Go Back   Star Trek Online > Support > Gameplay Bug Reports
Login

Notices

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 1 FAW ignoring [Acc] modifiers
04-04-2012, 09:59 AM
Problem:
When using Fire at Will the hit rate of the beams drops to the hit rate level of a common turret. The hit rate does not noticeably improve with [Acc] modifiers on the weapons.
I suspect that FAW either ignores [Acc] modifiers or uses a wrong magnitude (e.g. +1% bonus accuracy instead of +10%).

Some sample data (22,7% bonus accuracy vs 54,3% bonus defense):
Turret (common): 79% hit rate
Turret [Acc]x2: 91%
Beam array (common) with FAW2: 75%
Beam array [Acc]x2 with FAW2: 76%
This was a short test (~12min, ~470 shots per weapon), so there is some room for error, but it is already obvious that the [Acc] modifier is not being applied correctly.

How to reproduce:
1) Equip beam arrays and turrets with the same accuracy modifier.
2) Enable the combat log.
3) Shoot at a target with a fixed defense value (that is higher than your bonus accuracy) and use FAW. Keep doing this for a long time to gather useful data.
4) Look at the combat log and calculate the hit rates for beams with FAW and turrets.
5) Repeat steps 1-4 with different accuracy modifiers.
(To make it easier, you can also equip weapons of different energy types with different [Acc] modifiers, so you can test them simultaneously and still have useable combat log data since it distinguishes between different energy types (at least for FAW2).)

Expected Behaviour:
FAW hit rates with a given bonus accuracy level are equal to hit rates with other weapons with the same bonus accuracy.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 2
04-04-2012, 05:15 PM
Wow. Just wow . . .
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 3
04-05-2012, 02:14 PM
i thank you good sir for all the unpaid work you do
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 4
04-05-2012, 02:27 PM
i thought my [acc]x2 beams were missing more then they should have with FAW, weren't any better seeming then the very inaccuracy polarized tet beams another character was using.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 5
04-05-2012, 05:15 PM
He blinded me with Science!
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 6
04-08-2012, 04:15 AM
Further tests have also produced situations where FAW2 had hit rates below turret hit rates (FAW2 with no [Acc] and with [Acc]x1 / [Acc]x2 all below a turret without [Acc]). Of course I cannot completely rule out that this is just coincidence and it all hits with turret hit rate (which would still be a bug for [Acc] modifiers), but I'd like to know more about how accuracy works. Is there a range-dependent term in the calculations somewhere?
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 7
04-08-2012, 01:33 PM
Yeah, I've noticed that I miss a lot more with FAW...almost 50% of the time, when fighting small fighters, even though I have a high accuracy.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 8
05-02-2012, 12:13 PM
Considering that the Fed carrier is about to be released, FAW will become even more important as a spam-clearing tool. Any chance we can get it fixed so that it can actually do what it is supposed to do?
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 9
05-02-2012, 12:39 PM
thanks to faw inaccuracy, my damage has been so much less that ive been forced to rely on single cannons on my excelcior and DHC on my vorcha! whoa is me! they are quite useless at dealing with spam too
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 10
05-06-2012, 05:03 AM
Can we seriously get this fixed please.

FAW is the crucial element in clearing this ridiculous level of overpowered spam we have at the minute and it's only doing it's job half as well as it should be.
Closed Thread

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 06:19 PM.