153 replies to this topic

[Joseph Mallan]

Solis Obscuri, on 06 December 2012 - 07:16 AM, said:

But the damage is concentrated in an area relative to the diameter of the projectile, yes?

From the description of the 7/12 change, it sounds like an AC/20 or Gauss round was, at the time, being treated as though it were only the size of a single particle, and this was creating some gameplay issues, so the system was modified to treat the projectile as though it were roughly the size of a medicine ball or a watermelon - which doesn't sound too far off from canon for the cannon, if you'll excuse the pun.

Ok. That is a beast of a different verity. I understand the difference in what you are saying, and what I was reading. And Yes, it does chance how I see the issue. Damage hits with a bigger fist, thus damages a larger area, but it is not conical Area of Effect "spread".

Thanks for the explanation.

[Naitsirch]

Bitslizer, on 06 December 2012 - 07:31 AM, said:

You guys are understanding this wrong.

This was put in because Projectile have a problem of not landing hits correctly(ie shot would clip/pass through target in closed beta), increasing the collison radius make the hit register correctly.


This doesnt "SPREAD" damage from a SINGLE PROJECTILE. it just make it more likely when you are shooting multiple ballistics in an alpha strike that the multiple projectiles end up hitting different location instead of all projectiles landing pin point damage on one location. Each individual projectiles still do all the damage to the location it hit, just that not all projectiles may hitting the same location

You are correct, but that is not the point that causes the disturbances. Aside from the 0,25m-thing there seems to be an additional spread implemented, unrelated to the 0,25m.
Let's say:
0,25m collision-model
AND
dmg-spread
Those are the 2 subjects of the thread, with the former being thrown in on the first pages, but not being the main topic.

[Bitslizer]

Viper69, on 06 December 2012 - 07:37 AM, said:

Would not appear the case from his tests. We are going to test tonight on single shot to static targets.

Perhaps their wire frames need their collisions reworked not the projectile. If i hit the CT dead center it should only register CT. That is what we will test. Hopefully we have documentation tonight on range incrimination and slug size. Lets not get too worked up until we have some results please.

I was playing Dual AC20 cat last night and I did not notice "damage spread" if i'm single firing them. So from my own test I did not see damage spread

[Bitslizer]

Naitsirch, on 06 December 2012 - 07:39 AM, said:

You are correct, but that is not the point that causes the disturbances. Aside from the 0,25m-thing there seems to be an additional spread implemented, unrelated to the 0,25m.
Let's say:
0,25m collision-model
AND
dmg-spread
Those are the 2 subjects of the thread, with the former being thrown in on the first pages, but not being the main topic.

point of impact = collision radius

just worded differently

[mekabuser]

christ no, please say this isnt the case. The whole point of me playing mw is that my guns go where i fire them. If they are so concerned about people crying they got one shot then implement
BULLET DROP.
there ,,, end of story... No self respecting pilot will EVER complain about that mechanic.

this goes back to that bs cof shiite that the tt nerds were qq about. This isnt TT, this is Supposed to be a skill based game

[Bubba Wilkins]

von Bremerhaven, on 06 December 2012 - 07:21 AM, said:

Exactly. That's what disappointed me, the visuals, sound and damage placement were not what I would have expected. And yes, the variable is something of a band-aid to cover the poor initial design, and somewhat unfair.

Caveat: Not that I am losing sleep over not being one-shotted as much

I've never pictured AC's to be a machine gun. More like a flak gun or large bore artillery. I think they nailed it.

What your describing is more like an RAC which is a Rotary AutoCannon. Basically you take 3-6 AC's and stick them on a rotating assembly like a Gatling gun. Then you will see fire rates closer to machine gun type.

[Irreverence]

I see the sky is falling for the 8th time this week.

[JadeViper]

Only LBXac should have spread. I could kinda see an argument for Gause and AC/20 as those rounds are massive, and I can realistically see a gause/AC20 round impact being spread around the hit spot.

But Machine guns, AC2, AC5, U/AC5, AC10 should be point only. If they are making MG's and AC2 spread, every dev should be strung up.

I note that I love ballistics. I love the skill they require. I love leading a target and calculating drop in my head. They are ammo limited and hard to use. My favorite rig runs 2 MGs and 2 U/AC5s. U/AC5s jam to boot, making them harder to run. I sincerely hope I'm not getting nerfed. I can by no means 1/shot a target, but with talent and and tactics, I can nail a target hard and fast if they walk into my trap and get a kill. Now I can't core a light standing still, and lose to an XL Awesome despite strong aim at L/RT. XL engines are now safe to run.

No, I havn't playtested recently to see if I actually am nerfed. Maybe my guns are fine. But the thought scares me.

Edited by JadeViper, 06 December 2012 - 08:03 AM.

[Lil Cthulhu]

Was playing around with my Dual AC/20 Cat last night and was having no problems getting headshot kills.
Hell, I even got a clean one-shot kill off on an Atlas.

[DaZur]

Thontor, on 06 December 2012 - 07:17 AM, said:

While I don't have a problem with this damage spread, if it did change, I do have a problem with it not being mentioned in the patch notes or something.

The devs really need to get a handle on what changes are being made. I doubt they are leaving stuff out intentionally, its just there are so many people making changes to stuff all the time I can see how it could be hard to keep track of every little thing..

But they need to get better at it...

In fairness... I thing they are leaving specific bits out. We've seen the *****-storms that have been created when they announce various balance changes... Imagine what these forums would look like if "every" change in bits and bytes was announced!

Sometimes Devs (particularly in beta) slip phantom updates to effectively test stuff to gauge end results...

[mekabuser]

Thontor, on 06 December 2012 - 07:50 AM, said:

There is already bullet drop for Autocannons.

