EVE Search - DPS Doesnt Seem to Change Much from Class S to Class M Weapons ...

All Channels

Ships and Modules

DPS Doesnt Seem to Change Much from Class S to Class M Weapons ...

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Leyana Antilles	Posted - 2006.08.08 12:22:00 - [1] I was praying someone could prove me wrong in my math here, but after some number crunching, it seems to me that, all skills aside, the base dps of S vs M vs L weapons is not significant enough to warrant such significant increase in CPU/Power?Cap requirements. For example: Take a 150mm Railgun I versus a 250mm Railgun I (or comparing the techII versions, etc) using the same respective ammo types, say Antimatter rounds ... the 250mm does exactly double the damage of the 150mm. Makes perfect sense. But when you account for the RoF, you realize that although not twice as fast, the RoF of the 150mm is significantly lower, and thus the overall dps of the 250mm is only slightly higher than that of the 150mm. Take into account signature resolution affecting you average number of hits per shot, and the dps is practically equal for any ship one class smaller that the weapon size, and the fact that these larger weapons cannot track nearly as well as thier smaller counterparts, and you find that the smaller weapons out-perform the larger variants for anything other than thier class or larger. I believe there has also been some discussion on whether or not a smaller signature resolution than the target increases the chance for a critical hit (e.g. wrecking hits). In which case the smaller weapons have an even greater advantage ... Considering the power and CPU requirements from S to M weapons increases almost tenfold, the cap requirements by five times and the dps increase is minimal, tracking and resolution become factors ... why would anyone want to use M class weapons on a cruiser, rather than for instance just sticking on the biggest S class weapons, and loading up on large shield extenders for +6k shields? About the only detriment to using S vs M weapons seems to be range. But when PvE, the NPCs generally close to optimal range anyway (1-10k) so I dont seem the point ... I know I am probably dead wrong, but I cant get by the math and I was hoping someone might shed some light on what makes M class weapons so wonderful to have on your cruiser? Or is this only applicable to frigates and cruisers? Admittedly, I have not done the math on the BSs or Dreads, since I am still pretty far off from that ... Thanks!
AsfALT	Posted - 2006.08.08 12:25:00 - [2] Cruisers get bonuses to Med weapons.
Hugh Ruka Caldari	Posted - 2006.08.08 12:29:00 - [3] your math is not that much off, however to compare frigs to cruisers (as the respective ships that fit 150mm and 250mm rails): 1. frigs have fewer high slots, less HP, less slots generaly 2. cruisers have higher nimber of high slots and more HP, also more slots generaly Both classes get bonuses to their respective class wepons. Coupled with more weapon slots and more fitting versatility, cruisers come on top (usualy). Also range and ammo capacity is a factor sometimes. So you cannot only compare the weapons themselves, because you are looking only at one part of the picture and will miss how they work in the larger view. ------------------------------ at least fit ECCM before you start crying how overpowered ECM is.
Ronin Reborn	Posted - 2006.08.08 12:30:00 - [4] Not to mention there is more to a weapon than dps. Like optimal and falloff, which are greatly in favor of bigger guns. Of course the tracking is better on smaller guns though
Waragha Art of War	Posted - 2006.08.08 12:30:00 - [5] Originally by: AsfALT Cruisers get bonuses to Med weapons. And cruisers have more highslots and M ammo does more damage. Originally by: Trepkos ... The only difference between GS and NPC's are that GS respawn quicker.
Maya Rkell Sebiestor tribe	Posted - 2006.08.08 12:31:00 - [6] Basic reason? He'll do unto you beyond the range of your 150's.
Karl Shade FinFleet Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2006.08.08 12:38:00 - [7] Edited by: Karl Shade on 08/08/2006 12:38:34 Originally by: Leyana Antilles About the only detriment to using S vs M weapons seems to be range. But when PvE, the NPCs generally close to optimal range anyway (1-10k) so I dont seem the point ... Apart from the above posters points, PVE isn¦t a valid reference to balancing weaponry in eve. -
James Lyrus Lyrus Associates Interstellar Starbase Syndicate	Posted - 2006.08.08 12:49:00 - [8] Raw DPS there's not much in it, especially with tracking and sig as you say. The thing that makes the difference: Range number of slots Ship bonuses. (Generally size specific).
Leyana Antilles	Posted - 2006.08.08 13:16:00 - [9] Agreed the cruiser always has better stats in and of itself. But specifically, i was considering the following statement from the original post: Considering the power and CPU requirements from S to M weapons increases almost tenfold, the cap requirements by five times and the dps increase is minimal, tracking and resolution become factors ... why would anyone want to use M class weapons on a cruiser, rather than for instance just sticking on the biggest S class weapons, and loading up on large shield extenders for +6k shields? If you let up on weapons, you can add significantly more room for oversized med and low slot items ... I mean, if I can keep in range of a cruiser with med weapons and only 1.5K shields, do almost as much damage but have 7.5k shields and armor ... isnt that a considerable factor in PvP as well as PvE?
