Go Back   Star Trek Online > Information and Discussion > The Academy
Login

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 111
12-02-2010, 01:52 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by richander View Post
[...]
Also, and this might be important, was the test character highly skilled or low skill?
That is answered in his OP, you can even review his raw data there, but i don't blame you because people often don't pay attention to the details when confronted with a wall of text.

And you need to realize why your conclusion below is wrong.

Quote:
Originally Posted by richander View Post
[...]
There is no way for this ratio to change as the power level increases. Each point of power will be worth 2% of the base regardless of whether it is the 100th point of power or the 125th point. Therefore any graph this formula produced would have exactly the same shape at 100 points as at 125 points and only differ in scale. [...]
Best regards, dukedom.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 112
12-02-2010, 03:50 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by richander View Post
I've been double checking my own analysis of the numbers, looking for any place I might have made incorrect assumptions. Nagorik, you mentioned that your testing was done against negvars with low mark weapons so as to increase the sample size per combat... How much variation did you expect due to small range fluctuations? Did you do any testing at rest against immobile targets like satellites?

Also, and this might be important, was the test character highly skilled or low skill?
Most of your questions are addressed in my test setup post, but I don't think that they will really help alleviate your confusion, because I believe you are focusing on the wrong factors.

BigBadB never tested weapon scaling, he tested, or reported, the effect of skill on listed weapon damage and power on listed weapon damage. In all my tests the skill remains constant, otherwise it would render all of the results moot. There is no real contradiction between anything BigBadB posted and anything I have.

I believe your confusion isn't due to math per se, but merely a misunderstanding of the mechanics involved. The truth is I've already covered all of this in the original post, so I'm a bit reluctant to type the whole thing over again. The reason the curves are not identical at different power levels is because the drain value makes up a higher percentage of the total at lower power levels. BigBadB never tested the results of weapon power drain in combat, so what is covered here is simply beyond the scope of his testing.

An analogy might be that BigBadB's tests explain how a speedometer works, whereas mine tell you how many miles per gallon you can expect to achieve at a given speed. A speedometer is an important tool for measuring speed, but that alone tells you nothing about fuel efficiency. That isn't to say my testing is better, just that there is an additional factor involved in my results, which is the actual energy drain observed when firing a number of weapons.

Going back to the DPS curves, there is a simple reason that they vary at different power levels. To explain why, let's just look at the most extreme comparison: 8 beams at 125 power vs 8 beams at 25 power. Each beam beyond the first drains 10 power. At 125 power your max power level is 125 and your minimum is 55, with many shots actually taking place between those power levels. At 25 power level, your max power level is 25, and your minimum power level is 0, with most shots actually taking place at 0 power and doing no damage (it only takes 4 beams firing at once to drain you to 0 from 25 power). I think it should be obvious that the DPS curve at 25 power and 125 power won't be identical, because anything beyond 3 beams will do negligible damage at 25, while at 125 you have the power to support a drain up to the full 8 weapons. Everything in between those two extremes is just a matter of degree.

The bottom line is that it's actually expected that the DPS curves would be wildly different at different power levels, and it would be more surprising if that were not the case.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 113
12-02-2010, 06:29 AM
nice simplified explanation Nagorak, i would have started with why the transformation of weapon power upon time is not bijective next *cough*.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 114
12-03-2010, 09:13 AM
^ stop. you go there and you'll start confusing me.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 115
12-03-2010, 10:10 AM
This is informative. I was having a discussion with a fleet mate that swears by the 8-beam build as a tac. The 8-beam build is nice because you are doing consistent damage across all firing arcs, the 8-beam is not "spiky" enough to kill things. Unfortunately in this game spikes are very important to kill things, it is one thing that CAN get you ahead of the healing. In a team setup consistent might be good but once you start getting into solos or 2v2 spikes become more apparent.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 116
12-04-2010, 05:30 AM
Just an update for everyone. I finished retesting turrets at 125 power and uploaded the updated 125 weapon power chart, and the calculated 135 weapon power chart. So, for anyone who is interested, the information in both of those charts is now up to date.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 117
12-04-2010, 05:01 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by dukedom View Post
That is answered in his OP, you can even review his raw data there, but i don't blame you because people often don't pay attention to the details when confronted with a wall of text.

