0005884: Plasma Siege Starship fails to hit shield bearers - Arcen Idea Tracker (Bugs and Features)

Notes
(0019068) TechSY730 (reporter) Feb 13, 2012 10:25 pm	Alternate theory, the "splash" of the bullet is not large enough to hit the actual "body" of the shield bearer when the bullet hits the rim of the forcefield.

(0019086) keith.lamothe (administrator) Feb 14, 2012 8:35 am	Just put a cap of mkI sieges against 30 or so shield bearers. The sieges killed every single one, doing some damage by ff-splash and some damage by direct-hit (particularly obvious on the last shield bearer). Can you give me a save?

(0019089) TechSY730 (reporter) Feb 14, 2012 8:44 am edited on: Feb 14, 2012 12:36 pm	Hmm, I'll have to reproduce a nice case for you. In the case I observed, one siege was vs. one shield bearer, and the shield bearer had a wormhole guard post and a missile frigate under it. Oh, and my siege was auto-kiting, due to its range meeting the cutoff, and as such, it was at pretty much max range. Not sure if that is important. EDIT: Fixed a typo, though it would be funny if there was a "rage cutoff"

(0019167) TechSY730 (reporter) Feb 15, 2012 8:30 am	Drat, now I'm having trouble reproducing it. I'll keep an eye out for it, and post a save if I can reproduce and isolate a blatant show of this bug.

(0020115) TechSY730 (reporter) Mar 1, 2012 3:30 pm edited on: Mar 1, 2012 3:38 pm	Thanks to rabican's observation at http://www.arcengames.com/forums/index.php/topic,9975.msg94782.html#msg94782 [^] it seems that when there is nothing under the forcefield (or at least nothing under it that the "additional damage to stuff under the forcefield" logic can apply to, and the forcefield is at 100%, the bug seems much more likely to trigger. And this effects not only the shield bearers, but also normal forcefields as well.

(0020148) Ranakastrasz (reporter) Mar 1, 2012 8:16 pm	Makes me think of the old Autobomb bug, where they would splat on forcefields, and achive absolutely nothing, not even a pitiful amount of damage.

(0020242) keith.lamothe (administrator) Mar 3, 2012 9:59 am	Fixed for 5.028, thanks :)

**Issue Community Support**
This issue is already marked as resolved. If you feel that is not the case, please reopen it and explain why.
Supporters:	No one explicitly supports this issue yet.
Opponents:	No one explicitly opposes this issue yet.

Issue Community Support

This issue is already marked as resolved.
If you feel that is not the case, please reopen it and explain why.

Supporters:

No one explicitly supports this issue yet.

Opponents:

No one explicitly opposes this issue yet.

Issue History
Date Modified	Username	Field	Change
Feb 13, 2012 10:20 pm	TechSY730	New Issue
Feb 13, 2012 10:24 pm	TechSY730	Description Updated	View Revisions
Feb 13, 2012 10:25 pm	TechSY730	Note Added: 0019068
Feb 14, 2012 8:13 am	tigersfan	Internal Weight	=> Fix Before Major Release
Feb 14, 2012 8:13 am	tigersfan	Assigned To	=> keith.lamothe
Feb 14, 2012 8:13 am	tigersfan	Status	new => assigned
Feb 14, 2012 8:35 am	keith.lamothe	Note Added: 0019086
Feb 14, 2012 8:35 am	keith.lamothe	Status	assigned => feedback
Feb 14, 2012 8:44 am	TechSY730	Note Added: 0019089
Feb 14, 2012 8:44 am	TechSY730	Status	feedback => assigned
Feb 14, 2012 12:36 pm	TechSY730	Note Edited: 0019089	View Revisions
Feb 15, 2012 8:30 am	TechSY730	Note Added: 0019167
Mar 1, 2012 3:30 pm	TechSY730	Note Added: 0020115
Mar 1, 2012 3:38 pm	TechSY730	Note Edited: 0020115	View Revisions
Mar 1, 2012 8:16 pm	Ranakastrasz	Note Added: 0020148
Mar 3, 2012 9:59 am	keith.lamothe	Note Added: 0020242
Mar 3, 2012 9:59 am	keith.lamothe	Status	assigned => resolved
Mar 3, 2012 9:59 am	keith.lamothe	Fixed in Version	=> 5.028/5.029
Mar 3, 2012 9:59 am	keith.lamothe	Resolution	open => fixed

Relationships