Ballistic Bro Changelogs Discussion

[Azarael]

What I do think will cause rage is the splash damage rework. While inaccurate spamming is much less effective because the damage dropoff is quadratic, accurate fire will do far more damage than it did before. In some cases, most obviously Longhorn directs and M46 mines, that's a one-shot kill for a perfect hit.

I'm actually surprised that quadratic falloff wasn't implemented before. It's more accurate than linear dropoff, physically speaking, and vanilla BW explosives have ridiculously high damage, but seem to have ignored this aspect of the physics...

[iRobot]

<my head>
ctrl+f quadratic

not found

[Azarael]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Square_%28algebra%29

[iRobot]

Math things

[Pinky]

I'm actually surprised that quadratic falloff wasn't implemented before. It's more accurate than linear dropoff, physically speaking, and vanilla BW explosives have ridiculously high damage, but seem to have ignored this aspect of the physics...

Wouldn't an exponential falloff be even more accurate and realistic?

[Rymosrac]

Wouldn't an exponential falloff be even more accurate and realistic?

Same thing. y=x^2 is a quadratic function.

<my head>
ctrl+f quadratic

not found

You forgot to close your head.
Actually, that explains a lot.

[Oska]

Wouldn't an exponential falloff be even more accurate and realistic?

Same thing. y=x^2 is a quadratic function.

[iRobot]

Too much math

[Rymosrac]

Well yeah, not all exponential functions are quadratic. But pretty much all quadratic functions are exponential.

I'm actually surprised. . . Vanilla BW. . . seem(s) to have ignored this aspect of the physics

I don't think surprise is the right word.

[Azarael]

I'm actually surprised that quadratic falloff wasn't implemented before. It's more accurate than linear dropoff, physically speaking, and vanilla BW explosives have ridiculously high damage, but seem to have ignored this aspect of the physics...

Wouldn't an exponential falloff be even more accurate and realistic?

I'm concerned about the performance of Square() versus **. Can you offer any clarification? I can see how Square is internally handled as x * x, but, say, x ** 1.4?

I don't think surprise is the right word.

Not sure what you're getting at. I got a lot of stick for commenting that explosives did extreme damage in vanilla and that G5 rockets in particular were extremely free, yet not one of the realism-favouring players has ever mentioned that the linear dropoff model used in BW was completely wrong.

I'm almost beginning to think they don't actually care about realism, only about preserving status quo...