correctly representing that, I'd honestly been under the impression that a single 42% crit chance was the ingame mechanic.

That said, I'd rather a single crit chance per hit, and higher or absolute ammo explosion chance, simply because it reduces the influence of the RNG in the whole system.

[Joseph Mallan]

Toong, on 21 January 2014 - 07:16 PM, said:

You seem to be forgetting that TT also had random rolls for determining hit locations. In a system that favors an equal distribution of damage, 100% ammo explosions make a little more sense because by the time you risk getting crits to ammo, the 'mech is already very near death. In Mechwarrior Online, where players can consistently deal high damage to single sections of the 'mech, a 100% ammo explosion chance would result in a lot of very premature deaths.

Again, I don't think you're thinking this through.

Funny you'd think the "when you hit it" would enlighten you that I d understand the logistics of "random" But how can we have our Skillz but not want to pay the price for that accuracy? Second, we don't have visible Ammo to hit, it is RNG to determine so it is the same as TT as far as that goes.

Fire on Unarmored LT. Do damage to the structure. 18% chance to get a crit It is an Ammo hit... BOOM It is a Laser hit... dead laser! That is random enough for me and my 7 tons of ammo in an Atlas!

You forget I am playing MW:O and asking to blow up more... this isn't TT.

Edited by Joseph Mallan, 23 January 2014 - 04:30 AM.

[Ashvins]

I'd love to see 100% ammo explosion, damage from it should not be rounds left X type of round though. Say 20 per crit slot that explodes. So 5 tons ammo all critted 100 damage.

But if this were implemented I would also want to be able to dump my ammo as could be done in TT and every other Battletech/mechwarrior game.

[Joseph Mallan]

Right now AC Ammo does 150 damage per ton (AC20 is At 140 for obvious reasons). So each ton of Ammo should do 150 - rounds fires damage when it explodes! That means My Jager 40 would suffer a max of 560 damage if a bin was critted! That is a whole lotta BOOM! And would make for a spectacular death! That I would love watching on occasions!

[Toong]

Joseph Mallan, on 23 January 2014 - 04:29 AM, said:

Funny you'd think the "when you hit it" would enlighten you that I d understand the logistics of "random" But how can we have our Skillz but not want to pay the price for that accuracy? Second, we don't have visible Ammo to hit, it is RNG to determine so it is the same as TT as far as that goes.

Fire on Unarmored LT. Do damage to the structure. 18% chance to get a crit It is an Ammo hit... BOOM It is a Laser hit... dead laser! That is random enough for me and my 7 tons of ammo in an Atlas!

You forget I am playing MW:O and asking to blow up more... this isn't TT.

Your post isn't very well structured so I'm having a little difficulty understanding what you're trying to say, but I think what you're trying to say is that, since crits aren't guaranteed to hit ammo, it's okay for ammo to always explode when it does get hit. This is very shortsighted.

True, your ammo might be spared from any given critical hit. However, criticals are a very common occurrence (if memory serves it's something like 60% of all internal shots cause at least one crit), and with each roll a critical to ammo becomes much more likely. After as few as three or four criticals the chance of an explosion would be more likely than not. Explosions would become so much more likely, in fact, that in my opinion it would kill the viability of ballistics altogether, except possibly the gauss rifle (since it only does 30 points of damage upon explosion), and machine guns, for their crit seeking ability. As I've said before, making an entire class of weapons unviable is not gameplay balance; it is in fact the opposite.

As to your comment that I "forget [you are]playing MW:O and asking to blow up more... this isn't TT.", this is exactly my point. This isn't tabletop. What I don't understand is, if you also understand that this isn't tabletop, why are you trying to add tabletop features? This comment makes me honestly question if you're even reading what I say, or if you're just replying with reactionary posts simply because I disagree with you.

Edited by Toong, 23 January 2014 - 07:33 PM.

