49 replies to this topic

[WM Atimar]

So im wondering what type of damage a weapon does if you hit under range ? Example :

AC/20 has a Range of 270 and Max Range of 810

how exactly does damage work if you hit at a range of 50 or a range of 710 for example.. anyone know how this works..

Edited by Atimar, 24 June 2012 - 04:43 PM.

[Nacon]

AC/20 doesn't just appear out of thin air, you know... Why would it have minimum range? It would be from where the barrel is toward the max range.

[Tymanthius]

IRL, Min Range is usually Min Effective Range. Take a Howitzer. It CAN shoot point blank, much like a tank. They even practice it at gunnery. However, it's not nearly as accurate/effective.

Not sure how this would be implemented in game.

edit:
Oh, and the under-barrel grenade launcher on an m-16 has a min range too. If the grenade doesn't spin enough times, it won't explode on impact.

Edited by Tymanthius, 24 June 2012 - 04:53 PM.

[WM Atimar]

Ya I been trying to test this on the AC/20 and from the feel of things if your real close your not getting your max damage.. I could be wrong however.. just wondering if theres any info on this

[Ravendreams]

Atimar, on 24 June 2012 - 04:54 PM, said:

Ya I been trying to test this on the AC/20 and from the feel of things if your real close your not getting your max damage.. I could be wrong however.. just wondering if theres any info on this

What game are you testing this on? If your a Beta Tester you shouldn't be posting here, if its MW2-4 then I wouldn't count that information as to useful due to who knows what the devs will choose to use for the final damage numbers.

I've heard somewhere that the TT stuff is just a set of guidelines that they are using, but not going to be the end all of the weapons. But since the game isn't released yet I really have no idea what the weapons are going to do.

[BFalcon]

I would like under-range LRMs to "KLANG!!!" off the hull because they've not armed yet - that would be a nice touch, but might slow things down unnecessarily.

[Joseph Mallan]

TROOOOOOOLLLLLLL!

810 Meters is 27 hexes! AC20 has a long range of a paltry 270 meters! Oh yeah... Advanced Extreme range rules! Dang it I have been out of the game for to long!

Edited by Joseph Mallan, 24 June 2012 - 05:14 PM.

[GHQCommander]

I read this games maximum range is about 650. Not based on canon and it can't be either due to the nature of the game.

I understand you mean effective range. Read nothing on that at all and I'm going to guess due to the range being shortened they may not have an effective range. It would result in the need for very close combat.

Meaning players with a lot of LRM would dish out serious damage before taking any, especially if they keep moving backwards while fire. This is just a guess but I would be no effective range exists.

Joseph Mallan, on 24 June 2012 - 05:09 PM, said:

TROOOOOOOLLLLLLL!

This is doing my head in, who are the silly people who just post troll everywhere. They are clueless as to what a troll is for a start and in doing so they are actually the troll by ruining someones thread.

Mods can you please warn these people. It is totally pointless for such posts to be made.

[BFalcon]

GHQCommander, on 24 June 2012 - 05:14 PM, said:

I read this games maximum range is about 650. Not based on canon and it can't be either due to the nature of the game.

I understand you mean effective range. Read nothing on that at all and I'm going to guess due to the range being shortened they may not have an effective range. It would result in the need for very close combat.

Meaning players with a lot of LRM would dish out serious damage before taking any, especially if they keep moving backwards while fire. This is just a guess but I would be no effective range exists.

I would hope that they've stuck to the TT rules ranges - changing them would alter the balance of the game as much as altering the armour amounts would.

[GHQCommander]

BFalcon, on 24 June 2012 - 05:17 PM, said:

I would hope that they've stuck to the TT rules ranges - changing them would alter the balance of the game as much as altering the armour amounts would.

I think the range has been changed for good reason. Like many have said already, they can't put the entire TT into the game. The TT doesn't have roles and information warfare like this game does.

Think about it. Players can target enemy mechs without having a line of site due to scouts. That is just one example. Whatever they are doing, it's not for laughs it needs to be done and is being well tested.

[Joseph Mallan]

GHQCommander, on 24 June 2012 - 05:14 PM, said:

I read this games maximum range is about 650. Not based on canon and it can't be either due to the nature of the game.

I understand you mean effective range. Read nothing on that at all and I'm going to guess due to the range being shortened they may not have an effective range. It would result in the need for very close combat.

Meaning players with a lot of LRM would dish out serious damage before taking any, especially if they keep moving backwards while fire. This is just a guess but I would be no effective range exists.



This is doing my head in, who are the silly people who just post troll everywhere. They are clueless as to what a troll is for a start and in doing so they are actually the troll by ruining someones thread.

