Rifleman Archive
Thread: Can some explain the reasoning: less damage when vul to my t21?
Page 1 of 1
WookieOgre
Mon May 03, 2004 10:02 am
#1
I just mastered Rifleman 2 days ago, hologrinding. This is a great profession. My question, I just want an answer if its broken in the calculations or was this intended from the devs. If its intended, it makes absolutely no sense to me.
T-21 has ap3. When I was grinding I found if a mob had 10-20% resists to energy I still got huge bonus damage every hit. Well I like to switch mobs every now and then to make sure its not too borning when i grind. Know I found a mob that is vul to energy and gives good xp. Only problem is Im doing much less damage than when I was hitting a mob that had actual resists to my gun. I noticed if I hit a mob vul to energy the damage is exactly what the combat log says. Meaning, I hit for 1200 and that was the final damage. Where as if I fought a mob with 20% resists for 1200 my actual damage was like 1900-2000!!!!
How does this make sense? If something is vul to your attack why does it doless damage in some cases (I realize ap3 would be good when they have med-heavy armor or high 75% resists)? I never noticed this problemin any of the other combat professions because I mostly used light ap weapons.
Barb-Wire
Mon May 03, 2004 10:24 am
#2
there is a error in the damage formula that prevents armour piercing from working on vulnerable creatures. so basically being vulnerable to energy is like armour to a weapon that relies on AP for its damage.
a creature vulnerable to energy makes a T21 do straight damage as displayed with no adjustment. it basically turns a T21 into a AP0 weapon or makes the creature have heavy armour. however you care to think about it.
WookieOgre
Mon May 03, 2004 10:47 am
#3
Wow, and the devs haven't fixed this?
I'm not saying this is devastating to Rifleman, still think this profession works better than any Ranged profession in the game but this doeseffect all guns ap1-3 and flat out just doesnt make any sense.
What did the devs tell you guys/girls, wait until the combat rebalance lol. Oh well, I probably have to drop Rifleman anyways but I thought I was going crazy when doing less damage against this little cl20 mob than a cl50 mob.
Barb-Wire
Mon May 03, 2004 11:03 am
#4
they dont think it does. even though it has been proven by some folks that did a LOT of testing and backed it up with facts figures and formulas. but it is not a problem inherent to T21. it affects every weapon with a AP rating of 1 or higher regardless of damage type. if the creature your fighting is resistant to the damage type your doing then AP has an effect. if the creature is vulnerable to that damage type it is as if the creature had no armour and the weapon was AP0. vulnerability bug only really effects T21 and lasers and only on a few critters worth killing.
after all there are only 12 creatures over level 25 that are vulnerable to energy. 4 of them are 50-56 all of which live on endor. so it really isnt a huge issue just use your DXR6B instead on those few. the bug actually helps in most aspects when your not talking about the T21.
Sotaudi
Mon May 03, 2004 11:43 am
#5
You get less damage in this case because, when a target is vulnerable to the damage type, armor and resistance calculations are bypassed. Since armor differences are ignored, you lose the armor piericing (AP) bonus whenarmor rating (AR) of thetargetis less than theAP of the weapon. And that is frustrating.
But consider this. If armor is taken into account when the target is vulnerable and the AP of the weapon is higher than the AR of the target, then it would also be taken into account when AP is less than AR and the target is vulnerable.And that wouldmake even lesssense. If the target is vulnerable to the damage type, then why should an AP0 (no armor piercing) value weapon have reduced damage because the target is AR3 (heavy armor)? If it is vulnerable, then it is vulnerable, and armor should not block the damage at all. And, so, they bypass armor and resists when the target is vulnerable. That means that, when a target is vulnerable, we lose the bonus when AP is greater than AR, but we gain because we also lose the penalty when AR is greater than AP.
This does create a logical problem, but it is they way they chose to handle the differences when AP is less than AR. It would make more sense that a vulnerable target is considered to have AP0, and armor and resists are then calculated normally against this level of armor, but that would mean that we get an AR3 vs AP0 bonus, and they may consider that a double bonus. For instance, an AP3 weapon against a heavy armor target would go from doing straight damage reduced by the resists to 1.95 times the damage with no reduction from resists. And that isa big jump. Justifiable, but maybe more than they want.
Barb-Wire
Mon May 03, 2004 5:06 pm
#6
Geddeo wrote:
What is funny is the dev response when Volsted and others gave them combat spam data to prove this was happening. The dev basically said you are wrong, AP and Resists do not work this way.
According to the dev response at the time, AP does not add dmg when the AP is over the AR, instead it lowers the resistance. So instead of working like they describe it in the manual (ap adds 1.25x dmg for every 1 ap over the ar and AR decreases dmg by 50% for every 1AR over AP), they think it works and stated that they changed it so that AP decreases the resistance of the target. Anybody who plays the game knows that it works the way described in the manual, but the devs think it works different.
In the end there was a huge post and most riflemen agreed that we liked AP to add dmg instead of decreasing resistances. We know how it works and like how it works and seem to be the only profession that notices anyway. We soon realized in the thread that we were asking the devs to make a change we didn't want just to prove we were right about AP and AR so we "forgot" about the issue and let the devs think everything works as intended.
Message Edited by Geddeo on 05-03-2004 12:11 PM
you said it better than me *applaud* this is one bug we prefer to keep.
Geddeo
Tue May 04, 2004 12:11 am
#7
What is funny is the dev response when Volsted and others gave them combat spam data to prove this was happening. The dev basically said you are wrong, AP and Resists do not work this way.
According to the dev response at the time, AP does not add dmg when the AP is over the AR, instead it lowers the resistance. So instead of working like they describe it in the manual (ap adds 1.25x dmg for every 1 ap over the ar and AR decreases dmg by 50% for every 1AR over AP), they think it works and stated that they changed it so that AP decreases the resistance of the target. Anybody who plays the game knows that it works the way described in the manual, but the devs think it works different.
In the end there was a huge post and most riflemen agreed that we liked AP to add dmg instead of decreasing resistances. We know how it works and like how it works and seem to be the only profession that notices anyway. We soon realized in the thread that we were asking the devs to make a change we didn't want just to prove we were right about AP and AR so we "forgot" about the issue and let the devs think everything works as intended.
According to the dev response at the time, AP does not add dmg when the AP is over the AR, instead it lowers the resistance. So instead of working like they describe it in the manual (ap adds 1.25x dmg for every 1 ap over the ar and AR decreases dmg by 50% for every 1AR over AP), they think it works and stated that they changed it so that AP decreases the resistance of the target. Anybody who plays the game knows that it works the way described in the manual, but the devs think it works different.
In the end there was a huge post and most riflemen agreed that we liked AP to add dmg instead of decreasing resistances. We know how it works and like how it works and seem to be the only profession that notices anyway. We soon realized in the thread that we were asking the devs to make a change we didn't want just to prove we were right about AP and AR so we "forgot" about the issue and let the devs think everything works as intended
.Message Edited by Geddeo on 05-03-2004 12:11 PM
Page 1 of 1