Go Back   Star Trek Online > Feedback > Federation Shipyards
Login

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Captain
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 3,140
# 11
10-13-2012, 03:46 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by adamkafei View Post
But at the same time the "on-hit" numbers are more realistic because they take that into account but at the same time how do you account for both ships as configured above producing the same figures?
they are more realistic, but impractical for any kind of comparison. and why shouldn't the t3 cruiser with same weapons do the same dmg? (ok despite the 1 less tac console)
a couple of STF runs is not the place to make accurate measuremant (said that the last time you postet that in another thread) thats why i find it more than doubtfull that they produce the "exact" same numbers.

but as i said, compare the numbers represented in the weapon tray...make a screenshot (you must use this command /screenshot_ui_jpg)
compare both numbers, and post it here again (you must hover over the weapon to highlight it's dmg numbers)...if they are exactly the same.
Open also the status window of both ships, so we can have a look at your exact config.
Go pro or go home
Captain
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,427
# 12
10-13-2012, 06:25 AM
This isn't an argument that has anything to do with cruisers whatsoever. I can pull similar DPS numbers on a Tier 3 escort to that of an unwrapped VA MVAE, because weapons don't "downgrade" depending on the ship they're mounted to. In fact the Excel keeps the same shield mod too no matter which flavor it comes in, so if you strap a MACO shield to the Tier 3, it'll be exactly the same as that of one strapped to a a Tier 5 (go ahead and try it).

Basically it's dishonest to compare Tier 3s to Tier 5s, especially from the perspective of a fully-levelled/specced character. The Tiers are designed for levelling (when you wouldn't have had nearly as many buffs and various boosts and skills as you do now), not for comparing in retrospect.
Captain
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 3,283
# 13
10-13-2012, 07:39 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by shimmerless View Post
This isn't an argument that has anything to do with cruisers whatsoever. I can pull similar DPS numbers on a Tier 3 escort to that of an unwrapped VA MVAE, because weapons don't "downgrade" depending on the ship they're mounted to. In fact the Excel keeps the same shield mod too no matter which flavor it comes in, so if you strap a MACO shield to the Tier 3, it'll be exactly the same as that of one strapped to a a Tier 5 (go ahead and try it).[/QOUTE]

Well you shouldn't as the MVAE has more consoles and boff skills so the ships should have some difference in damage

Basically it's dishonest to compare Tier 3s to Tier 5s, especially from the perspective of a fully-levelled/specced character. The Tiers are designed for levelling (when you wouldn't have had nearly as many buffs and various boosts and skills as you do now), not for comparing in retrospect.
Like I said in my opening post, I pulled the old one out for a laugh (not to compare them) and it performed (damage wise) as well as the RA version which shouldn't happen as the RA has an extra console and an extra tac boff skill.

If the ships performed differently to each other then I wouldn't be here talking about it, but according to my test results the extra tac console and boff skill had no effect. If the previous analysis is correct then the third console needs a fix.

On this occasion I'm not asking for a general buff to cruiser damage but the extra console and boff skill should put distance between two ships regardless of tier and if the console is working then there really is something up as the ship is dealing 24.4% less damage then it should.
Captain
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 3,283
# 14
10-13-2012, 10:16 AM
Ok, we have screenshots here and they show different prefire figures, however it doesn't explain the on-hit damage. Although consoles don't explain it either as I've just done the maths as follows:

Boost from 1 console: 170.3524

Console boost on retrofit: 26.2*3 = 78.6
Damage on retrofit (no consoles): 650.2

650.2*1.786 = 1161.2572

So expected damage prefire (with consoles) = 1161.2572
Actual damage prefire (with consoles) = 840.5
Difference: 320.7572

Console boost on Standard: 26.2*2 = 52.4
Damage on standard (no consoles): 650.2

650.2*1.524 = 990.9048

So expected damage prefire (with consoles) = 990.9048
Actual damage prefire (with consoles) = 788.6
Difference: 202.3048

So while the prefire damage increases for that 1 console I still find a hole in their maths. You can calculate it in percentages (as I have shown here) or in plain numbers (as I also have) and you should come out with the same results.

So either I'm wrong, after doing all my calculations 3 times in windows calculator, or the game maths is wrong, or there is a hidden variable

Last edited by adamkafei; 10-13-2012 at 10:38 AM. Reason: adjusted calculations to 26.2% per console rather than 24.4%
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 232
# 15
10-13-2012, 12:10 PM
Let's just say that the damage increase promised by consoles is pretty much a lie.

First, it adds additive with all other +damage% increases (from skills), but that's to be expected. That means you get a fixed amount of damage for each console. Which is actually happening.

But that's not all:
I just tested it on my Sci, with Mk XI purple BAs (base damage: 217.7) and Mk Xi blue consoles (+26.2%).

at 55 power, each console increased the damage by 29.4 (13.5% of base damage, 12.3% if normalized to 50 weapon power)
at 123 power, each console increased the damage by 54.6 (25.1% of base damage, 10.2% if normalized to 50 weapon power)

... I don't have an explanation for THAT one.

Basically, another console adds about 10% real damage, far from the promised numbers.
Which explains your original observation: The increase in weapon power and energy damage from EPtW1 to EPtW2 cancels out the additional console, completely.
Why and how? No clue. I'd need to do some more math to come up with a model for the actual increases, from which I could reverse-engineer the actual mechanics.

TL;DR: console damage increases as shown are ... very optimistic.
Captain
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 3,283
# 16
10-13-2012, 02:25 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by flekh View Post
Let's just say that the damage increase promised by consoles is pretty much a lie.
Yes, let's do that

Quote:
Originally Posted by flekh View Post
First, it adds additive with all other +damage% increases (from skills), but that's to be expected. That means you get a fixed amount of damage for each console. Which is actually happening.

But that's not all:
I just tested it on my Sci, with Mk XI purple BAs (base damage: 217.7) and Mk Xi blue consoles (+26.2%).

at 55 power, each console increased the damage by 29.4 (13.5% of base damage, 12.3% if normalized to 50 weapon power)
at 123 power, each console increased the damage by 54.6 (25.1% of base damage, 10.2% if normalized to 50 weapon power)

... I don't have an explanation for THAT one.
Well this is interesting, so we have two ships (and two careers?) showing similar results

Quote:
Originally Posted by flekh View Post
Basically, another console adds about 10% real damage, far from the promised numbers.
Which explains your original observation: The increase in weapon power and energy damage from EPtW1 to EPtW2 cancels out the additional console, completely.
Why and how? No clue. I'd need to do some more math to come up with a model for the actual increases, from which I could reverse-engineer the actual mechanics.
I decided to read the console text and they all say "Values do not reflect skills or other modifiers" which could explain a few things, I shall experiment with that theory myself and post any findings here

Quote:
Originally Posted by flekh View Post
TL;DR: console damage increases as shown are ... very optimistic.
This confuses me, could you please elaborate on it for me?
Captain
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 3,283
# 17
10-13-2012, 02:59 PM
Ok, my most recent findings.

I theorised that the console boost is based on the weapon base damage. I came out with this:

Base damage: 274.4
3 Console boost: 78.6%

Expected end damage: 490.0784
3 Console boost: 215.6784
1 Console boost: 71.8928

Damage with 3 consoles: 840.5
Expected damage without consoles: 624.8216

(running 99 weapon power)

I think I'm close but if this theory is correct then the game system is still wrong and they still need to look at it
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 232
# 18
10-13-2012, 03:41 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by adamkafei View Post
but if this theory is correct then the game system is still wrong and they still need to look at it
... I'd beg to differ.
The game system is fine - the balance it creates if fine. Not perfect, but fine.
What's wrong is that the game doesn't tell us what we can really expect to gain from an item. That it doesn't let us make educated decisions. That the only way to get some useful data is to actually run experiments instead of playing the game.
In short: it's the classic Lying Tooltip.

You're right though, they need to look at stuff like that.

If the game actually worked like the tooltips say it would ... oh, ... crap ... that might be a bit overpowered.
Captain
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 3,283
# 19
10-13-2012, 04:11 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by flekh View Post
If the game actually worked like the tooltips say it would ... oh, ... crap ... that might be a bit overpowered.
It would be for something like an escort but I think it would be a little refreshing for cruisers to gain those few points a the end of the day, it wouldn't be anything major on cruisers or on sci ships, it's more the mass of tac skills on escorts that would blow it there
Captain
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 3,605
# 20
10-14-2012, 06:55 PM
I think in general the game either needs to A) Explain what has diminishing returns and how large of an effect they will have (aka what the cap is, and where it starts to have a reduced effect, and what the maximum potential you can achieve will be), or B) Remove those diminishing returns (which is broken and OP as hell, so I do NOT support this idea).

Just my 2 ECs.
It is said the best weapon is one that is never fired. I disagree. The best weapon is one you only have to fire... once.
Why the Devs can't make PvE content harder. <--- DR proved me wrong!
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:21 PM.