And your bullets still go where they are fired. But since they are explosive rounds, the damage isn't always focused on a single section of the mech.

there is bullet drop? really?,, I run an ac10 cicada and ive never noticed any kind of bullet drop at all. I routinely fire rounds down range , even beyond max distance just for the hell of it because i pack 60 rounds. Unless I subconsciously account for it, but I am 99% sure there is none.. If there is any.......... its like 1% of the bullet drop for ac rounds in mwll.
Lets put it this way, I am positive ive never aimed OVER a mech downrange.

[Bacilus]

[color="#b27204"]J4ckInthebox[/color]<p class="author_info">

Member

Posted Today, 04:45 AM

WHY THE **** THAT GAME-CHANGING TWEAK WAS NOT IN THE ******** PATCHNOTE !



^^^^!!!!!

[bobthebomb]

WHATTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT ?

[Levi Porphyrogenitus]

A few points not directly related to the OP but relevant to certain aspects of the ensuing conversation.

1 - Bullet drop is in. All of the ACs and the Gauss all have projectile drop (don't think the PPCs do). It is less noticeable for the higher velocity projectiles, though, as the drop occurs at the same rate but since the faster round is farther away it is harder to see the effect.

2 - AC rounds are not armor piercing kinetic penetrators. They are more akin to HEAP or HEAT rounds. True KEP won't be in until they add special munitions, specifically the Armor Piercing rounds. These will allow for through-armor internal damage and potential critical hits (and by rights ought to be nearly pinpoint in damage application), while the standard AC ammo does indeed carry an explosive payload and, given the nature of Battletech armor (science fiction ablative materials that do a super good job of absorbing and spreading received energies) having damage spread a bit is not unreasonable.

3 - Though I doubt I can find the reference (the old CB forums are inaccessible, yes?) I have a recollection that some time about midway through CB they added splash damage to PPCs and ACs (and missiles, for that matter), which they subsequently nerfed with regard to heads because it meant near-misses were headshotting people too readily (now it's something like 25% of received damage from splash). My impression was that the point of impact would suffer full damage and bonus damage would be applied to nearby locations, but I could be wrong (and that would have been quite the buff to high-damage single-location guns).

[Glythe]

On the one hand this does make light mechs more powerful.... and that's messed up. Lights are supposed to be one hit kills with a double AC/20 setup because it's hard to make that double hit actually land. It would be about the same thing if Assault mechs had to have their front armor stripped before lights could hurt their back armor.

On the other hand..... mechs that use double Gauss or AC/20 lead to such a cheap build design that it is frustrating to fight them with anything.

Solutions?

1) Disable dual AC/20 or Gauss rifles and then allow for concentrated damage again. Make them carry one of each or whatever (you'll mess up the tonnage with ammo costs and the heat)

2) Leave it as it is and do something to nerf lights who are flipping insane if they have ECM or run with an ECM buddy. Maybe we can have coding to prevent ballistic damage spread on lights specifically?

[Joseph Mallan]

I played Tt for a long time. I even play tested many of the present rules. I don't remember playing or even reading such rules for TT. This doesn't mean they don't exist, I didn't test them all.

[Undead Bane]

Glythe, on 06 December 2012 - 08:11 AM, said:

On the one hand this does make light mechs more powerful.... and that's messed up. Lights are supposed to be one hit kills with a double AC/20 setup because it's hard to make that double hit actually land. It would be about the same thing if Assault mechs had to have their front armor stripped before lights could hurt their back armor.

On the other hand..... mechs that use double Gauss or AC/20 lead to such a cheap build design that it is frustrating to fight them with anything.

Solutions?

1) Disable dual AC/20 or Gauss rifles and then allow for concentrated damage again. Make them carry one of each or whatever (you'll mess up the tonnage with ammo costs and the heat)

2) Leave it as it is and do something to nerf lights who are flipping insane if they have ECM or run with an ECM buddy. Maybe we can have coding to prevent ballistic damage spread on lights specifically?

First, please, leave "Nerf Gaussapults" idea out of this post.
Second, you should see Annihilator build. You will like it.

[Undead Bane]

By the way, the more feedback on the case - the better. If someone can cooperate and test it and post info here - that would be much appreciated.

[Gowan]

I have been pretty successful with my AC/20 and PPCs lately. I could see this being frustrating, but at the same, time, I haven't personally noticed the damage spread.

Granted, I could see this being frustrating, but I've dumped more than few hours into the game since the patch, and I haven't noticed a significant change in damage saturation, so as far as I'm concerned, this is currently a non-issue.

Still, I feel for you OP -- nothing as discouraging as firing a kill shot that refuses to kill something.

EDIT: I'll be running a few matches today, I'll see if I can scare up a Whackapult willing to put a couple rounds on my cockpit hitbox while I'm at it.

Edited by Gowan, 06 December 2012 - 09:22 AM.

[Krivvan]

Glythe, on 06 December 2012 - 08:11 AM, said:

On the one hand this does make light mechs more powerful.... and that's messed up. Lights are supposed to be one hit kills with a double AC/20 setup because it's hard to make that double hit actually land. It would be about the same thing if Assault mechs had to have their front armor stripped before lights could hurt their back armor.

I think spreading out the damage actually makes lights far weaker. Few people are able to actually consistently land hits on a single part of a moving light mech (blame lagshield if you desire). Having the spread means that you're more likely to actually destroy a single already damaged component of a light mech rather than having to work through every part of it.

Basically, if I had a red critical side torso in a Jenner before, then I still wouldn't care because it's unlikely anyone will get another shot on that torso. Now I'd be even more scared of streaks and ballistics putting out just enough damage to destroy that spot.

Edited by Krivvan, 06 December 2012 - 09:20 AM.