[Tesunie]

Toong, on 23 January 2014 - 07:33 PM, said:

However, criticals are a very common occurrence (if memory serves it's something like 60% of all internal shots cause at least one crit),

If my math serves me correct, it's a 44% chance to cause a crit, but a 66% total chance to crit internals in general due to the multiple crit rule, but I'm not being technical or anything here...


As far as ammo explosion chances, here's another perspective on the issue, from the "victims" point of perspective.
Let's take my Stalker for an example. Excluding factors such as armor and where it is place (I'll go into this later), my Stalker walks into a match with a total chance of exploding from ammo of 90% (9 tons of ammo, each with 10% chance of exploding that's 9x10%=90%). I can mitigate this to some extent by placing as much of my ammo crits into hard or less often hit locations, such as the arms, but the chance still remains. I only diminished the chances is all. Then, I have armor. I can place more armor (max) in those locations to try and prevent enemy fire from punching through to internals to score those deadly crits. However, most people already run max armor, so this doesn't really change much at all. The last thing I can do, while in a match, is to try and shift damage by rotating or staying out of the lines of fire. If I rotate, I'm still taking the chance those locations will get hit, but I can try to make my opponent hit a different spot instead. Another thing to factor is the thought that, as the match goes on my ammo count will probably drop. This also reduces the chance of my ammo exploding. However, it doesn't chance the fact that I start with a 90% chance of exploding at the start of the match. (LRMs would become even more risky than they are now, and a lot of players already consider them a "non-weapon".)

If I was to remake my Stalker for a TT game, I would probably have anywhere from 2-4 tons of LRM ammo (half the ammo), replace my SSRMs for SRM4s, and retain the one ton SRM ammo (I could probably also run the design with SHS in TT, or less DHS). With the less weight used for ammo, I could possibly drop Endo, and replace with cheaper FF. Already, I have halved the chance of my ammo exploding, as I have half the ammo in my mech. Half the ammo means less crits to go boom.

With the proposed explosion chance, with the need for double or even triple ammo values from TT (there is a reason I included my TT rough redesign of my Stalker), you would be asking me to walk into a match with a 900% chance of exploding base. This isn't the "chance to cause an explosion result in a single hit" but my mechs actual potential to explode within a single match. And even though it's total is 900%, that doesn't mean that I will always explode. However, it means I have a really high chance of it base. Other factors will help to reduce this chance, but the base fact is that it would be far more dangerous to run anything with ammo. This would only push the meta away from anything with ammo, and into anything with energy (SSRMs would probably be one of the few weapons to survive, as it can run well with 1 ton of ammo, and is still good for hunting lights).

All this suggestion would do is make energy weapons the meta. Don't believe me? See people's reactions to ghost heat? I see so many people chain fire 3 med lasers to "avoid the ghost heat" all the time. Ghost heat doesn't even apply till, what? Past 6? We would see this very same overreaction to this announcement. Just like we have seen to LRMs when they got reduced after LRMApocalypse version 2 (the non-"Artemis-to-the-head"). Or am I the only one who has seen this?

Edited by Tesunie, 23 January 2014 - 08:11 PM.

[ReXspec]

Colonel Pada Vinson, on 19 January 2014 - 01:24 AM, said:

you mean make CASE useful?

Who'da thunk?

Once people start aiming for ammo stockpiles, and Clan Tech C.A.S.E. comes out (which is zero tons and takes zero slots, btw) we'll be back to square one. People will start using Clan C.A.S.E. to protect their ammo, and their will continue to be crying.

Yiazmat, on 19 January 2014 - 01:22 AM, said:

Who'da thunk, eh? Here's how they did it: when your armor was breached, your ammo was exposed. when your ammo was hit/crit out, it detonated 100% of the time. None of this sissy-footing around that PGI has done with mwo's *EDIT not 20* 10% ammo detonation chance when crit out.