Aww come on that's the first time in 11 years on forums that I have ever called out a troll! So chill. AC 2's are the long gun in the game AC20 is a up close and personal gut buster! Clueless? 1986 start date into this universe, I played the Computer games up to the original MechCommander. Clueless I am not

[SlasH58]

The original point on effective damage at minimum (point blank in this case?) and maximum range is still valid. Like any weapon; the closer to the effective maximim range the target is, the less damage inflicted. I personally don't think I'd like to test the point blank affect on a mech if it's coming at me...

[BFalcon]

GHQCommander, on 24 June 2012 - 05:22 PM, said:

I think the range has been changed for good reason. Like many have said already, they can't put the entire TT into the game. The TT doesn't have roles and information warfare like this game does.

Think about it. Players can target enemy mechs without having a line of site due to scouts. That is just one example. Whatever they are doing, it's not for laughs it needs to be done and is being well tested.

The longer-range ACs are lightweight, so not too dangerous and the target would have plenty of time to move out the way and change vector, so long-rang shots aren't likely to be a problem - but this *is* conjecture, so...

And I think that ACs would be kinda hard to aim without some kind of LOS, unless you were firing over a hill that only *just* hid the target... and even then it would be touch and go...

As for the testing - I trust them to get it right - I just hope that they don't cripple certain weapons (and hence designs) by shortening the ranges though - it's a complex issue.

[ScientificMethod]

GHQCommander, on 24 June 2012 - 05:22 PM, said:

I think the range has been changed for good reason. Like many have said already, they can't put the entire TT into the game. The TT doesn't have roles and information warfare like this game does.

Think about it. Players can target enemy mechs without having a line of site due to scouts. That is just one example. Whatever they are doing, it's not for laughs it needs to be done and is being well tested.

TT has rules for line of sight games, they weren't used much because it was a pain and required a GM just to rule on who had line of sight on who. If you played anything more than 1v1 or 2v2 with experienced players you would see the role and (if you've ever tried playing TT with line of sight) information warfare you're talking about.

Edit: Don't play TT with line of sight rules, it's the easiest way to get a headache.

Edited by ScientificMethod, 24 June 2012 - 05:34 PM.

[Joseph Mallan]

SlasH58, on 24 June 2012 - 05:33 PM, said:

The original point on effective damage at minimum (point blank in this case?) and maximum range is still valid. Like any weapon; the closer to the effective maximim range the target is, the less damage inflicted. I personally don't think I'd like to test the point blank affect on a mech if it's coming at me...

It would be valid... IF an AC20 had one. Minimum ranges only affect targeting mods, not damage output. Same for extreme range, Unless they are going to also add the glancing blow rules and such.

[Cole Christensen]

I'm sorry, is "min range" a carry-over from the table-top game (I've never played)? There should be no "min range" in MWO except for missiles which need a certain space to launch (which is just like real-life). Projectile weapons should be able to hit at point-blank and still do max damage since the round has its maximum velocity exiting the barrel and only slows down from there.

Theoretically, shooting at point blank should cause the most damage.

[ScientificMethod]

There is no minimum range for the AC20

http://www.sarna.net/wiki/AC-20

[Stonewall]

GHQCommander, on 24 June 2012 - 05:22 PM, said:

I think the range has been changed for good reason. Like many have said already, they can't put the entire TT into the game. The TT doesn't have roles and information warfare like this game does.

Think about it. Players can target enemy mechs without having a line of site due to scouts. That is just one example. Whatever they are doing, it's not for laughs it needs to be done and is being well tested.

There are TT rules for Indirect fire, however strict adherence the TT rules would indeed be folly. Back to the point of the thread: One can assume that weapons with minimum ranges (not AC/20) will be less or not effective inside said minimum range. At this point like most other topics we can only speculate.

Edited by Stonewall, 24 June 2012 - 05:43 PM.

[ScientificMethod]

Stonewall, on 24 June 2012 - 05:41 PM, said:

There are TT rules for Indirect fire, however strict adherence the TT rules would indeed be folly. Back to the point of the thread: One can assume that weapons with minimum ranges (not AC/20) will be less or not effective inside said minimum range. At this point like most other topics we can only speculate.

We've already seen that the lrm's simply won't lock-on within the minimum range. How many other weapons with a minimum range are there?

[BFalcon]

ScientificMethod, on 24 June 2012 - 05:45 PM, said:

We've already seen that the lrm's simply won't lock-on within the minimum range. How many other weapons with a minimum range are there?

Actually, I hadn't - where was this?