| Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Malka Badi'a
   |
Posted - 2006.02.26 06:16:00 -
[1]
I keep running the math on this one because it doesn't make sense. Each and every time, no matter how I throw it, the 150mm autocannons spank the 200mms. I've included reload times, I've included longer and shorter duration battles. I've included damage mods. In the end, the 150mms come up better with more damage, larger clip, more tracking, almost identical range for optimal (100m difference), and use less powergrid. People are probably tired of me posting this over and over, but I need clarification here from the devs. What the hell are up with the 200mms?
Skills not included in the math below because in the end the % stayed the exact same in terms of damage/RoF difference and ended up with both guns shooting faster, hitting harder, but with the 150mm still staying ahead.
150mm damage: 11 x 1.65 = 18.15
200mm damage: 11 x 1.925 = 21.175
150mm clip: 80
200mm clip: 40
150mm damage per clip: 1694
200mm damage per clip: 847
150mm time per clip: 2.25 x 80 = 180 seconds
200mm time per clip: 2.50 x 40 = 100 seconds
Damage in 180 seconds for 200mm (170 after reload):
170 / 2.50 = 68 shots in 180 seconds for the 200mm (-10 second reload penalty)
68 shots * 21.175 = 1439.9
150mm damage: 1694
200mm damage: 1439.9
Damage in 360 seconds
150mm : 1 reloads so 350 seconds
200mm : 3 reloads so 330 seconds
150mm : 350 / 2.25 = 155.55 shots in 360 seconds -10 second reload penalty
200mm : 330 / 2.50 = 132 shots in 360 seconds - 30 second reload penalty
150mm damage in 360 seconds: 18.15 x 155.55 = 2823.2325 damage
200mm damage in 360 seconds: 21.175 x 132 = 2795.1 damage
--------------
|
Mr Vapor
|
Posted - 2006.02.26 06:31:00 -
[2]
You know, I have to agree on this one. I was a loyal user of the 200mm up until a couple of weeks ago. 150's are just sooooo much better.
/siggy war hero |
Foulis
|
Posted - 2006.02.26 06:45:00 -
[3]
How about damage over 1 minute, plenty of frigate ganks don't last longer than that.
----
I like pie.
Cake > Pie - Imaran
 Originally by: CCP Hammer
Boobies
|
Malka Badi'a
|
Posted - 2006.02.26 07:01:00 -
[4]
Er, just run the math. Laazy bum 
60 / 2.25 = 26.66 shots
60 / 2.50 = 24 shots
18.15 x 26.66 = 483.879 in 60 seconds for the 150mm
21.175 x 24 = 508.2 in 60 seconds.
A different of not even 20 damage :/ And it goes downhill from there. Even in the initial time (the only time the 200mm's have a tiny advantage) the powergrid requirements compared to what..... 20 damage in 60 seconds? That isn't even .5 damage a second extra. Certainly not worth it after 60 seconds as shown in my initial math. And certainly not worth the difference of powergrid.
Most of my frigate fights also last longer than 60 seconds.
--------------
|
Vajell
|
Posted - 2006.02.26 09:11:00 -
[5]
same with mega beams in comparison to tachyons
|
Benglada
|
Posted - 2006.02.26 09:17:00 -
[6]
Originally by: Vajell
same with mega beams in comparison to tachyons
mmmmm megabeams have way less fitting for only a bit lesss range (i assume this is what your talking about?)
---------------------------
Originally by: Wrangler
Unfrtinately you dnot get to vote..
|
Lygos
|
Posted - 2006.02.26 09:34:00 -
[7]
I know of only one comprehensive way to rectify the problem of useless weapon categories like the 200mm ACs or the dual 180mm medium guns.
The 200mm ACs need a dps increase as well as a signature resolution increase. Ergo, they'll miss more often versus small targets, and hit for more on big ones. Between 40-80m is where I would place it.
The dual 180mm and similar low power guns need a sig shrink. Again, somewhere between 80 and 125m. The dps in such a case could be lowered seeing as they will take advantage of native bonuses and be used on small targets. It wouldn't hurt to increase their range either.
You still have to fit for what you want to hit.
Eunoia: The persistent suspicion that the universe is secretly conspiring to quietly improve one's life. |
Naughty Boy
|
Posted - 2006.02.26 09:41:00 -
[8]
Edited by: Naughty Boy on 26/02/2006 09:43:24
200mm AC have indeed very limited uses, mainly saving ammo or very short fights.
60 seconds
120 seconds
infinite fight
infinite fight + effect of tracking
Graphs are without damage mods (and nevermind the "drones" in the description, it has not effect on the graph).
