Because. ... Okay, I'll actually respond. A simple "side-based" system is just as flawed as many see this system to be, but in my opinion a simple side-based system is actually far more flawed than this system. The only truly accurate system would be so ungodly complex and evil that it would make servers cry. This is, in my opinion, a step in the right direction, even though it confuses people a bit. At the very least, it would be a good way to model splash damage from, say, a nuke or arty shell that hits near you. At the very most, it would be an interesting thing for some of the private version playtesters to take a swing at to see whether it improves things or is just a pain. Failing all else, it's an interesting mental exercise. And makes people think.
I understand you proposal fully, it's just that it seems to be trying to solve a problem that doesn't exist. The only reason for the inaccuracies in where the armor plates were was due to them not being properly defined in the scripts (or something simple like that, I recall). If you are hit on the front, you expect the damage to be done to the front, not spread out across different sides.
although that was also what I was trying to say, I can understand that it would seem more logical that at the edges of your armor, without the hit actually covering crossing over multiple plate, the damage should be spread over the 2 sides, a point where its closer to another armor plate than the actual hull (depending on how thick the armor is)
Using that, if you are hit straight on the front; the damage WILL go into the front armor 100% Corners is where this system takes the lead; currently its sort of 0 or 1 type of thing (You either hit that plate OR that one), with this a corner hit will be spread out over 2 plates as it should; instead of "Insta sniping" a single one
It seems to me that what it would do is make people frustrated. Your system simply gives order to the random issue that it is trying to fix. (did that make sense?) Let's consider the benefits of the current system from a thoughtful gameplay perspective: The primary benefit of seperate armor plates for each side, rather than different modifiers for a single variable, is that it makes the player think more about where his tank is and what it's doing. If you get shot at from the side, it does damage to that side. The obvious way to survive longer is, then, to turn a side of fresh armor towards your enemy. The bug, and frustration, with the AFV is that this thought process will not necessarily work: hitting on the side distributes damage to the rear. Turning a fresh plate of armor might not help you. Your idea, rather than fix what you put it forth to solve, makes it worse, because it generalizes this issue and applies it to the entire vehicle. Which, I would think, would increase the "OMG THAT LOOKED LIKE IT HIT MY FRONT BUT IT REALLY HIT MY SIDE?>!/1". comments.
If your enemy hits you dead center in that side, it will do ALL DAMAGE to that side (sin of zero degrees is zero, sin of 90 degrees is 1, cos of 0 degrees is 1, cos of 90 degrees is zero, do the math). If it hits CLOSE to the center on a side, the VAST MAJORITY of the damage will be dealt to that side, and only a little will escape to a different side. Thus, if it looked like it hit your front, chances are most of the damage will be dealt to your front. If it hits your front but damages your side more than your front, you're on crack because it actually hit your side more than it hit your front. In order for us to know how people would actually react, I think we'd need to see the system in action first.
I understand the corners thing, but when a shell hits 3/4 the way across an armour side, THEN it makes NO sense. the best solution would be to have another hitbox on each of the corners that devides damage to it between the two sides that it is adjacent too.
Let me assure you, I understand your system. The issue is that you systematize a flaw, rather than eradicate it. I will grant you that employing the system will show how people react to it, but I think we can get a pretty good idea by comparing what it does with what people currently bitch about. People complain that a strike on the side armor does significant damage to armor of a different side. In your system, strikes on a side will almost certainly deal damage to another side, and have a great chance of dealing significant damage to that other side. Furthermore, suppose a complete side of armor has been destroyed. Do you then take damage to the hull because someone hit your armor? That shoots the strategy of turning an undamaged side to hell. And what about buying armor? Since you can no longer rely on turning a given side to face the threat there is no purpose to customizing a tank with stronger armor on a certain side. This limits customizability and choice. Practically, how much more armor do you need to add to make the tank worth its price? And what can't you put on as a result?
Let's pretend I make a square out of four pieces of cardboard. Now I stab a corner, or anywhere for that matter, with a pencil. The box stays together, right? Now let's eliminate one side of the box. And stab one of the two exposed corners. -------------------- Next section -------------------- You seem to imply that you'll always be dealing huge-ass damage to two sides at once. This is false. The maximum damage you're capable of dealing under the system thus far is a sum of damages to two sides that equals the damage value of the shell itself. You're only capable of dealing equal damage to two sides at an angle of 45 degrees, which is to say, directly at a corner. Now, unless everyone becomes silly-skilled at shooting your corners, I doubt this will be a serious problem. I mean, people aiming for weakness certainly doesn't happen now. Not in the least, and certainly not in the most. I believe I mentioned earlier somewhere that you could also re-scale that funky rectangle most of the tanks make for the purposes of figuring out what angle something hit at. So, basically, if you hit someone near the middle of their armor plate, the vast majority of damage will be dealt to that plate. If you deal near the corner, most of the damage will happen to the impacted plate, but as you approach ever closer to the corner, the damage dealt to the side across the bend will approach equality with the impacted side. Once you're hitting the corner itself, you start dealing absolutely equal damage to both sides. -------------------- Next section -------------------- I've been wondering since the beginnings of page two if it might be a good idea to put forward a "small angle approximation", also known as "If the angle is less than such, the angle is zero". I'm surprised that no one suggested it. Makes me wonder how much thought went into discrediting an idea and how much went into seeing if it actually could be useful. Now for pretty pictures. --------------- pikchoor --------------- Dern. It doesn't seem to like me. I officially stab random things. Especially the fact that the jpeg version turned out larger than the png version, and yet I was allowed to upload the jpeg version. Discrimination, I say.
but that doesn't make sense! the only thing that this solution does is that now, if you hit it right in the corner, it deals damage to both armour plates. woo. but this could be done with the clever corner placed hitbox if it's really an issue. but think about it. if a shell hits you 1/4 of the way into an armour side, the adjecent armour REALLY WOULDN'T be damaged. an explosion wouldn't significantly wrap itself around the tank enough to cause damage. it's like saying that if you chuck a water balloon at a wall NEAR the corner of a house, the adjacent side also gets wet. well: it doesn't.
But we're not dealing in water balloons. If I, say, slammed a wrecking ball near the corner of the house, one side will sure as hell have a hole, and the other may decide it wants to be a tad weaker. And to Sandbag's suggestion of adding hitboxes to the corner: Sure, it'd work. I'd have no problem with putting even more arbitrary hitbox placements. The more hitboxes, the merrier. The more hitboxes, the more places for the AFV to happen again. I think this thread has gone on long enough and has forced people to actually THINK about some of the silliness issues that happen with armor. Mission accomplished. ... OR IS IT?
What happens to when the ovbjects are super long subs, or huge gunships? Does one long line of armor hold the entire side together? if not and it is split into segments, then what happens when that seam is hit? Does the engine pixel twich and decide which plate to magicly attribute ALL of the damage? This is a very good way to prepare for the future
More ideas, please. I will not relent in my task of making people think-ificate! Unless, of course, I actually manage to not miss one of those "omgahawtchixistalkingtome" opportunities.
First off its maths not math, second this is the most boring thread ever. (btw trigonometry isn't supposed to be fun)
