Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
|
Posted - 2011.03.29 13:54:00 -
[31]
Edited by: Tippia on 29/03/2011 13:57:20
Originally by: Khory Thunderstar Our weapon has a 100s cicle time. A 4% increase in rate of fire would bring that cicle time to 96s. Our HW2 has a rate of fire of 96s
- So far so good?
Not really, no, but at the same time yes ù the problem is that you're using the same flawed idea of "RoF" that the game uses. Riedle is also quite correct, which is wrong in terms of how RoF is handled in the game.
What the game has isn't really "rate of fire", but rather "cycle length" (or refire delay) ù it doesn't measure how many shots are fired, it measures time between shots.
Eg. #1: Ye olde M16 has a rate of fire of 700û950 rounds per minute, or 11û15 rounds per second. This translates into a cycle length of 63û86 ms.
Eg. #2: Ye (not quite as) olde 800mm II has a cycle length of 7875 ms (before skills and bonuses), which is mislabelled in the info screen as "rate of fire." This translates into a RoF of 7.6 rounds per minute or 0.13 rounds per second.
When Riedle says that 4% more RoF = 4% more damage, he's quite correct, assuming we're talking about the first (correct) meaning of RoF: you shoot 4% more bullets, and therefore do 4% more damage.
What you're talking about is the game's interpretation of RoF and RoF increases (which are actually cycle length and cycle reductions, which translate into RoF increases). So yes, a game bonus that says it improves your rate of fire by 4% does not improve the actual rate of fire by 4% ù it reduces the cycle length by 4% which translates into a RoF increase (and thus a damage increase) of 1/(1-4%), but an actual RoF increase of 4% would mean that the damage also increases by 4%. ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡à you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki |
Khory Thunderstar
|
Posted - 2011.03.29 14:21:00 -
[32]
You are quite correct Tipia
The game doesnt use 'rate of fire', but 'delay between shots'.
Reducing delay between shots increases damage in a higher proportion than increasing the proper rate of fire would, as i explained.
|
Pod Amarr
|
Posted - 2011.03.29 15:25:00 -
[33]
It should not
see If the DPS is constant and chance of critical hit is percentage.
Then it is does not matter how fast you fire since the low cycle high alpha weapons critical will be even higher offsetting the more common but lower dmg of the high ROF weapon.
So statistically over long periond of time it will be the same. Pod |
Butzewutze
|
Posted - 2011.03.29 16:02:00 -
[34]
Originally by: Khory Thunderstar There is no advantage.
...
There is absolutely no gain from it
Thats not quite true. If u have a higher ROF, i mean if u fire more often in a certain amount of time u have a better chance to apply damage to a target.
For example:
1 shot in 60 seconds(100 damage) = 1 hit chance with 100 damage(if u miss... u wont do any damage for the next 60 seconds) 10 shots in 60 seconds(10 damage)= 10 hit chances with 10 damage(more chances to do at least some damage)
Regards
Butze
|
Jagga Spikes
Minmatar Tribal Liberation Force
|
Posted - 2011.03.29 16:26:00 -
[35]
Edited by: Jagga Spikes on 29/03/2011 16:26:20
Originally by: Butzewutze ... For example:
1 shot in 60 seconds(100 damage) = 1 hit chance with 100 damage(if u miss... u wont do any damage for the next 60 seconds) 10 shots in 60 seconds(10 damage)= 10 hit chances with 10 damage(more chances to do at least some damage) ...
on the other hand, if target has 100 hit points and reps 10 point of damage per 6 seconds, higher rate of fire isn't helping at all. ________________________________ : Forum Bore 'Em : Foamy The Squirrel - [jedi handwave] "There is no spoon." |
stoicfaux
Gallente
|
Posted - 2011.03.29 17:34:00 -
[36]
Originally by: Von Kroll
Originally by: stoicfaux
Argh, you don't understand statistics.
I understand them, I just don't understand how the math works.
/facepalm. No. No. Nonononononononononononononono...