Originally by: Vajell
same with mega beams in comparison to tachyons
Alpha strike
60 seconds
120 seconds
infinite fight
infinite fight (longer range)
infinite fight (longer range) + effect of tracking
^^ I'd suggest you keep them bookmarked, this time ?
Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy.
|
j0sephine
|
Posted - 2006.02.26 10:31:00 -
[9]
"150mm time per clip: 2.25 x 80 = 180 seconds
200mm time per clip: 2.50 x 40 = 100 seconds
(..)
Damage in 180 seconds for 200mm (170 after reload):
(..)
150mm damage: 1694
200mm damage: 1439.9
Damage in 360 seconds
(..)
150mm damage in 360 seconds: 18.15 x 155.55 = 2823.2325 damage
200mm damage in 360 seconds: 21.175 x 132 = 2795.1 damage
"
You are skewing the calculation results, by picking fight times that happen to end *just* before reload for 150mm autocannon occurs. But when you do the contrary:
damage in 190 seconds
* 200mm: (190 - 10 sec reload) / 2.5 = 72 * 21.175 = 1524.6
* 150mm: (190 - 10 sec reload) / 2.25 = 80 * 18.15 = 1452
damage in 370 seconds
* 200mm: (370 - 30 sec reload) / 2.5 = 136 * 21.175 = 2879.8
* 150mm: (350 - 20 sec reload) / 2.25 = 155 * 18.15 = 2813.25
... see? 10 sec of difference in fight length, but completely different results.
The damage advantage shifts between 200mm and 150mm autos over time, depending on which reloaded last and how long time passed since then. If you wanted to get some sort of averaged results, you can try to include reload times in the RoF:
* 200 mm rate of fire = 2.5 + (10 second reload / 40) = 2.75
* 150 mm rate of fire = 2.25 + (10 second reload / 80) = 2.375
normalized damage:
* 200 mm autocannon: 1.925 / 2.75 = 0.7
* 150 mm autocannon: 1.65 / 2.375 = 0.695
... meaning, on average, over a number of fights that last random amount of time, the 200 mm autocannons outdo the 150 mm autos by less than 1% (which isn't really worth the extra fitting cost and worse tracking, but that's another story)
|
Malka Badi'a
|
Posted - 2006.02.26 10:42:00 -
[10]
Did you just miss naughty's post? Or are you that blind in reading comprehsion?
The 200mms only catch up per 150mm reload briefly, but are quickly overtaken again and again by the 150mms
--------------
|
|
|
j0sephine
|
Posted - 2006.02.26 10:50:00 -
[11]
"Did you just miss naughty's post? Or are you that blind in reading comprehsion?
The 200mms only catch up per 150mm reload briefly, but are quickly overtaken again and again by the 150mms"
"The damage advantage shifts between 200mm and 150mm autos over time, depending on which reloaded last and how long time passed since then."
Take some reading comprehension lessons yourself, before trying to be insulting. You're repeating the very same thing i said, like some sort of counter-argument here.
|
Naughty Boy
|
Posted - 2006.02.26 10:52:00 -
[12]
Edited by: Naughty Boy on 26/02/2006 10:54:28
edit: Not fast enough. ^^ j0's right 
edit2: fixed wrong link.
240 sec.
720 sec.
infinite fight.
Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy.
|
Malka Badi'a
|
Posted - 2006.02.26 10:53:00 -
[13]
Quote:
Take some reading comprehension lessons yourself, before trying to be insulting. You're repeating the very same thing i said, like some sort of counter-argument here.
Exactally my point? What was the purpose of your post if all you stated was exactally what I put in my first post?
That the 150mms have more DoT, more DpS, more tracking, less fitting, and only have less damage right after a reload. Something already discovered by two posters above you.
Post constructively, or go away.
--------------
|
Meridius
|
Posted - 2006.02.26 10:56:00 -
[14]
/signed
Nerf 150mm's, they are clearly overpowered.
_
__
WE get EVERRYYWHHHEERREEEE!!1 - Imaran |
j0sephine
|
Posted - 2006.02.26 11:39:00 -
[15]
"Exactally my point? What was the purpose of your post if all you stated was exactally what I put in my first post?
That the 150mms have more DoT, more DpS, more tracking, less fitting, and only have less damage right after a reload."
I don't see you state anything about 200mm autos having temporary advantage every now and then in your first post, sorry. It's all to the tune of "what's the point of 200 mm when 150 mm are always better, just look at my math that proves it /o\"
Had you actually stated in your OP what you now claim you did, there'd have been no reason for me to reply pointing that out, simple as that.
|
Helene Troi
|
Posted - 2006.02.26 12:04:00 -
[16]
Tech II's...
