LOL, Iceman, you really think my designs look the same? Well, guess what? They do, for a very good reason. Any other design method has given me worse results, especially titans that depended too much on energy weapons. <img src="biggrin.gif" border="0">
Well, a BRG is supposed to be THE weapon to keep your enemy prone, right? It works especially well against inferior jocks, but loses its edge against better pilots. Elite pilots in Assault titans resist its powers surprisingly well, especially b/c they usually have a shield. So, you really have to weigh in the 58% extra firepower gained by choosing the AC12 (maximal firepower in assaults) over BRGs. Keep in mind, I didn't say anything about their combination, say, 4AC12s plus a BRG, which I think even you admit works frighteningly well.
Which leads me into thinking, should I also run through all the possible 2 weapon type combinations, just for laughs? Anyone interested?
Meson gun's damage counts only the internal damage. Reasoning here being that any other damage that only applies to the external armor is 'wasted' in this context, unless it depletes the external armor completely, in which case the meson damage does you no good anymore, as any weapon works the same way. Here again, ignoring meson's specialty really wrecks its ratings.
Indepth study of weapons
Moderator: MOD_TitansOfSteel
Dammit, wrong post.
Anyway, I did do a few designs around max damage/sec which worked out fairly well, the foremost being the Launcher design with 11 LRM6s. Yes, in this case I'm counting 100% missile hits for max damage/sec which isn't the case (though one can be hopeful right? <img src="smile.gif" border="0"> ) Anyhow, in some cases, max damage/sec designs are effective.
[ November 22, 2001: Message edited by: Lyhrrus ]</p>
Anyway, I did do a few designs around max damage/sec which worked out fairly well, the foremost being the Launcher design with 11 LRM6s. Yes, in this case I'm counting 100% missile hits for max damage/sec which isn't the case (though one can be hopeful right? <img src="smile.gif" border="0"> ) Anyhow, in some cases, max damage/sec designs are effective.
[ November 22, 2001: Message edited by: Lyhrrus ]</p>
Check the quote, it was not aimed at you.Originally posted by Jukka Mikkonen:
LOL, Iceman, you really think my designs look the same?
Well, a BRG is supposed to be THE weapon to keep your enemy prone, right? It works especially well against inferior jocks, but loses its edge against better pilots. Elite pilots in Assault titans resist its powers surprisingly well, especially b/c they usually have a shield. So, you really have to weigh in the 58% extra firepower gained by choosing the AC12 (maximal firepower in assaults) over BRGs. Keep in mind, I didn't say anything about their combination, say, 4AC12s plus a BRG, which I think even you admit works frighteningly well.
Meson gun's damage counts only the internal damage. Reasoning here being that any other damage that only applies to the external armor is 'wasted' in this context, unless it depletes the external armor completely, in which case the meson damage does you no good anymore, as any weapon works the same way. Here again, ignoring meson's specialty really wrecks its ratings.
So it all goes down (again) to energy weapons being hampered by shields?! This is one more reason not to rely on those stats too much. Want to get rid of a shield? Get a TB (or an EMP in WS <img src="smile.gif" border="0"> ). *Then* use the BRG. Your opponent will also get a 50C "bonus", which will compensate for those 58% extra firepower you mention.
You can't compare these 2 weapons. The BRG is a weapon that has a specific use, in such a way that cramming a titan with them is all but useless. Once the opponent is down, its special effect becomes useless until he tries to get up. That makes it unsuited for alphas, unlike the AC12. The BRG is a complementary weapon, not a main like the AC12. I'm sure you realised this while writing your post, hence the AC12+BRG example. <img src="smile.gif" border="0">
About mesons, the external damage is wasted?! C'mon, it is never wasted, unless you're packing mesons only, and even in that situation it is not wasted. I know this is the premise of your charts, but it is also the reason I consider them "useless". I don't need charts to build a multiple-one-weapon-type titan, just cram as many weapons as I can and find a suitable heat reg. Ok, not that simple but close, and you know what I mean.
Now, why is it that external damage is not wasted on meson-only titans? Ammo explosions! Yes, one of the most feared effects of mesons. The less *total* remaining armor in the exploding location, the more damage is tranferred to the next adjacent location. Do you call this wasted? I don't.
Ok, I know you're a AD&D player, so am I. Are you a BT player also? Just curious.
This might be another factor for you to add to your rating of weapons, ammo dependent weapons are vulnerable to ammo explosions (and not only from mesons, but also from heat from various sources). <img src="smile.gif" border="0">
Iceman
Yes, I know, I saw them. And all around missiles. Hopeful doesn't really cut it in actual battle does it? <img src="smile.gif" border="0">Originally posted by Lyhrrus:
Anyway, I did do a few designs around max damage/sec which worked out fairly well, the foremost being the Launcher design with 11 LRM6s. Yes, in this case I'm counting 100% missile hits for max damage/sec which isn't the case (though one can be hopeful right? <img src="smile.gif" border="0"> ) Anyhow, in some cases, max damage/sec designs are effective.
Some cases are not the basis for a solid titan design strategy. Besides, what you're refering to is max d/s *within* the same weapon category, which is not the "core" of the discussion. What you're referring to is exactly what I said the charts would be useful for, balancing weapons within the same type.