Quote: I'm not looking for a game changer. I'm just curious about "normalizing" damage where the increased chance for a wrecking shot, well-aimed shots, and excellent shots over the same period of time may make the EFT numbers misleading. Your Rokh example is a good start.
The more shots you fire the more consistent your DPS will look. The fewer shots your fire, the greater the chance for wrecking hits (aka luck) to make a huge difference in your short term DPS.
Example. You're an amateur poker player. You join a table of professional poker players. If you play for a long time, you will lose everything unless you have a huge string of incredible luck.
Your best chance to win is to depend on short term luck; bet everything on one hand and hope lady luck comes through for you.
Back to railguns. The more you fire, the more consistent your DPS will be (the DPS graph will be smoother.) The less you fire, the more impact that wrecking hits (luck) will have on your DPS (the DPS graph can be very spikey.)
Quote: I don't want anyone to do leg-work for me. I'll crunch the numbers. What I'm curious about is whether or not, theoretically, a higher rate of fire increases the chance that the actual damage created is higher than the base damage listed in EFT.
Use the DPS graph in EFT. It includes wrecking hits in the DPS number. You can see this since your DPS graph DPS can be higher than the raw DPS number on the ship fitting window.
----- "Are you a sociopathic paranoid schizophrenic with accounting skills? We have the game for you! -- Eve, the game of Alts, Economics, Machiavelli, and PvP"
|
Von Kroll
Caldari Kroll's Legion
|
Posted - 2011.03.29 18:32:00 -
[37]
Ok, my theory was wrong. Hopefully that puts out the flames.
That leads me to a second question then. What advantage does a higher rate of fire convey then? Given that in EvE, volley damage increases as rate of fire decreases and vice versa, what advantage, if any, does a weapon with a higher rate of fire convey in PvP?
|
Riedle
Minmatar Paradox Collective Black Legion.
|
Posted - 2011.03.29 18:40:00 -
[38]
Edited by: Riedle on 29/03/2011 18:42:54 It all equals out. Sometimes you will have the extra shot in any given exchange and sometimes you will not.
4% increase in ROF = 4% increase in DPS over time.
simple.
KISS
|
Riedle
Minmatar Paradox Collective Black Legion.
|
Posted - 2011.03.29 18:48:00 -
[39]
Edited by: Riedle on 29/03/2011 18:49:08
Quote: Given that in EvE, volley damage increases as rate of fire decreases and vice versa, what advantage, if any, does a weapon with a higher rate of fire convey in PvP?
That is not a given.
You shoot 1400mm howitzers from your maelstrom 4% faster when you have trained another level of rapid firing. That's it. If your target was a POS, for example, you would have applied 4% more DPS on the POS as you otherwise would have if you didn't train that extra level of Rapid Firing. DPS is already a calculation over time.
If you decrease the cycle time of your weapons, your DPS (damage per second) goes up. Why?
Because it took you less time (S) to apply the same damage (D).
It's not a hard concept unless you want it to be.
|
Rutger Centemus
Phantom Squad En Garde
|
Posted - 2011.03.29 18:54:00 -
[40]
Originally by: Riedle
4% increase in ROF = 4% increase in DPS over time.
KISS
Keeping it simple: look up Tippia's explanation. IRL you would be correct, in Eve you're mistaken. Leaving the last "S" up to you to apply where applicable
Originally by: Crumplecorn I prefer launching bathtubs of antimatter at my opponents over pointing an open DVD player at them, even if the bathtubs do miss a lot. So no.
|
|
Usahina
|
Posted - 2011.03.29 19:00:00 -
[41]
The effect of higher refire rate will be to increase your ammo and cap costs, and that you don't kill a target as soon as higher alpha.
This is because high alpha weapons frontload their damage (say, gun1 deals 6 damage, refire every 7 seconds, gun2 deals 1 damage every second, after 6 seconds gun2 will outdamage gun1 by 1, and at sec 7 it will be outdamaged by 5 again, gun2 will outdamage gun1 after 42 seconds), and that high alpha weapons deal with optimal shield recharge better.
