Rifleman Archive
Thread: DXR-6b Disruptor Rifle and Armor Piercing
Message Edited by Rawauh on 08-03-2004 03:53 PM
I thought this was as it was designed. Has it been stated as a bug by a Dev or Correspondent? Would be nice to get that extra bonus...
Rawauh wrote:
ya, if something is vulnerable to a dmg type the armor piercing doesnt do any extra dmg, it is a bug and should be fixed, but it prob wont. this is t get rid of the armor rating that teh creature might have. vulnerability more or less renders a creatures armor to ar0 but gives no weapon bonus.
Message Edited by Rawauh on 08-03-2004 03:53 PM
Molveno wrote:
Heh, if i can hurt a resistant guy more than a vulnarable one, then it's simply, definitely a bug.
I love my disruptor and I really don't wanna switch back to laser after examining the mob and seeing he's vulnarable to acid. this is ridiculous...
XaverriJade7 wrote:
I thought this was as it was designed. Has it been stated as a bug by a Dev or Correspondent? Would be nice to get that extra bonus...
RozhlokLightningskull wrote:
Molveno wrote:
Heh, if i can hurt a resistant guy more than a vulnarable one, then it's simply, definitely a bug.
I love my disruptor and I really don't wanna switch back to laser after examining the mob and seeing he's vulnarable to acid. this is ridiculous...
I don't know if it is a bug. Lightsabers are AP2 and do lightsaber damage, which all things are vulnerable to. The Jedi community brought this issue to the attention of the devs, but, there was a never a fix for it. If this is a bug, as an MBH I hope they don't fix it, ever. That would mean a Jedi would do 56.25% (1.25^2)more damage to me and they already hit me hard enough! OUCH!
Although if the J3d3y3's have brought this up and it hasn't been fixed yet then maybe it's not a bug.
Logitition wrote:
It is NOT a bug.
About month 3 it was brought up and the devs clearly stated that it was 'working as intended'.(u can probably still find the post in the backlogs of the dev tracker)
It kinda makes sense if u look at it right.. Holow points are some of the best bullets to tear apart human flesh and make the most mess of them inflicting huge damage.. It is the WORST to use against body armor. Armor piercing ammo can cut through steel, if u are in war, it is actually BETTER to get hit by an armor piercing round due to the clean entrance and exit wounds due to the lack of shattering..
. I always just figured the armor piercing one had a bigger power supply.
Molveno wrote:
Heh, if i can hurt a resistant guy more than a vulnarable one, then it's simply, definitely a bug.
I love my disruptor and I really don't wanna switch back to laser after examining the mob and seeing he's vulnarable to acid. this is ridiculous...
The problem is, you are looking at only one side of the equation, how it affects higher AP. However, if the AR (armor rating) vs. AP (armor piecing) differences count when the target is vulnerable to the damage type, then, to be consistent, it would count both when the AP is higher than the AR and when it is lower. So take two instances: the DXR6B against a target with no armor, but that is vulnerable to acid damage, and another target that has heavy armor that is, likewise, vulnerable to acid damage.
If AP counts when the target is unarmored and vulnerable, I should get a 1.56 times (i.e., +56%) damage bonus for the medium armor piercing of the DXR6B vs. no armor and lose no damage because it has no resists. This is what people focus on when they call this a bug. But if AP counts, then going against the heavy armor target, I would get a 0.50 times (i.e., -50%) damage penalty against that target because it has a higher armor rating than my weapon. So while I would still lose no damage from resists, I would lose 50% of my damage due to AP vs. AR. How does that make sense? A target that is vulnerable to my damage type still reduces my damage by 50%?
On the other hand, as it currently works, if my DXR6B does a 500 point hit against the heavy armor target that is vulnerable to acid damage, I do 500 points of actual damage. I do not lose 50% of my damage due to armor, and that makes sense. The target is vulnerable, so it does not resist my damage at all. The vulnerabilityprevents the armor rating fromhelpingor hurting the damage.
Now, if the vulnerability allows 500 points of damage through heavy armor when it would normally be reduced by 50%, it is not unreasonable to expect that the exact same vulnerability in medium, light or even no armor would produce the same 500 points of damage. Same "resistance" factors, same results. In otherwords, the current system is consistent. If the target is vulnerable, you do the same amount of damage no matter what the AP vs. AR rating. When the target is not vulnerable, the armor and resistance factors come into play to determine how the weapon performs against the target's armor. Higher AP and lower resists equate to more damage. Lower AP and higher resists equate to lower damage. So while there is a big jump in damage going from vulnerable to 1% resists for higher AP, there is also a big damage lossgoing from vulnerable to 1% resists when the AP is lower. And that is reasonable.
Could they have handled it differently? Yes. It it a bug? No. It is a design choice that is certainly a reasonable way to handle it. Therefore, do not think of vulnerabilities as simply 1% less resistance to damage than a target with 1% resists, but as a different class of damage calculationaltogether. When looked at from all angles, it makes sense.