Iceman
True true, all too true Iceman, but the Launcher doesn't need to be hopeful. I wrote out the maths for it and when I tried to post it, I got an error message so I'm not going to rewrite everything. (GAAAAAHHHH, stupid board, I miss the old one <img src="tongue.gif" border="0"> ) Long and short of it all is that it will (based on conservative estimates, 50% missile hits, 50% of all racks hit) take off a section in 180 or less seconds (180 seconds is 12 volleys for 74+27 armor).
Anyway, the second part was that I found the simple additions I made to your table are more than enough for balancing my titans. The dmg/sec, heat/sec and dmg/heat are simple enough so that anyone can use them. The effvalue=dmg^2/(heat*sec) is useful for single weapon comparisons, putting the LRM6 and SRM8 as the best weapons (at max damage of course). The rest of the weapons I compare to the Flamer which I use as a base since it has an effvalue=1.00 Of course it doesn't take into account special effects of mesons, BRG, NB and such, but hopefully the designer will have already thought about those parts.
Anyway, the second part was that I found the simple additions I made to your table are more than enough for balancing my titans. The dmg/sec, heat/sec and dmg/heat are simple enough so that anyone can use them. The effvalue=dmg^2/(heat*sec) is useful for single weapon comparisons, putting the LRM6 and SRM8 as the best weapons (at max damage of course). The rest of the weapons I compare to the Flamer which I use as a base since it has an effvalue=1.00 Of course it doesn't take into account special effects of mesons, BRG, NB and such, but hopefully the designer will have already thought about those parts.
That is also funny, cause my calcs gave me 59 pts to the CT, not 101, little more than half your numbers...Originally posted by Lyhrrus:
True true, all too true Iceman, but the Launcher doesn't need to be hopeful. I wrote out the maths for it and when I tried to post it, I got an error message so I'm not going to rewrite everything. (GAAAAAHHHH, stupid board, I miss the old one <img src="tongue.gif" border="0"> ) Long and short of it all is that it will (based on conservative estimates, 50% missile hits, 50% of all racks hit) take off a section in 180 or less seconds (180 seconds is 12 volleys for 74+27 armor).
Anyway, the second part was that I found the simple additions I made to your table are more than enough for balancing my titans. The dmg/sec, heat/sec and dmg/heat are simple enough so that anyone can use them. The effvalue=dmg^2/(heat*sec) is useful for single weapon comparisons, putting the LRM6 and SRM8 as the best weapons (at max damage of course). The rest of the weapons I compare to the Flamer which I use as a base since it has an effvalue=1.00 Of course it doesn't take into account special effects of mesons, BRG, NB and such, but hopefully the designer will have already thought about those parts.
I gasp at the value of the PG, and CC weapons, among others... there *really* must be something wrong with my tables.
Iceman
Which are you talking about, the armor on the Launcher or the armor on the opponent? 74+27 is for max armor on the opponent. The 50/50% hit rate also only accounted for 25-33% of all missiles hitting, hitting that part. This doesn't include cluster hits, or the increased hit rate when the enemy moves closer. <img src="smile.gif" border="0">
Anyway, I don't think tables all the time, I only use it as a rough guideline. One time I did my titan "Pentagram" based on getting headshots and doing damage to the pilot. I threw in 2 AC12s, a BRG and a couple NBs. The AC12s and the BRG all had the high chance of doing damage to the jock on head hits. Of course it's modified now because it has trouble supporting all the e-weapons (now - the BRG). But, when first trying to design and get a feel for balancing a titan, the tables help as a ROUGH guideline. <img src="smile.gif" border="0"> Anyway, my congrats to Jukka for doing those tables, as I wouldn't have the patience to sit through all those numbers and calculate them. <img src="tongue.gif" border="0">
Anyway, I don't think tables all the time, I only use it as a rough guideline. One time I did my titan "Pentagram" based on getting headshots and doing damage to the pilot. I threw in 2 AC12s, a BRG and a couple NBs. The AC12s and the BRG all had the high chance of doing damage to the jock on head hits. Of course it's modified now because it has trouble supporting all the e-weapons (now - the BRG). But, when first trying to design and get a feel for balancing a titan, the tables help as a ROUGH guideline. <img src="smile.gif" border="0"> Anyway, my congrats to Jukka for doing those tables, as I wouldn't have the patience to sit through all those numbers and calculate them. <img src="tongue.gif" border="0">
Huh, why should I be talking about the Launcher's armor, if that was not the point?!Originally posted by Lyhrrus:
Which are you talking about, the armor on the Launcher or the armor on the opponent? 74+27 is for max armor on the opponent. The 50/50% hit rate also only accounted for 25-33% of all missiles hitting, hitting that part. This doesn't include cluster hits, or the increased hit rate when the enemy moves closer. <img src="smile.gif" border="0">
Anyway, I don't think tables all the time, I only use it as a rough guideline. One time I did my titan "Pentagram" based on getting headshots and doing damage to the pilot.[...] But, when first trying to design and get a feel for balancing a titan, the tables help as a ROUGH guideline. <img src="smile.gif" border="0">
Also, *I* did count with the average damage profile, which you seem to have replaced with something come out of thin air.
