This has to stop (wall penetration)

Its pretty realistic IMO, imagine being behind a thin wall, and a huge bomb hitting the other side and exploding, i'm sure you would feel it a little

As for how to fight it, just avoid wall hugging in general, it doesnt happen often

 

At the barest minimum, there should be a significant damage reduction if there's cover between you and the impact point.

The problem is that this reduces the overall level of tactics. If you're playing peek-a-boo behind a wall or a corner, I don't have to try to think about timing my shot or which side you'll pop out on - I just aim for the apex of the corner and I'll still hit you.

It also exacerbates player frustration - if you've ever played an online FPS and said (to yourself or out loud) something to the effect of "how did that guy hit me, I was safe?" - well, this will have the same impact as trying to play an FPS with a laggy connection - you're running from an enemy and make it into cover, I just blast the wall, and kill you anyway.

 

Nice well thought out post!
I have played a lot of online FPS, mainly a controversial one made by Activision so cant really call it "realistic"
However I know exactly what you mean, you get round the corner to find yourself dead anyway.

As for the Torp vs Peekaboo game, it depends on your motion.

When popping in / out I try and stay centralized between the back wall and the apex to ensure I will take minimum damage should a torp hit either.
But it means I have to play careful, and watch closely as im not invincible.
If you could hug walls and be 100% safe, then the game would be much more slower / peekaboo all round with everyone popping in and out of cover.

I totally respect your opinion / argument, as some background on me, I am not one to bitch over things needing to be nerfed / buffed etc.
I just play the game how the devs have laid it out to be played.

If it remains in the game, im cool with that and if it is removed then I am cool with that also.
People that complain that weapons are OP, why dont they just use them to level the playing field?

 

Feeling a hint of sarcasm although destructible maps would be amazing

 

Depends really on Rovios view.
If they plan to remove it, then its a bug, but if they plan on keeping it, its a feature

 

OP has written quite a few well-thought-out posts here about how there's an inconsistency between AOE weapons (Mortars don't damage through walls, Torpedos do) and while the initial post was a little frustrated in tone, it doesn't make it any less valid of a concern that should be addressed.

The only people here I see "QQ'ing" are people who want to shut down the discussion.

 

And above, you will see examples of the straw-man fallacy in action. By creating an imaginary position to argue against and then defeating it, the poster claims to have won the original debate. Of course, they are mislead.

Now, if I can take off the David Attenborough voice here; no one is arguing that "but X does go through a wall and Y doesn't" is fine; the issue is consistency and predictability. Look at this from the perspective of a new player. Cannon shots are blocked by walls. Mortar damage is blocked by walls. Stuns and repair bolts are blocked by walls. But torpedoes and repair pulse aren't? Confusing.

I'm not a dev (for this game) but the simple way I would do this would be to do a raycast from center-of-impact and check against the 2D collision map for the level. If it intersects blocking geometry, apply a damage reduction modifier or simply exit loop with damage=0. If no intersection, calculate distance for falloff and apply accordingly.