Taking this to eve: don't use rails, they have larger ammo and use cap, and they don't damage well.
|
Riedle
Minmatar Paradox Collective Black Legion.
|
Posted - 2011.03.29 19:29:00 -
[42]
Originally by: Rutger Centemus
Originally by: Riedle
4% increase in ROF = 4% increase in DPS over time.
KISS
Keeping it simple: look up Tippia's explanation. IRL you would be correct, in Eve you're mistaken. Leaving the last "S" up to you to apply where applicable
How does decreasing the cycle time of your guns by 4% not equal a circa 4% increase in your ROF?
Realizing there is a difference in it actually being 4% less cycle time and it not being exactly 4% - it is still an increase in your DPS. If it's 3.94% or whatever is not the point. The relevent point is that it is an increase in your DPS of about 4%.
Seriously, getting caught up in decimal points? lol Unless one wants to be purposefully obtuse and pedantic, it makes no difference.
Yes, it's division instead of multiplication but my point remains. You know exactly what the S means and it still stands.
|
Jagga Spikes
Minmatar Tribal Liberation Force
|
Posted - 2011.03.29 19:38:00 -
[43]
Originally by: Riedle
Originally by: Rutger Centemus
Originally by: Riedle
4% increase in ROF = 4% increase in DPS over time.
KISS
Keeping it simple: look up Tippia's explanation. IRL you would be correct, in Eve you're mistaken. Leaving the last "S" up to you to apply where applicable
... Seriously, getting caught up in decimal points? lol Unless one wants to be purposefully obtuse and pedantic, it makes no difference. ...
it gives wrong idea. at some point it stops being about decimals and it starts to make difference. for example, EVE's 50% increase in ROF is not 50% increase in dps. ________________________________ : Forum Bore 'Em : Foamy The Squirrel - [jedi handwave] "There is no spoon." |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
|
Posted - 2011.03.29 19:51:00 -
[44]
Originally by: Riedle How does decreasing the cycle time of your guns by 4% not equal a circa 4% increase in your ROF?
[à]
Seriously, getting caught up in decimal points?
It's not so much the decimal point or that 1/0.96 ≈ 1+1.04 ù it's that it's a good idea to remember what you're actually doing since the differences become much more pronounced as the bonuses increase.
For instance, by the time you have a 25% "RoF bonus" (in the EVE sense) ù which quite a few ships offer ù you have actually increased your rate of fire by 33%, and that's significantly more than the bonus itself would suggest. If you had a 50% EVE-style RoF bonus, your rate of fire would have doubled, and so on (and a 100% RoF bonus would mean you did infinite damage¦à now all we have to do is convince CCP to give us such a ship ).
¦ àok, not infinite. It would do the entire ammo capacity worth of damage in one shot ù your DPS would be [volley]+[ammo capacity]/10 (for the reload) ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡à you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki |
Liang Nuren
|
Posted - 2011.03.29 19:53:00 -
[45]
Edited by: Liang Nuren on 29/03/2011 19:55:41 Given equal DPS between a high ROF ship and a high volley ship, the high ROF ship will excel only when the volley damage is greatly superior to the amount of HP the target has.
Consider 1000 damage volley/10s ROF vs 100 damage volley/1s ROF: - T0: 1000 Damage / 100 damage - T1: 1000 Damage / 200 damage - T2: 1000 Damage / 300 damage - T3: 1000 Damage / 400 damage - T4: 1000 Damage / 500 damage - T5: 1000 Damage / 600 damage - T6: 1000 Damage / 700 damage - T7: 1000 Damage / 800 damage - T8: 1000 Damage / 900 damage - T9: 1000 Damage / 1000 damage - T10: 2000 Damage / 1100 damage
Basically: at no point does a high ROF ship exceed the damage done by a high volley damage ship (as long as all other variables are equal).
Consider 3 frigs with 2000 HP ea flying towards you. High volley ship fires one volley and blows up one frig. ... time passes ... snooze a bit ... High volley ship fires one volley and misses because the frigs are now too close.
High ROF ship fires two volleys and blows up one frig. High ROF ship fires two volleys and blows up one frig. High ROF ship fires one volley and puts the last frig at half armor. Second volley misses because it's too close.