You won't get too many cluster hits with LRM6s... 12s maybe, 6s not. It's just not their thing. And all hits, cluster or not, tend to balance out in the long run.
I'm confused, your point with the Pentagram is...?!
I still don't see what the charts tell you in terms of balancing a titan that the weapons' specs don't. Maybe you can enlighten me?
When I first tried to design titans, I used the tables and something called 'testing'. Worked pretty well. Never used the pinboard, never used Marshall's tables (for those who were not around, they had the exact same main stats that Jukka's charts have).
Iceman
Not much point with the Pentagram, though its testing phase worked out okay. The math I use the most is the heat/sec, as it gives me a decent idea as how to balance my weapons for a constant firing rate. I do test my designs, and many have fallen flat on their face dispite "theory". <img src="wink.gif" border="0">
Anyway, I did account for the spreading out for the missiles. I assumed a flank in my calculation, giving a 25-33% hit to that side torso out of all missiles. On average, out of the 11 racks (66 missiles), about 4 missiles would hit that spot per volley at 50%. Yes, I did pull the 25-33% out of the air, but just from watching where the missiles hit from testing I estimated that range.
However, I still don't understand how you came up with 59.
Anyway, I did account for the spreading out for the missiles. I assumed a flank in my calculation, giving a 25-33% hit to that side torso out of all missiles. On average, out of the 11 racks (66 missiles), about 4 missiles would hit that spot per volley at 50%. Yes, I did pull the 25-33% out of the air, but just from watching where the missiles hit from testing I estimated that range.
However, I still don't understand how you came up with 59.
Do you use *any* other stat?Originally posted by Lyhrrus:
The math I use the most is the heat/sec, as it gives me a decent idea as how to balance my weapons for a constant firing rate.
Anyway, I did account for the spreading out for the missiles. I assumed a flank in my calculation, giving a 25-33% hit to that side torso out of all missiles. On average, out of the 11 racks (66 missiles), about 4 missiles would hit that spot per volley at 50%. Yes, I did pull the 25-33% out of the air, but just from watching where the missiles hit from testing I estimated that range.
However, I still don't understand how you came up with 59.
Yes, that one is the only one worth it, as long as you don't forget movement and shield (if applicable).
Now, about the 25~33%, that's funny, cause they have an average of 13%, and that I´m pretty sure is working right cause Larkin showed it to me a long time ago. But wait, 4 missiles out of 33, that's... you got a calculator Lyhrrus? Mine must be wrong, it says 12%... <img src="wink.gif" border="0">
How did I come up with 59? By doing things right <img src="smile.gif" border="0"> 11 racks, at 50% to hit, 50% missiles hit (average is higher, but I kept your numbers), 2 damage per missile, 15% hit the CT.
59 damage to the CT will hardly penetrate armor in a lightly armored assault.
Iceman
No I don't. You got it right the 1st time. The Launcher does 59 damage in 12 volleys to the CT, not 101 like you said. But you do test your designs, so howcome you missed this?! <img src="wink.gif" border="0">Originally posted by Lyhrrus:
Oh wait, never mind, 59 was talking about damage potential on the enemy titan. You've got to be a bit more clear Iceman. <img src="wink.gif" border="0"> j/k
Iceman
Urgh, I meant 8 missiles, was thinking that then divided by two. My mental calculator seems to have eloped with the Thanksgiving turkey. <img src="smile.gif" border="0"> Anyway, this is only supposing that a flank is shown towards the launcher. So 8 missiles is ~25%, giving the required 101 damage. Now worst case scenario would be a titan approaching from head on, swiveling from right to left to spread the damage. I don't have the random % hit charts so I can't say what the outcome will be.
Your calculations are still wrong. How will 8 out of 16.5 missiles (66*.5*.5) hit one single bodypart? Don't forget there's 9 bodyparts. Although you say you're counting the damage profile %s, you're not. Swivelling or not, max % is 15% of all missiles to the frontal torso, and that's .15*66*.5*. missiles, *2 damage per salvo, *12 for the 12 salvos. That's 59 damage.
Iceman
Uh, that's .15*66*.5*.5
Seems we're not getting our numbers right, you and me <img src="smile.gif" border="0">
Bottom line is, there's no way a single location can be hit by 25~33% of all missiles. Let's say you want the RT to go. 25~33% to the RT, the same for the LT (assuming frontal attack), a little more for the CT. That's 80~110% of all the missiles! That's -10~20% for all the other bodyparts. Can't be, can it?
The damage profile %s are in the guide, armor section of the factory.
Seems we're not getting our numbers right, you and me <img src="smile.gif" border="0">
Bottom line is, there's no way a single location can be hit by 25~33% of all missiles. Let's say you want the RT to go. 25~33% to the RT, the same for the LT (assuming frontal attack), a little more for the CT. That's 80~110% of all the missiles! That's -10~20% for all the other bodyparts. Can't be, can it?
The damage profile %s are in the guide, armor section of the factory.
Iceman