Think about it. "Oh. {Scrap}. here's a [insert most hated ammo dependent mech here]. he probably puts his ammo in his legs. he probably runs an xl engine to support all dem guns. and he probably shaved off a ton of armor off those chicken legs to fit 'moar' ammo." *gnaws on mechs legs*

BOOM!

suddenly the monsters with hella guns are walking time bombs about to go off. this should apply to all ammo types: ballistic, missile and ams.

"but, but Yiazmat, that wouldn't be fair, my ballistic mech is already paying the price for its guns with the xl, why make them weaker? " I'm not. I'm bringing them into line with the rest of the game. you want pinpoint damage and no heat? here, have an AC, but get ready to pay with weight and ammo EXPLOSIONS (inner Mr. Torgue popped out there sorry) If you want pinpoint damage and little weight, go with ppc's, but be prepared to pay for it in crippling heat and dead zones (or no dead zones and worse crippling heat) And if you want great weight and decent heat management, go for medium and large lasers (and be prepared to spread ze damage all over the target and that bs ghost heat).

TLDR, we need this little shift back to the game's roots to help balance out the game (I hate saying that but whatever). the best part is its really really really easy to do! An afternoon of shifting through the ammo crit code and changing all the values to 100%. nothing added. nothing new to program. ****, gimme access and I'll do it for free!

OP, if you want to "shift the games back to it's roots" you need more then just ammo explosions to balance this game...

- You need crosshair deviation per shot/while moving with ACs

- Decrease rate of fire down to TT values.

- Increase Armor Values up to TT standards.

- Have slot numbers in each body part of a 'mech represent 'mech design.

- Have ammo per ton reflect TT values.

If we implement these changes, I promise you we wouldn't see nearly as many as the balance grievances with ACs (and every other weapon system) that we are seeing today.

[Joseph Mallan]

Toong, on 23 January 2014 - 07:33 PM, said:

Your post isn't very well structured so I'm having a little difficulty understanding what you're trying to say, but I think what you're trying to say is that, since crits aren't guaranteed to hit ammo, it's okay for ammo to always explode when it does get hit. This is very shortsighted.

True, your ammo might be spared from any given critical hit. However, criticals are a very common occurrence (if memory serves it's something like 60% of all internal shots cause at least one crit), and with each roll a critical to ammo becomes much more likely. After as few as three or four criticals the chance of an explosion would be more likely than not. Explosions would become so much more likely, in fact, that in my opinion it would kill the viability of ballistics altogether, except possibly the gauss rifle (since it only does 30 points of damage upon explosion), and machine guns, for their crit seeking ability. As I've said before, making an entire class of weapons unviable is not gameplay balance; it is in fact the opposite.

As to your comment that I "forget [you are]playing MW:O and asking to blow up more... this isn't TT.", this is exactly my point. This isn't tabletop. What I don't understand is, if you also understand that this isn't tabletop, why are you trying to add tabletop features? This comment makes me honestly question if you're even reading what I say, or if you're just replying with reactionary posts simply because I disagree with you.

You don't seem to accept that I am an Ammo carrying beast. I average 7-8 tons of ammo. I think that if it gets hit My lil bit of a toon should explode in a loud and lovely manner. I am wanting to add ammo explosions cause they have a chance of happening due to the propellant held within each and every missile and ballistic shell I am carrying in my Mech... in this game. How easy or difficult it should be is up for debate as we don't have it in the game right now. If it feels like it happens to often I support it happening less, if (like now) it isn't happening enough, I support it happening more. I am not confusing TT with MW:O, But MW;O takes place in the BattleTech universe and in that Universe Ammo blows up spectacularly both when hit in combat and when a Mech rides it's heat to long and the ammo cooks off!

And yes, if ammo gets hit I want it to go boom. Even if it is mine! It is the risk I assume when I take ammo. As is there is no risk! Boring!

Edited by Joseph Mallan, 24 January 2014 - 07:03 AM.