And you need to realize why your conclusion below is wrong.



Best regards, dukedom.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richander View Post
Each point of power will be worth 2% of the base regardless of whether it is the 100th point of power or the 125th point. Therefore any graph this formula produced would have exactly the same shape at 100 points as at 125 points and only differ in scale.
Ah, here I must confess to some poor late night communications, which seem to have led to some confusion. I was speaking generically rather than specifically about Nagorik's graph, and apparently left out two words. The ratio remains constant and has exactly the same EFFECT on shape as at 125. I wasn't intending to claim there was a problem with Nagorik's graph, but trying to indicate that I recognized it was topologically correct and that my problem was with the value of the actual numbers.

Thank you for pointing out the raw numbers in his OP. I did indeed miss that due to its length.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nagorak View Post
BigBadB never tested weapon scaling, he tested, or reported, the effect of skill on listed weapon damage and power on listed weapon damage. In all my tests the skill remains constant, otherwise it would render all of the results moot.
In the tests I did, before I discovered your post, I was also researching weapon scaling and kept skill as a constant. But it occurs to me that skill is not necessarily constant across time. Having had a chance over the last few days to compare the raw data, I'm now working on the hypothsis that the devs have indeed tweaked the formula at some point to decrease the effect of skill. Also the timing would seem to match other changes in the game to lengthen combat.

Not that this difference changes the value of the graphs as a decision making tool. I don't see any reason to reproduce earlier data. Anyways, a change in the effect of skill in BigBadB's formula would explain the unknown difference in DPS results that I was trying to explain, and having looked at Nagorik's raw data I'm satisfied it occurs in the equation and not in the analysis of weapon scaling.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 118
12-04-2010, 08:08 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by richander View Post
Ah, here I must confess to some poor late night communications, which seem to have led to some confusion. I was speaking generically rather than specifically about Nagorik's graph, and apparently left out two words. The ratio remains constant and has exactly the same EFFECT on shape as at 125. I wasn't intending to claim there was a problem with Nagorik's graph, but trying to indicate that I recognized it was topologically correct and that my problem was with the value of the actual numbers.

Thank you for pointing out the raw numbers in his OP. I did indeed miss that due to its length.



In the tests I did, before I discovered your post, I was also researching weapon scaling and kept skill as a constant. But it occurs to me that skill is not necessarily constant across time. Having had a chance over the last few days to compare the raw data, I'm now working on the hypothsis that the devs have indeed tweaked the formula at some point to decrease the effect of skill. Also the timing would seem to match other changes in the game to lengthen combat.

Not that this difference changes the value of the graphs as a decision making tool. I don't see any reason to reproduce earlier data. Anyways, a change in the effect of skill in BigBadB's formula would explain the unknown difference in DPS results that I was trying to explain, and having looked at Nagorik's raw data I'm satisfied it occurs in the equation and not in the analysis of weapon scaling.
Well, I'm glad you figured out what you were looking into. Sorry for any misunderstanding on my part. It's not impossible that the formula was tweaked. I've noticed that not all changes make an appearance in the patch notes.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 119
12-04-2010, 08:10 PM
I plan to do some more tests at lower power levels next. I'll be running tests at 50 power for certain, and possibly at 30 (the lowest I can actually achieve due to my captain's innate traits). I also may test at 75.

After I do some more testing, at least at 50 power level, I'm going to make a calculator like PatricianVetinari's. Maybe that's the ticket to getting stickied. :p
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 120
12-07-2010, 02:30 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nagorak View Post
I plan to do some more tests at lower power levels next. I'll be running tests at 50 power for certain, and possibly at 30 (the lowest I can actually achieve due to my captain's innate traits). I also may test at 75.

After I do some more testing, at least at 50 power level, I'm going to make a calculator like PatricianVetinari's. Maybe that's the ticket to getting stickied. :p
I don't think you need more power levels for a calculator. It would be far more interesting to see the values of combinations (i.e. 2 dual heavy cannons + 2 turrets) there. While you can guesstimate those combinations from your graphs the margin of error is to high for a calculator.

And I'm aware that completing that logs is far more work than 'just' adding another power level graph
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 06:30 AM.