Quote:
Originally Posted by Fenring
Noticeably, yes, there would. A lot of vehicle weapons have some sort of cell spread on them, most <1 cell, but you would see a drop in damage on every vehicle, rendering them weaker than usual. Probably not a good thing. But the spread isn't enough to warrant removal really.
|
Actually dropping cellspread would not alter damage vs vehicles one single bit. the vehicle itself, game-logic-wise, occupies the center lepton of the cell, and that center lepton only. The vehicle does not occupy the outer leptons of the cell like a building does (it occupies the entire cell). Thus, wherever on the cell the warhead hits, it takes the damage value of that warhead only once, and it will take the PercentAtMax (or whatever the exact flag is, i forgot) value for the cellspread radius for whatever damage it calculated at the exact center of the cell the vehicle occupies. if it's on the move, then the center is wherever the center of the voxel is.
Quote:
|
That's the thing. Even if you removed the cell spread, the structure would still take damage because that vehicle occupies a cell occupied by a structure. The cell spread is irrelevant at this point.
|
yes, that's true. i perhaps worded my sentance wrong and misleaded you/truefeel in to believing thats what i meant, but yes, the cellspread logic has not much bearing here.
Quote:
|
Bear in mind that this logic was put into place in Tiberian Sun and is not new to Red Alert 2. The graphical drawing changed but the way damage is handled did not change and the reason why it damages the way it does is the continuity of the beam since Disruptors in Tiberian Sun damaged everything in their path, often multiple times per.
|
the logic is actually somewhat different. the concept is similar, but the reason the dolphin's weapon is so powerful is because the actual speed of the warhead depends on the distance it must travel (technically this is similar to the TS disrutpror beam as well, but bear with me). Unlike the TS disruptor beam, which was a steady, constant beam, the dolphin's was something of a projectile. This 'projectile' damages everything it is touching at certain intervals (it damages something like every 1-2 frames). the disruptor did this similarly, but the prime difference was that if a dolphin is standing closer to an object, its projectile moves slower, meaning the beam is on the object for more time, and this can lead to
drastically increased damage compared to if it fired at long range. The TS disruptor beam touched everything in its path equally, and applied damage equally to all of those things no matter how close or far it was away.
And not to say that the TS sonic logic couldn't have been improved. If they made it only damage each building it touched once, and made it still able to damage units, you would get a very similar effect, but it would be MUCH easier to balance in the long run. That would mean it did a set amount of damage, instead of a damage amount that was basically case-specific. Same thing here with the dolphin sonic logic.
Like I said earlier, my image of the perfect sonic logic is that of RA3's dolphin and CNC3's sonic emitter.
Quote:
|
Again, I must reiterate that this has nothing do with EA and everything to do with Westwood and the game's damage calculation functions. No INI modification will ever 'fix' Sonic weapons or anything with warheads. There's nothing to fix since it works as intended.
|
it works "as intended," but they could have
improved the logic to serve the same purpose and be yet better balanced.
Sorry my former use of the word "fix" was misleading, but yes, it was never broken, it just needs improvement.
Alchemy
Linear Mode