Twilight Moon Minmatar eXceed Inc. Ascendant Frontier	Posted - 2006.08.08 13:20:00 - [10] Edited by: Twilight Moon on 08/08/2006 13:21:50 Antimater M Ammo Damage: Kinetic 14 HP, Thermal 10 HP Antimater S Ammo Damage: Kinetic 7 HP, Thermal 5 HP Theres where you extra damage comes from. Antimatter M does fully 2x the damage of Antimatter S ammo. ...on the other hand using a banana might be a viable alternative.
Leyana Antilles	Posted - 2006.08.08 13:51:00 - [11] Thanks Twilight ... I appreciate everyone's input ... but you arent reading the entire post: "the 250mm does exactly double the damage of the 150mm. Makes perfect sense. But when you account for the RoF, you realize that although not twice as fast, the RoF of the 150mm is significantly lower, and thus the overall dps of the 250mm is only slightly higher than that of the 150mm" I know it does exactly twice as much damage, but taken into account with RoF, and your DPS is only pathetically higher ... ------ It seems aside from the boni the ship class itself gives you and the range issue, there is not reason not to invest power and CPU elsewhere ... not to mention it makes enemy energy drain attcks insignificant (since you are using 1/4 cap what you would be normally). I guess the math is right ...
Yoshimako	Posted - 2006.08.08 13:58:00 - [12] Originally by: Leyana Antilles Thanks Twilight ... I appreciate everyone's input ... but you arent reading the entire post: "the 250mm does exactly double the damage of the 150mm. Makes perfect sense. But when you account for the RoF, you realize that although not twice as fast, the RoF of the 150mm is significantly lower, and thus the overall dps of the 250mm is only slightly higher than that of the 150mm" I know it does exactly twice as much damage, but taken into account with RoF, and your DPS is only pathetically higher ... ------ It seems aside from the boni the ship class itself gives you and the range issue, there is not reason not to invest power and CPU elsewhere ... not to mention it makes enemy energy drain attcks insignificant (since you are using 1/4 cap what you would be normally). I guess the math is right ... Are you trying to justify the 150mm rails on your mega?
anotleam	Posted - 2006.08.08 14:06:00 - [13] Edited by: anotleam on 08/08/2006 14:06:26
Leam Gallente Celtic industries Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate	Posted - 2006.08.08 14:07:00 - [14] Originally by: Leyana Antilles Thanks Twilight ... I appreciate everyone's input ... but you arent reading the entire post: "the 250mm does exactly double the damage of the 150mm. Makes perfect sense. But when you account for the RoF, you realize that although not twice as fast, the RoF of the 150mm is significantly lower, and thus the overall dps of the 250mm is only slightly higher than that of the 150mm" I know it does exactly twice as much damage, but taken into account with RoF, and your DPS is only pathetically higher ... ------ It seems aside from the boni the ship class itself gives you and the range issue, there is not reason not to invest power and CPU elsewhere ... not to mention it makes enemy energy drain attcks insignificant (since you are using 1/4 cap what you would be normally). I guess the math is right ... light neutron blaster dps without skills (antimatter)= 12 medium neutron blaster dps without skils (antimatter)= 16 so 25% extra dmg for medium ones. And frigate ships use to have only 3-4 guns. Then, if you fit smalls in a cruiser, you wont be only losing the 25% dmg, but also the ship dmg or rof bonus, that can easily be another 25% extra. The diference might look small when you calc the base dmg, but only the base 25% is A LOT.
Sammiel Ars Caelestis Ascendant Frontier	Posted - 2006.08.08 14:08:00 - [15] Edited by: Sammiel on 08/08/2006 14:09:13 250 II's do fully 33% more raw damage than 150 II's. That is huge in this game. A medium turret on a pilot with Med Hybrid 1 will do as much damage as a Small Hybrid on a pilot with Small Hybrid 5 and Small Rail Spec 4. That is a fairly vast gulf in this game considering people will spend 10-15 days for a 3% bump in overall damage.