-Liang
Ed: And yes, I'm aware that ungrouping your guns can mitigate part of this problem. -- Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire On Twitter
|
Flex Nebura
Caldari
|
Posted - 2011.03.29 21:15:00 -
[46]
High damage and low RoF (long time between shots) is better for dealing damage.
Ignoring the random chance of wrecking or missing, as we should, low RoF will be better for overcoming most tanking, except passive armor or hull that recieves no support.
It is also cheaper in terms of ammo. And has the added bonus of putting you on higher up on kill mails.
And if you dont want to ignore the random chances of turrets. Ok faster RoF should hit its average dps sooner than the slower weapons. I just dont think it matters all that much.
|
Riedle
Minmatar Paradox Collective Black Legion.
|
Posted - 2011.03.29 22:55:00 -
[47]
Originally by: Tippia
Originally by: Riedle How does decreasing the cycle time of your guns by 4% not equal a circa 4% increase in your ROF?
[à]
Seriously, getting caught up in decimal points?
It's not so much the decimal point or that 1/0.96 ≈ 1+1.04 ù it's that it's a good idea to remember what you're actually doing since the differences become much more pronounced as the bonuses increase.
For instance, by the time you have a 25% "RoF bonus" (in the EVE sense) ù which quite a few ships offer ù you have actually increased your rate of fire by 33%, and that's significantly more than the bonus itself would suggest. If you had a 50% EVE-style RoF bonus, your rate of fire would have doubled, and so on (and a 100% RoF bonus would mean you did infinite damage¦à now all we have to do is convince CCP to give us such a ship ).
¦ àok, not infinite. It would do the entire ammo capacity worth of damage in one shot ù your DPS would be [volley]+[ammoácapacity]/10 (for the reload)
ok, true enough - that is a good explanation.
I think we can all agree that the higher the ROF on the same guns, the better. Some people seem to be getting caught up on the details of volley and dps when the OP was not comparing the virtues of different weapons systems.
|
Cyniac
Gallente Twilight Star Rangers
|
Posted - 2011.03.30 12:42:00 -
[48]
Originally by: Von Kroll Ok, my theory was wrong. Hopefully that puts out the flames.
That leads me to a second question then. What advantage does a higher rate of fire convey then? Given that in EvE, volley damage increases as rate of fire decreases and vice versa, what advantage, if any, does a weapon with a higher rate of fire convey in PvP?
There is one effect that shorter cycle times has - it allows you to switch targets faster as you need to as you need to wait for a cycle to finish before you can switch targets.
|
ThirdEyeBlenny
|
Posted - 2011.03.30 14:14:00 -
[49]
This is how I have constructed fanfest to be in my mind...
I'm sat in 'The English Pub' in downtown Reykjavik, with ten of you dorks, debating the breasts off the theoretical damage increase, which is potentially inherent in a 4 percent rate of fire bonus, while drinking ridiculously overpriced ale.
It all gets nasty as the arguments over the propper application of the mathematical principle of statistics begin to heat up, and you all start glassing each other.
I go back to the hotel, a broken man, and cry**** into a sock.
The end. |
Dr Sheepbringer
Gallente Halinallen veroparatiisi Inglorious Carebears
|
Posted - 2011.03.30 14:27:00 -
[50]
Uff...the moar bullets in space, the moar potential damage you will make (i mean, you can miss them all..). Basically the RoF helps. Period.
Rails just suck that to overcome the suckyness...one would have to get a RoF of 2-3x at least...
Originally by: CCP Shadow Dr. Sheepbringer -- It's not that kind of horn.
|
|
Seriously Bored
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2011.03.30 15:16:00 -
[51]
Originally by: Dr Sheepbringer Rails just suck that to overcome the suckyness...one would have to get a RoF of 2-3x at least...
Somehow I don't think doubling or tripling the DPS of Rail Guns will solve imbalance.
Or if you take your statement at face value, having them fire once every 28 seconds wouldn't solve much either. ùùùùù
Originally by: CCP Big Dumb Object When I nerf something, it takes 2-3 months for your dreams to be crushed.
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |