November 18, 2007 at 5:29 pm #6067
MIRV dont follow cenrtal trajectory.
After apex mirv splits normaly – one half up and one half down,
but later bomblets start shifting forward from the cental path.
At ground they missed completely the hit point.
i ve noticed this effect after making corections.
Normaly if you missed the first mirv shoot – the next shoot adjustment is done relative to the central hit spot of the mirv, but then you miss again. 😆November 18, 2007 at 6:24 pm #46908
its the same with Death heads aswell, they push forward when splitting.
i think it should be like that, makes it a little harder to use them.November 18, 2007 at 8:08 pm #46909
Those are excellent screen-shots. I disagree with Peanuts — this must be fixed. All shots should land at the same exact spot regardless of the weapon type.November 18, 2007 at 8:58 pm #46910
I found that putting in a WeaponVelocity with a relative velocity change of 0.83 or so just before the split in the weapon will cause MIRVs to roughly behave like they used to. Not a permanent solution, but can be used to work around this issue for now.November 19, 2007 at 5:35 pm #46911
If anything, shouldn’t they go back from the projectile? Or couldn’t you just tweak it on the Xml end? Depends on how you make your mirvs, sure, but if instead of using the Mirv tag itself, just make it manual, I will look at some negative number fun later in the day.November 19, 2007 at 8:19 pm #46912
@The AI wrote:
If anything, shouldn’t they go back from the projectile? Or couldn’t you just tweak it on the Xml end? Depends on how you make your mirvs, sure, but if instead of using the Mirv tag itself, just make it manual, I will look at some negative number fun later in the day.
Funny thing is, I was doing it manually in Apoc instead of using WeaponMirv and it does the same thing either way unless you put the velocity change and slow it down a bit.November 19, 2007 at 9:01 pm #46913
I found out something odd, when you change the Vspread, it uses the out most shot as a guide. Set it to zero and it is still farther forward. The thing that is more strange, set it to two, with ten projectiles, and compare that to a normal shot… really odd. I also found out that an uneven spread to projectile results in a unbalanced amount of projectiles, one or more are doubled while the others are not.November 21, 2007 at 3:23 pm #46914
Man I’m glad that someone else pointed this out. I thought that I was either going insane, or losing anything left of my edge.
I guess I’m sorta torn if this should be fixed. On one hand, I (and most everyone else, I’m sure) am used to v40 MIRVs. It allows you to damage area on both sides of the impact point without adjusting your aim. The v41 MIRV forces you to readjust in order to do damage on both sides of the impact point…..
On the other hand, it wouldn’t be too hard to adapt to the new system.
Yep, superb documentary shots, naka.November 21, 2007 at 4:47 pm #46915
I don’t understand why this is a problem. I noticed it and I have to adjust my shots for the new spread. (now you have to undershoot them instead of overshooting) But kudos on the pics that really shows the spread of the mirvs.November 21, 2007 at 10:56 pm #46916
I don’t understand why this is a problem.
It is a problem because it is unintended behaviour. The MIRV spread should be centered around the original shot, that is how it is supposed to work. They are not supposed to overshoot the original shot location like they are currently.November 21, 2007 at 11:21 pm #46917
The problem also increases with larger and larger spreads, the projectiles seem to gain an entire second period of thrust starting their arc at the apex of the original. I am going to have to do more testing. But I will most likely have some pictures to post.November 22, 2007 at 2:35 am #46918
I’d just like to say this:
AI, this thread is a model for bug reports/complaints whatever. The description and the screenies are awesome.
I have a few things on my plate right now, but if Some Guy doesn’t get to it, I’ll keep it in mind for when I’m done the things I’m working on.November 23, 2007 at 1:25 pm #46919
I hope these pictures help. They are inverse to help contrast, but I realise that they are not the best.
the extreme one is of course extreme, but it is a good example.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.