Jump to content


"test" lower rng


  • Please log in to reply
2 replies to this topic

Destraag #1 Posted 08 August 2019 - 05:06 AM

    Captain

  • Players
  • 40031 battles
  • 1,571
  • Member since:
    02-22-2014

Not a fan.

 

If this is a serious test... which I wonder

 

Then I would suggest and prefer we head in the direction of using a bell curve normal distribution similar to what we have for dispersion.

 

I would also like to see equipment or consumables added that either tighten or loosen the width of the bell curve. 

 

For example

 

lets say 85% of the values fall within 15% of the printed values.

 

equipment or consumable that loosens it up so 85% within 20% or tightens it to 85% within 10%.

 

This way extreme outlying values are still on the table but just less likely as opposed to completely removing them. Also adding modding equipment allows players a bit of customization. 

 

Further in this model armor either works or simply doesnt. making a lot of armor ineffective compared to before when it may have bounced x% of shots on low penetration rolls. Consider if armor is within 25% of blocking a shot offer damage dampening equal to the percent. something like... 

 

shot hits 100 pen against 99 armor... reduce to 50% damage

shot hits 112 pen against 99 armor... reduce to 75% damage

shot hits 125 pen or higher against 99 armor... full damage - 100% 

 

so good defensive play can still help even when taking damage.


Edited by Destraag, 08 August 2019 - 03:34 PM.

When a person resorts to attacking the other person rather than focusing on the issue (aka argumentum ad hominem), it becomes pretty clear they have nothing else to contribute and are wrong.


Z_X_GriizzlY #2 Posted 08 August 2019 - 10:55 AM

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 11509 battles
  • 278
  • [7ARMD]
  • Member since:
    09-29-2016
Interesting, so if you angle appropriately even in a tank like the conqueror with its weak hull theres a chance you could negate some of the damage as it wasn't just a flat full over penetration instead taking 75% damage for atleast trying to make it by angling and lowering how much they overpenetrated by?

This makes sense in my head whether what I have said makes sense to you guys I don't know lol I couldn't word it how the genius above did :s

I like this but it's more of a can it be done kind of question and of course how much development time and would it be worth the cost kind of thing, if it's cheaper to just tweak the current model then that's what smart business will probably do, although your idea sides likes a good improvement for the future.

Destraag #3 Posted 08 August 2019 - 04:00 PM

    Captain

  • Players
  • 40031 battles
  • 1,571
  • Member since:
    02-22-2014

View PostZ_X_GriizzlY, on 08 August 2019 - 05:55 AM, said:

I like this but it's more of a can it be done kind of question and of course how much development time and would it be worth the cost kind of thing, if it's cheaper to just tweak the current model then that's what smart business will probably do, although your idea sides likes a good improvement for the future.

 

Given they use the other model for accuracy/dispersion it is likely a usable function/method already exists and it would just be a matter of applying it in place of the random function. So its possible we are not talking about much development there just a chunk of testing. 

 

I think the biggest concern with this piece is if there is a higher resource consumption for using the new function.

 

On the damage dampening there might be some development concerns but I don't think this is too difficult to code and I would suspect they already have similar code for the HE ammo and explosion/ramming damage. 

 

I just hope they at least consider thinking along these lines before they move with major game changes.... it is likely they have but all we can do is post and wait for feedback. 

 

On the damage dampening they should also consider partial damage below pen to account for the other side of the coin damage that would have happened on high pen rolls.

 

shot hits with less than 75 pen against 99 armor... no damage/bounce etc - 0% 

shot hits 83 pen against 99 armor... reduce to 25% damage

shot hits 100 pen against 99 armor... reduce to 50% damage

shot hits 112 pen against 99 armor... reduce to 75% damage

shot hits 125 pen or higher against 99 armor... full damage - 100% 

 

Which would make orange reticle now mean partial damage instead of an unknown 0 or 100. 

 

 

 


Edited by Destraag, 08 August 2019 - 04:05 PM.

When a person resorts to attacking the other person rather than focusing on the issue (aka argumentum ad hominem), it becomes pretty clear they have nothing else to contribute and are wrong.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users