[1.3] minimum damage

Bug reports for the different beta versions of transcendence.
Post Reply
User avatar
Atarlost
Fleet Admiral
Fleet Admiral
Posts: 2391
Joined: Tue Aug 26, 2008 12:02 am

There are reports going around that there is now a 1 point minimum damage to non-immune shields and armor rather than the old behavior of rounding down to 0.

If this is true it really needs to be reverted.
  • It removes the drawback of weapons firing many weak shots. This is used as a balancing factor in several mods as well as on the Lancer. Reversing this behavior makes such weapons overpowered.
  • It reduces the value of resistance. Resistance now has no effect on weak weapons.
  • It reduces the value of high type weapons since their primary benefit is not being resisted.
  • It makes the displayed armor and shield stats misleading. Previously when a shield said it had +700% against laser it actually did. Now it has a mere +75% benefit against common lasers. The resistance displays are now deceptive in a direction unfavorable to the player, especially at low level.
Literally is the new Figuratively
User avatar
Aury
Fleet Admiral
Fleet Admiral
Posts: 5421
Joined: Tue Feb 05, 2008 1:10 am
Location: Somewhere in the Frontier on a Hycrotan station, working on new ships.

I have to agree with all the above points, especially since TSB has weapons/armor/shields build around each of those behaviors.
(shpOrder gPlayership 'barrelRoll)
(plySetGenome gPlayer (list 'Varalyn 'nonBinary))
Homelab Servers: Xeon Silver 4110, 16GB | Via Quadcore C4650, 16GB | Athlon 200GE, 8GB | i7 7800X, 32GB | Threadripper 1950X, 32GB | Atom x5 8350, 4GB | Opteron 8174, 16GB | Xeon E5 2620 v3, 8GB | 2x Xeon Silver 4116, 96GB, 2x 1080ti | i7 8700, 32GB, 6500XT
Workstations & Render machines: Threadripper 3990X, 128GB, 6900XT | Threadripper 2990WX, 32GB, 1080ti | Xeon Platinum 8173M, 48GB, 1070ti | R9 3900X, 16GB, Vega64 | 2x E5 2430L v2, 24GB, 970 | R7 3700X, 32GB, A6000
Gaming Systems: R9 5950X, 32GB, 6700XT
Office Systems: Xeon 5318Y, 256GB, A4000
Misc Systems: R5 3500U, 20GB | R5 2400G, 16GB | i5 7640X, 16GB, Vega56 | E5 2620, 8GB, R5 260 | P4 1.8ghz, 0.75GB, Voodoo 5 5500 | Athlon 64 x2 4400+, 1.5GB, FX 5800 Ultra | Pentium D 3.2ghz, 4GB, 7600gt | Celeron g460, 8GB, 730gt | 2x Athlon FX 74, 8GB, 8800gts 512 | FX 9590, 16GB, R9 295x2 | E350, 8GB | Phenom X4 2.6ghz, 16GB, 8800gt | random core2 duo/atom/i5/i7 laptops
CaleyM
Commonwealth Pilot
Commonwealth Pilot
Posts: 65
Joined: Sat Feb 22, 2014 7:04 pm

This was based on some text I read somewhere that said 1 was minimum and there was no plan to change it for now. This was before 1.3 IIRC. I was playing 1.2 with that assumption. But it is difficult to test 100% in game.
george moromisato
Developer
Developer
Posts: 2997
Joined: Thu Jul 24, 2003 9:53 pm
Contact:

I don't believe this is true. [At least not intentionally.]

I haven't changed this code recently and a quick check of the code shows that there is no minimum. For armor we round to the nearest integer (e.g., <0.5 rounds down to 0). For shields we (inconsistently) truncate to integer value (e.g., <1 rounds down to 0).
User avatar
Atarlost
Fleet Admiral
Fleet Admiral
Posts: 2391
Joined: Tue Aug 26, 2008 12:02 am

I thought shields were also truncated in the past.
Literally is the new Figuratively
CaleyM
Commonwealth Pilot
Commonwealth Pilot
Posts: 65
Joined: Sat Feb 22, 2014 7:04 pm

Then you would need to go from 900% to 1901% resist or L8 to get from 1 to 0 on a laser with 5 damage.
Post Reply