Kirtan Loor Chosen Path Center for Disease Creation	Posted - 2006.08.08 14:18:00 - [16] Once you decide to use small guns, you can just continue and go on using best small beam lasers(Name is medium beam laser). They deal better damage than rails, have better damage and slightly reduced range and don't use any ammo. Or just use best small pulse lasers (Name is medium pulse laser). Range is shorter. But has the base damage over time as 250mm railgun. Once you decide to deal damage over a long range however, Railguns will begin looking sweet. Oh...and 250mm Railguns have the best firing sound in the game IMO
Axle skye Caldari Ruby Sunrise	Posted - 2006.08.08 14:27:00 - [17] While your general assumptions are correct in terms of dps, one other factor that you have overlooked is the added power of wreacking shots. a good chunk of this game gets lost in the dps race. the 250mm rails will hit with a wreacking shot for quite a bit more damage, often saving you several shots at once.
Leyana Antilles	Posted - 2006.08.08 14:38:00 - [18] Thanks Leam and Samm ... thats the bit of 'veteran insight' I was looking for. Thank you everyone who replied, actually, it was all very helpful data. Its a good point that the 25% damage increase includes a 25% increase to the wrecking shot damage, and the increased damage of the ship itself (which I acknowledged, but I dont like being limited to one weapon group - eg hybrid for Cal and Gall). Basically you can sum it up to range and stacking that 25% extra damage across multiple other boni. Well, hopefully this will help other new players trying to crunch the numbers ...
Vathar Elegance	Posted - 2006.08.08 14:39:00 - [19] Another thing worth mentionning: you talk about effective damage reduction due to tracking and sig radius. While I agree that you can't do much about sig radius (except painters, but they're not that good), decent piloting skills can reduce the impact of tracking; ie, you can offset this situational modifier by knowing how to fly your ship, whereas if you rely on smaller guns, it'll be easier to hit your target, but you won't be able to increase damage by reducing a situational malus. You'll be stuck with the max damage of your small guns. _ Originally by: Stamm Minmatar are kind of like going down a flight of stairs on an office chair firing an uzi
Diana Merris Minmatar	Posted - 2006.08.08 14:43:00 - [20] Yes, your math is correct. Damage is doubled when you go up a size but RoF is only 2/3rds so your damage over time is 4/3rds, a 33.3% increase in DoT. Why use the larger weapons? First, they have twice the range. Second, the ships bonus is only for appropriate sized weapons. Third, against appropriate sized targets they will track and hit ok. There have been many threads commenting on the low damage scaling on guns all the way back to beta.
Crellion Art of War	Posted - 2006.08.08 14:44:00 - [21] Originally by: Axle skye While your general assumptions are correct in terms of dps, one other factor that you have overlooked is the added power of wreacking shots. a good chunk of this game gets lost in the dps race. the 250mm rails will hit with a wreacking shot for quite a bit more damage, often saving you several shots at once. Erred post disregard ^ As to the OP: yes difference is small but as fully explained in the thread with more turret slots and increased cruiser tank (= you shoot for more time) it becomes 2x as it should or more. Range is oc another advantage but that balances with worse tracking so its not worth mentioning. Also fitting reqs are irrlevant. Med weps are balanced for cruiser sized ship's fitting capabilities. If anything frig guns have relatively lower fitting reqs.
Yaman	Posted - 2006.08.08 14:44:00 - [22] I didn't read much of this other than the title..then what appeared to be disagreements.. lol BUT I did want to bump it and say that I think small vs. medium weapons definitely need to have more of a gap in damage. Sure you can get 400 some + off medium projectile, BUT the howitzers take forever to fire. My Crusader and heck the Amarr Assault Frigate...were doing AMAZING damage on tech2 guns. I can't say the same for my tech2 medium lasers. Now, I havn't tried on a Zealot or Absolution - but even a normal cruiser should do more with tech2 medium lasers than a small ship with tech2 small lasers....even if that small ship has bonuses. I'm not saying change the small guns, I love them - they tear things to bits. AND the ships generally are not tankers...maybe the assault frigate - but not really. I do think - at least on behalf of amarr - that medium lasers dps should be increased slightly. slightly. further supported by the fact that they only do em/therm and NOT any other type of damage - of course they should do more damage. I would even say that they should stand to do more damage than other medium turrets just because of their limitation. - limitation on range, CAP USE, and most important - damage type. I'm sorry but I actually equip medium projectile on some of my amarr ships.... that's sad.
Hugh Ruka Caldari	Posted - 2006.08.08 15:12:00 - [23] Originally by: Crellion Originally by: Axle skye While your general assumptions are correct in terms of dps, one other factor that you have overlooked is the added power of wreacking shots. a good chunk of this game gets lost in the dps race. the 250mm rails will hit with a wreacking shot for quite a bit more damage, often saving you several shots at once. Erred post disregard ^ As to the OP: yes difference is small but as fully explained in the thread with more turret slots and increased cruiser tank (= you shoot for more time) it becomes 2x as it should or more. Range is oc another advantage but that balances with worse tracking so its not worth mentioning. Also fitting reqs are irrlevant. Med weps are balanced for cruiser sized ship's fitting capabilities. If anything frig guns have relatively lower fitting reqs. Oh, Axle is right: 150mm rail damage mod: 2.75 antimatter small damage: 12 250mm rail famage mod: 2.75 antimatter medium damage: 24 possible wrecking hit: 150mm: 2.75123 = 99 250mm: 2.75243 = 198 I think the 3x multiplier for wrecking hits is correct. 250mm rof 6.38 150mm rof 4.25 "wrecking DPS": 150mm: 99/4.25 = 23.3 250mm: 198/6.38 = 31.03 25% increase I know this is a best case scenario, but generaly the hit quality formula will skew the total damage ballance towards the larger gun. This is offset by worse tracking, but if they had equal tracking, what use would frig guns have (lower damage, range) ? AFAIK hit quality is a static distribution not influenced by gun or target parameters once tracking and optimal criteria are met. ------------------------------ at least fit ECCM before you start crying how overpowered ECM is.
Tyler Lowe Minmatar DROW Org Sylph Alliance	Posted - 2006.08.08 15:27:00 - [24] Originally by: Yaman I didn't read much of this other than the title..then what appeared to be disagreements.. lol BUT I did want to bump it and say that I think small vs. medium weapons definitely need to have more of a gap in damage. Sure you can get 400 some + off medium projectile, BUT the howitzers take forever to fire. My Crusader and heck the Amarr Assault Frigate...were doing AMAZING damage on tech2 guns. I can't say the same for my tech2 medium lasers. Now, I havn't tried on a Zealot or Absolution - but even a normal cruiser should do more with tech2 medium lasers than a small ship with tech2 small lasers....even if that small ship has bonuses. I'm not saying change the small guns, I love them - they tear things to bits. AND the ships generally are not tankers...maybe the assault frigate - but not really. I do think - at least on behalf of amarr - that medium lasers dps should be increased slightly. slightly. further supported by the fact that they only do em/therm and NOT any other type of damage - of course they should do more damage. I would even say that they should stand to do more damage than other medium turrets just because of their limitation. - limitation on range, CAP USE, and most important - damage type. I'm sorry but I actually equip medium projectile on some of my amarr ships.... that's sad. That's hysterically funny, because for PVE, I fit medium beams on my Typhoon. Best raw dps of any weapon system, best versitility of any weapon system in terms of shifting optimal on the fly. Small beams, which I fit on my Raven for running angel missions, kill the elite frigates (vipers and webifiers) faster then medium autocannon, and those are in theory vulnerable to the wrong damage types for lasers. To the OP: Using gun sizes appropriate to target size will yield best results. Small guns for frigates/destroyers, medium guns for cruisers/target painted destroyers/battlecruisers, large guns for battleships/target painted battlecruisers. J.A.F.O.
Crellion Art of War	Posted - 2006.08.08 15:35:00 - [25] Originally by: Hugh Ruka Originally by: Crellion Originally by: Axle skye While your general assumptions are correct in terms of dps, one other factor that you have overlooked is the added power of wreacking shots. a good chunk of this game gets lost in the dps race. the 250mm rails will hit with a wreacking shot for quite a bit more damage, often saving you several shots at once. Erred post disregard ^ As to the OP: yes difference is small but as fully explained in the thread with more turret slots and increased cruiser tank (= you shoot for more time) it becomes 2x as it should or more. Range is oc another advantage but that balances with worse tracking so its not worth mentioning. Also fitting reqs are irrlevant. Med weps are balanced for cruiser sized ship's fitting capabilities. If anything frig guns have relatively lower fitting reqs. Oh, Axle is right: 150mm rail damage mod: 2.75 antimatter small damage: 12 250mm rail famage mod: 2.75 antimatter medium damage: 24 possible wrecking hit: 150mm: 2.75123 = 99 250mm: 2.75243 = 198 I think the 3x multiplier for wrecking hits is correct. 250mm rof 6.38 150mm rof 4.25 "wrecking DPS": 150mm: 99/4.25 = 23.3 250mm: 198/6.38 = 31.03 25% increase I know this is a best case scenario, but generaly the hit quality formula will skew the total damage ballance towards the larger gun. This is offset by worse tracking, but if they had equal tracking, what use would frig guns have (lower damage, range) ? AFAIK hit quality is a static distribution not influenced by gun or target parameters once tracking and optimal criteria are met. Yes but they are infcluenced by rof. In the same fight a frig will have 2x the amount of wreckings as a cruiser (more if we are talking rails) simply because you shoot more times.

Pages: [1] :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.