My calculations (without factoring reload) puts 200 auto's 5% ahead on dps.
This % improves a little when skills are factored in.
So I'm gonna stick with them since they fit and most stuff blows up without the need for a relaod...
Thx for waking my brain up today...
 |
Malka Badi'a
|
Posted - 2006.02.26 12:11:00 -
[17]
Quote:
Had you actually stated in your OP what you now claim you did, there'd have been no reason for me to reply pointing that out, simple as that.
So instead of reading the entire thread, you just read the first thread? You seem to do this a LOT with the posts others make, completely ignoring anythign else that may have changed or not changed in the thread history. You can't possibly expect anyone to take you seriously 
--------------
|
j0sephine
|
Posted - 2006.02.26 12:31:00 -
[18]
"So instead of reading the entire thread, you just read the first thread? You seem to do this a LOT with the posts others make, completely ignoring anythign else that may have changed or not changed in the thread history. You can't possibly expect anyone to take you seriously "
If my desire was to be taken seriously, i wouldn't be posting on internet forum concerning math nook and crannies of space ships in a computer game, in the first place :s
Regarding your question: no, i don't ignore what's being said over the course of thread. But since all that's actually been said until the point i posted was either "150mm cannons are always better" and "200mm cannons have tiny advantage only at the very beginning of short term fight" ... both not being quite correct, i added my 2 isk to point out the yet unmentioned aspect.
Now, what happened to the request to "post constructively or not at all"? i don't see how off-topic discussion of my posting habits goes anywhere near meeting that requirement...
|
Angelus X
|
Posted - 2006.02.26 14:29:00 -
[19]
j0 is my hero 
---
Linkage
Sigs are limited to 24,000; Please reduce it's size. - Ductoris |
x Misako
|
Posted - 2006.02.26 15:45:00 -
[20]
Well, I did the math myself a bit ago and wasn't really surprised as I have talent for hunches (which is why I used 150's), but the result doesn't really mean anything is up with the 200's. That's life - some things are a bit borked, some things got flavor because of that. 200's are plenty different - you get bigger numbers, a different, slower pitter-patter of shots, a chance to boast about killing a 150mm user, also a chance to make another typically forumish pointless post as to how that 100m of additional range kicks all kinds of butts - maybe someone likes that and that makes the existence of an item far from pointless.
Sorry for getting into my philosophical mood here, but frankly, maybe that's just it - maybe the devs don't have to give a damn about the fact that some items can be mathematically proved worthless. 98% of EVE players don't care, they use 200's and believe they are better just because they're bigger. Others use 150's as some friends told them 150's are the way to go. All very logical Whys and Causes and no sarcasm here. It's really like choosing between Coca-Cola and Pepsi: it's all about the taste and psychology. No one gives a damn about the only thing that actually makes one worse than the other, which is that one of them has slightly more ortophosphoric acid, ergo: makes your stomach more of an ulcer playground.
Gee, I don't know, maybe we should just play the game (me having personally done this stupid math as well), stop being pathetic nerds and have fun in a human way or something.
Oh, and as far as logic goes - Josephine is right. |
|
|
Selim
|
Posted - 2006.02.26 16:21:00 -
[21]
Edited by: Selim on 26/02/2006 16:23:09
Originally by: Meridius
/signed
Nerf 150mm's, they are clearly overpowered.
Are you serious? The bigger autos need a boost, its not the smaller ones that need a nerf... but all they really need is a bigger ammo clip, and maybe a *slightly* higher damage mod, like 5% more or something, but even that may not be neccesary.
I think what would be best, though, is a skill to reduce reloading times...
|
LUKEC
|
Posted - 2006.02.26 17:16:00 -
[22]
Originally by: Selim
Edited by: Selim on 26/02/2006 16:29:36
Originally by: Meridius
/signed
Nerf 150mm's, they are clearly overpowered.
Are you serious? The bigger autos need a boost, its not the smaller ones that need a nerf... but all they really need is a bigger ammo clip, and maybe a *slightly* higher damage mod, like 5% more or something, but even that may not be neccesary. Even if they got boosted I probably would still use 150mms anyway.
I think what would be best, though, is a skill to reduce reloading times...
Please compare small laser fittings and AC fittings. Also consider that claw needs only 3 guns while crusader needs 4. Rest are more arty/beam ships.
I use no guns... i smack to death. |
Famine Aligher'ri
|
Posted - 2006.02.26 17:43:00 -
[23]
ugh who cares. 200mm's don't suck and they're worth it in some cases. You can sit there and do math all night but it comes down to real facts not assumed DPS that wont even be close to the true DPS you're getting in game between each gun. So just stop already. I dont want someone to nerf both guns.
|
OrangeAfroMan
|
Posted - 2006.02.26 18:00:00 -
[24]
They're there to keep 150 prices low... Shhh dont let anybody know!! Delete this thread Malka for god's sake!!!
|
Sarmaul
|
Posted - 2006.02.26 18:04:00 -
[25]
Originally by: Meridius
/signed
Nerf 150mm's, they are clearly overpowered.
yay he's back \o/
200mms, 425mms and 800mms are all excellent for NPCing when you don't want to have to run back to the station/pos every 3 belts to get more ammo. for pvp, always use the lower-tier as they do pretty much the same damage over time and have far lower fitting reqs.
Originally by: Zzazzt
Originally by: thoth foc
PA doesnt stand for anything..
Punchbag Alliance...
|
Hoshi
|
Posted - 2006.02.26 18:53:00 -
[26]
It's the same in many group of weapons. 125mm rails vs 150mm and 200mm rail vs 250mm for example. But there at least there is a reason to use the larger version and that's the increased range, specialy with the range bonus caldari ships have. But for ACs as noted above this range difference is minimal.
Maybe give the larger version a longer falloff? 5-6km instead of 4km might make them more interesting.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
Sarmaul
|
Posted - 2006.02.26 19:01:00 -
[27]
Originally by: Hoshi
It's the same in many group of weapons. 125mm rails vs 150mm and 200mm rail vs 250mm for example. But there at least there is a reason to use the larger version and that's the increased range, specialy with the range bonus caldari ships have. But for ACs as noted above this range difference is minimal.
Maybe give the larger version a longer falloff? 5-6km instead of 4km might make them more interesting.
if they did that I would possibly wet myself.
vagabond + 220mm + barrage + extra falloff = 
Originally by: Zzazzt
Originally by: thoth foc
PA doesnt stand for anything..
Punchbag Alliance...
|
Meridius
|
Posted - 2006.02.26 21:54:00 -
[28]
Edited by: Meridius on 26/02/2006 21:55:45
Originally by: LUKEC
Originally by: Selim
Edited by: Selim on 26/02/2006 16:29:36
Originally by: Meridius
/signed
Nerf 150mm's, they are clearly overpowered.
Are you serious? The bigger autos need a boost, its not the smaller ones that need a nerf... but all they really need is a bigger ammo clip, and maybe a *slightly* higher damage mod, like 5% more or something, but even that may not be neccesary. Even if they got boosted I probably would still use 150mms anyway.
I think what would be best, though, is a skill to reduce reloading times...
Please compare small laser fittings and AC fittings. Also consider that claw needs only 3 guns while crusader needs 4. Rest are more arty/beam ships.
Well i was being sarcastic but there definetly is an imbalance present.
125mm Gatling Autocannon II: 1pg - 3cpu
150mm Light Autocannon II: 2pg - 6cpu
Gatlin Pulse Laser II: 6pg - 4cpu
Claw: 40pg / 100cpu
Crusader: 40pg / 100cpu
Uhh am i missing something here? Compare practically every Amarr ship to Minmatar and you'll see that Amarr always have more grid because our guns take so much more to fit.
In this case our lowest caliber gun takes up 600% more pg then it's Minmatar counterpart. If that wasn't enough it also takes up 300% more pg then the Minmatar mid grade autocannon (yeah i know, it uses a whole 2cpu less, woo).
To pee on the dying man's face you'll also notice that the Crusader has to fit a 4th gun which further increases this fitting disparity.
Claws are arguably the best interceptor out there, boost? Yeah right...
I will agree with you on the ammo clip part tho, i think the clip is too small for a lot of AC's/Artillery.
_
__
WE get EVERRYYWHHHEERREEEE!!1 - Imaran |
Tachy
|
Posted - 2006.02.26 22:21:00 -
[29]
The math weak is in this one.
--*=*=*--
Megadon
CCP wanted a well known artist and celebrity to test the new font so it's approval would be well known. They got Ray |
Abbey Smallwood
|
Posted - 2006.02.26 22:36:00 -
[30]
Which begs the question.. Why do 150mm light autocannon 2's sell for nothing while the 200mm's are worth 1mil or so.
You wasted 4 seconds reading this post and you'll never get those back. |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |