Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Stafen
Killer Koalas
|
Posted - 2008.10.19 03:12:00 -
[1]
Well I have figured a formula which worked for me and I would like to share.
I used old data from last night (PST) before the new explosion velocities. I did a quick test now and it still holds.
This has only been tested using my heavy missiles against a number of different ship sizes and speeds.
It is:
Damage = Base_Damage * MIN(MIN(sig/Er,1),(Ev/Er)^n * (sig/vel)^n)
Where sig = ship's signature vel = ship's velocity Er = Explosion Radius of missile Ev = Explosion Velocity of missile n = magic constant
The magic constant was 0.64321 yesterday and is now 0.604 I am betting it is linked to the new missile attribute and probably the other missile attributes also.
I need to try some other missiles other than my heavy ones and see how the constant changes (if it does at all). Will do so tomorrow.
My data from yesterday compared to the formula can be found at http://eve-files.com/dl/176080(Excel file)
|
Stafen
Killer Koalas
|
Posted - 2008.10.19 04:05:00 -
[2]
Just tested a cruise raven against a afterburner stabber and found the formula still holds.
And the magic constant above is still about 0.6 (I got 0.60284 for cruise missiles).
My data was:
Base_damage = 356.7 Explosion Velocity = 54.6 Explosion Radius = 453 Ship signature = 124
Velocity = [141 187 220 375 508 673 780] Damage = [94.2 79.5 72 52.3 43.5 36.7 33.6]
and the formula gives (with n=0.6)
95.127 80.303 72.842 52.895 44.088 37.241 34.086
I put the errors down to rounding when reading off attributes like explosion velocity, ship signature which I take from the show info window.
I cannot test T2 missiles so now I will try light missiles.
|
Stafen
Killer Koalas
|
Posted - 2008.10.19 04:22:00 -
[3]
Edited by: Stafen on 19/10/2008 04:22:57 My final result for the day, a light missile caracal verses a afterburner claw.
Formula still holds. (n still 0.6)
Base Damage (in resists) = 82.282 Explosion Radius = 45 Explosion Velocity = 176.8 ship signature = 24
Velocities = [299 518 1105] Damage = [40.9 29.4 18.6]
And the formula gives:
41.034 29.461 18.659
So that is the three main T1 missile types verified.
|
Gypsio III
Dirty Filthy Perverts
|
Posted - 2008.10.19 11:25:00 -
[4]
Awesome work. Now I can test balance just with a spreadsheet, without having to faff about with ship fits, resists etc.
|
C4rnag3
Flawless. Resurgency
|
Posted - 2008.10.19 11:45:00 -
[5]
thx!
|
Gypsio III
Dirty Filthy Perverts
|
Posted - 2008.10.19 11:49:00 -
[6]
If would be awesome if you could check that this holds for HAMs and torps as well, please.
|
Stafen
Killer Koalas
|
Posted - 2008.10.19 12:23:00 -
[7]
Originally by: Gypsio III If would be awesome if you could check that this holds for HAMs and torps as well, please.
Well the stats on HAMs and trops are exactly the same as Heavy and cruise respectively. I might test torps and HAM later.
First I want to find someone with T2 missile skills and see how the "damage reduction factor" alters the constant "n" above. |
Stafen
Killer Koalas
|
Posted - 2008.10.19 14:55:00 -
[8]
Well I found that Torps have a different "Damage Reduction Factor" attribute then the other missiles I tested (and I can use torps) so I gave then a go against my trust afterburner claw.
Torp Raven vs AB claw.
The numbers are:
Base Damage (inc resists) = 493.69 Explosion Radius = 533 Explosion Velocity = 54.6 ship signature = 24 Damage Reduction Factor = 3.2
Velocities = [304 513 546] Damage = [18.4 12.9 12.4]
So now using my formula with n = 0.67579 (different from before), I get
19.036 13.366 12.815 which is close enough
Now from the other runs I have: Reduction factor / n 3 / 0.64321 2.8 / 0.6 3.2 / 0.67579
This I conclude n = 0.21 * Reduction Factor (the value 0.21 probably needs to be found with a bit more accuracy though)
So the full formula is:
Damage = Base_Damage * MIN(MIN(sig/Er,1),(Ev/Er)^(0.21*rf) * (sig/vel)^(0.21*rf))
Where sig = ship's signature vel = ship's velocity Er = Explosion Radius of missile Ev = Explosion Velocity of missile rf = Damage Reduction Factor
|
Stafen
Killer Koalas
|
Posted - 2008.10.19 18:49:00 -
[9]
Finally the last one I can do (except for rockets):
HAMs on a caracal vs an afterburner thrasher
Base Damage (inc resists) = 111.3 Explosion Radius = 166 Explosion Velocity = 140.4 ship signature = 82 Damage Reduction Factor = 3.2
Velocities = [204 371 474 533 606] Damage = [53.2 35.4 30.0 27.7 25.3]
and the formula gives:
53.294 35.431 29.975 27.668 25.347
so all is still good :-)
(PS. some of my previous posts have now old and outdated attributes for the missiles as Dev's are still at work tuning )
|
Roemy Schneider
BINFORD
|
Posted - 2008.10.19 20:16:00 -
[10]
Edited by: Roemy Schneider on 19/10/2008 20:16:04 so er... speed effect: ( (Ev/vel) * (sig/Er) ) ^ 0.604 *check* i'm so gonna fly steatlh bombers from now on - putting the gist back into logistics |
|
Gypsio III
Dirty Filthy Perverts
|
Posted - 2008.10.19 20:37:00 -
[11]
A basic feature of the new formula is that your target must have a sig radius greater than the explosion radius of your missile for full damage to be dealt. This is the same as the current TQ formula.
However, the converse is not true - if your taregt is going faster than your missile's explosion velocity, then full damage can still be dealt if the target's sig is sufficiently bigger than your missile's explosion radius - achievable by painting or MWD sig bloom.
Cruise missiles now have an explosion radius of 533 m (400 m with GMP V). This makes a Cruise Raven pretty crappy in its antisupport role - a Falcon will get a much greater reduction in damage than currently the case.
|
Latex Sandals
|
Posted - 2008.10.20 03:58:00 -
[12]
Edited by: Latex Sandals on 20/10/2008 03:58:50 I've never seen an inty with an AB. What do the numbers look like for a real pvp fit? Put a MWD on that claw and run the numbers.
:)
Edit: Please.
|
Rip Striker
|
Posted - 2008.10.20 09:24:00 -
[13]
Originally by: Gypsio III
... Cruise missiles now have an explosion radius of 533 m (400 m with GMP V). This makes a Cruise Raven pretty crappy in its antisupport role - a Falcon will get a much greater reduction in damage than currently the case.
Perhaps heavy missile (with increased time and velocity) ships will fulfill that role? To me it seems that CCP wants to:
Cruise missile Raven - Anti support BC/BS Heavy missile Cerberus - Anti support Cruiser
Imo, as is should be...that is, no way a cruise Raven should outperform a heavy Cerberus when taking out cruiser sized ships.
Fly safe!
|
Gypsio III
Dirty Filthy Perverts
|
Posted - 2008.10.20 10:22:00 -
[14]
Originally by: Rip Striker
Perhaps heavy missile (with increased time and velocity) ships will fulfill that role? To me it seems that CCP wants to:
Cruise missile Raven - Anti support BC/BS Heavy missile Cerberus - Anti support Cruiser
Imo, as is should be...that is, no way a cruise Raven should outperform a heavy Cerberus when taking out cruiser sized ships.
Your logic is sound in principle. However, the problem is that there aren't really any support BC/BS (well the Cruise Raven itself is one) - it's typically HACs and Recons doing the stand-off DPS and ewar support. Now certainly the Cerberus should be more effective than a Cruise Raven against those ships - but currently I believe that the gap in effectiveness is too much - ~70% damage reduction on a Falcon from Cruise is too much. |
Darth Felin
|
Posted - 2008.10.20 12:13:00 -
[15]
Originally by: Gypsio III
Originally by: Rip Striker
Perhaps heavy missile (with increased time and velocity) ships will fulfill that role? To me it seems that CCP wants to:
Cruise missile Raven - Anti support BC/BS Heavy missile Cerberus - Anti support Cruiser
Imo, as is should be...that is, no way a cruise Raven should outperform a heavy Cerberus when taking out cruiser sized ships.
Your logic is sound in principle. However, the problem is that there aren't really any support BC/BS (well the Cruise Raven itself is one) - it's typically HACs and Recons doing the stand-off DPS and ewar support. Now certainly the Cerberus should be more effective than a Cruise Raven against those ships - but currently I believe that the gap in effectiveness is too much - ~70% damage reduction on a Falcon from Cruise is too much.
Did you try to use target painting on it? Maybe so Hyena or something like it.
|
Stafen
Killer Koalas
|
Posted - 2008.10.20 12:18:00 -
[16]
Edited by: Stafen on 20/10/2008 12:21:03
Originally by: Latex Sandals Edited by: Latex Sandals on 20/10/2008 03:58:50 I've never seen an inty with an AB. What do the numbers look like for a real pvp fit? Put a MWD on that claw and run the numbers.
:)
Edit: Please.
Well the point of all the above posts was to find and verify the formula, not to actually try any useful fits.
From my data I do have one inty MWD dataset, but it is a couple of days old.
Heavy missile caracal Vs MWD claw.
Base Damage = 190.8 Explosion Radius = 141 Explosion Velocity = 210.6 (has since changed to 105.5!!) Damage Reduction Factor = 3.0 (it is not 2.8) Ship Signature = 177
Velocity = [300 400 500 590 750 1000 1200 1400 1600 2000 3000 4000 5000] Damage = [175.440 145.890 126.110 113.670 97.890 80.560 71.440 64.890 59.440 51.890 39.440 33.220 28.780]
But you could just get the missile attributes from Sisi and plug them into the formula (see the above spreadsheet)
Edit: forgot Signature
|
Cpt Branko
Surge.
|
Posted - 2008.10.20 12:30:00 -
[17]
Edited by: Cpt Branko on 20/10/2008 12:30:37
Originally by: Darth Felin
Originally by: Gypsio III ~70% damage reduction on a Falcon from Cruise is too much.
Did you try to use target painting on it? Maybe so Hyena or something like it.
Did you try clicking show info on a target painter and seeing why it's impossible? Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint |
Stafen
Killer Koalas
|
Posted - 2008.10.20 15:17:00 -
[18]
I did the math on all my results so far (about 100) to find the constant in the equation with a bit more accuracy.
I got the following:
Damage ~ ( Ev/Es * s/v )^(0.21447 * rf)
Graph of the fit can be found at: missileconstantfo8.png
Will edit the first post to have the full equation.
|
Wannabehero
Caldari Absolutely No Retreat
|
Posted - 2008.10.21 21:14:00 -
[19]
Awesome work Stafen, thanks for your efforts.
Out of curiosity I plug in your formula for a stealth bomber firing regular cruise missiles at a microwarp-driving crusader at 5000 m/s. I came up with a damage reduction of ~90.21%. Very interesting. --
Don't harsh my mellow |
Gabriel Karade
Nulli-Secundus
|
Posted - 2008.10.27 21:40:00 -
[20]
Stafen, still confident on the values of the 'Damage Reduction Factor' you found for the various missiles? Most interesting if these still stand, most interesting... --------------
Video - 'War-Machine' |
|
Kadoes Khan
|
Posted - 2008.10.28 01:30:00 -
[21]
Originally by: Wannabehero Edited by: Wannabehero on 21/10/2008 21:18:54 Awesome work Stafen, thanks for your efforts.
Out of curiosity I plugged in your formula for a stealth bomber firing regular cruise missiles at a microwarp-driving crusader at 5000 m/s. I came up with a damage reduction of ~90.21%. Very interesting.
Edit: That same crusader, if using an Afterburner and only moving at 1700 m/s has a damage reduction of ~93.62%. The inty will take less damage from a stealth bomber when using an afterburner instead of a MWD.
Yes for avoiding damage you essentially want to get sig/velocity as low as possible, which an AB does better as it doesn't cause massive sig bloom, while still raising speed. |
dojocan81
|
Posted - 2008.10.28 07:17:00 -
[22]
Edited by: dojocan81 on 28/10/2008 07:24:35 hi Stafen
great job on doing this ... i did my math as well and worked a little bit with excel too .... and thats what excel showed me up after a made some graphs from your data "From In-Game" and "From formula" which i like to share
from formula
from in-game
the graphs are showing, on which velocity&signature you'll receiving dmg area-wise
edit: is there a was to expand your excel sheet up to 650 signature ? i would like to manage all missiles against all shiptypes
|
Stafen
Killer Koalas
|
Posted - 2008.10.28 12:34:00 -
[23]
Originally by: dojocan81 Edited by: dojocan81 on 28/10/2008 08:30:59 hi Stafen
great job on doing this ... i did my math as well and worked a little bit with excel too .... and thats what excel showed me up after a made some graphs from your data "From In-Game" and "From formula" which i like to share
from formula
from in-game
the graphs are showing, on which velocity&signature you'll receiving dmg area-wise
I like the graphs, they look kind of cool.
Am I right in assuming the 'holes' in the in-game graph are due to missing data points?
|
Stafen
Killer Koalas
|
Posted - 2008.10.28 12:39:00 -
[24]
Originally by: Gabriel Karade Stafen, still confident on the values of the 'Damage Reduction Factor' you found for the various missiles? Most interesting if these still stand, most interesting...
The Damage Reduction factor can be found in-game if you 'show info' on a missile, it is not something I made up. The Devs change the values every so often, I think they have fixed them for now.
I have not checked the formula in-game for a while, but it held up over a few days as devs were changing the missile attributes.
I am assuming the devs are happy with the formula and are only changing the stats of the missiles. I will recheck when they are finished though.
|
dojocan81
|
Posted - 2008.10.28 12:49:00 -
[25]
Originally by: Stafen
Originally by: dojocan81 Edited by: dojocan81 on 28/10/2008 08:30:59 hi Stafen
great job on doing this ... i did my math as well and worked a little bit with excel too .... and thats what excel showed me up after a made some graphs from your data "From In-Game" and "From formula" which i like to share
from formula
from in-game
the graphs are showing, on which velocity&signature you'll receiving dmg area-wise
I like the graphs, they look kind of cool.
Am I right in assuming the 'holes' in the in-game graph are due to missing data points?
yes, so i had to interpolate the data with excel ... those "holes" are the result of the missing data and not to mention that excel cannot make more than 4 datastreams with the current grph settings
can you maybe post all missiles stats here (sig r & explo v)? so i can go and make some better graphs at all ... i would like to do it by myself, but iam currently at work until 20 cet :(
|
Stafen
Killer Koalas
|
Posted - 2008.10.28 15:10:00 -
[26]
Originally by: dojocan81
can you maybe post all missiles stats here (sig r & explo v)? so i can go and make some better graphs at all ... i would like to do it by myself, but iam currently at work until 20 cet :(
Well I did some more testing on Sisi just now and it seems the devs have changed the magic constant above.
I tested a Stealth Bomber verses an afterburner Wolf.
Base Damage = 114.28 Explosion Radius = 42 Explosion Velocity = 89.7 Damage Reduction Factor = 4.5 Ship Signature = 33
Velocity = [132 197 313 545 602 809 911] Damage = [64.600 45.500 30.200 18.600 17.000 13.100 11.800]
Now putting this into the formula gives the magic constant of 0.19750 and the formula damages become:
Damage = [ 65.430 45.838 30.375 18.555 16.985 13.062 11.753]
The fit of this curve and data is plotted at MissileConst.png
I also have this spreadsheet I found on the SHC forums by Tarminic which plots % damage for various settings. I updated it to have current missile stats and the new constant.
I will update the first post with the new constant.
|
Stafen
Killer Koalas
|
Posted - 2008.10.28 16:30:00 -
[27]
Well I did a bit more testing with heavy, light and cruise missiles.
It looks like the devs have changed how the damage reduction factor works.
For heavy and light missiles it does seem to be like ^(3/14 *drf)
but for cruise missiles on a raven and stealth bomber it is ^(0.1975 * drf)
This is using the drf number you get from show info.
I will hold off doing anymore testing and wait till changes are final or let someone else figure it out.
|
Endless Subversion
The Accursed
|
Posted - 2008.11.04 19:41:00 -
[28]
So is the info in the OP up to date or not?
If it isn't would someone mind posting the most recent crack at the missile dmg formula?
|
Akyla
Bears Inc Violent-Tendencies
|
Posted - 2008.11.05 13:34:00 -
[29]
How do these skills work in that formula?
"guided missile precision" 5% decreased factor of signature radius for light, heavy and cruise missile explosions per level of skill
"target navigation prediction" 10% decrease per level in factor of target's velocity for all missiles ________________________________ All your honey are belong to us! |
dojocan81
|
Posted - 2008.11.05 13:46:00 -
[30]
Originally by: Akyla How do these skills work in that formula?
"guided missile precision" 5% decreased factor of signature radius for light, heavy and cruise missile explosions per level of skill
"target navigation prediction" 10% decrease per level in factor of target's velocity for all missiles
Damage = Base_Damage * MIN(MIN(sig/Er,1) , (Ev/Er * sig/vel)^(k * drf) )
Er = Explosion Radius of missile
Er = Base_Er*(1-gmp_lvl*0,05)
Ev = Explosion Velocity of missile
Ev = Base_Ev*(1+0,1*tmp_lvl)
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |