Weapon Accuracies Compared

[Linuxizer]

With all the different lasers in the game, I thought it would be nice to compare them, graphically. Performance in accuracy seems most interesting, so here are a couple of graphs comparing the different lasers and how much accuracy they lose over range and azimuth. I also threw in railguns and rockets, but let the railguns go off the scale rather than lose resolution at the more common ranges.

 

http://imgur.com/1Nv9Xdm.jpg

 

The graphs are in polar co-ordinates. The radius is the range in meters, and the angle is the amount of swivel on the weapon when you fire. In case any newer player is reading this, I should point out that, in practice, most weapons become unreliable at very short range (< 500m or so). I'm not sure what is the exact reason. Lag? Range is measured from camera instead of ship? To target instead of target lead indicator? Azimuth is measured from camera instead of ship?

 

I didn't really learn anything new, except maybe that Rockets are worse than I thought, and I still don't like Quad Lasers.

 

Details:

Offensive companion bonus - +6% accuracy, and either +25% ammo or +8% reload speed

Capacitor - none

RFL and LLC - tracking upgrade instead of the critical upgrade

HLC - armor pierce upgrade instead of the critical and tracking upgrade

Ion Cannon - engine drain upgrade instead of the range upgrade

Slug Railgun - accuracy and tracking upgrade instead of the consumption upgrade

Rockets - damage upgrade instead of the range upgrade

[Verain]

I dislike that these are two slices of a large cylinder of these things stacked together (with the Z axis being accuracy). Cool graphs though, but you know I always criticize when you leave stuff I think is important out. In this case, I would think values down to 40% accuracy would be good to see.

[Linuxizer]

I dislike that these are two slices of a large cylinder of these things stacked together (with the Z axis being accuracy). Cool graphs though, but you know I always criticize when you leave stuff I think is important out. In this case, I would think values down to 40% accuracy would be good to see.

 

The graphs for 40%, and even 60% accuracy, end up mostly as pie slices of entire weapon envelopes (the entire firing arc out to max range).

[Verain]

That's useful though

[Gorgothus]

I dislike.

 

The one constant variable in the known galaxy

[Linuxizer]

Envelopes for 60%+ accuracy and 40%+ accuracy:

 

http://imgur.com/dmoRgdT.jpg

 

The next logical step, of course, is to graph the effective damage. This combines weapon accuracy, range, tracking penalty, evasion, base damage, capacitor, critical chance and damage, all in one convenient picture

 

(Edit: this picture has a mistake) http://imgur.com/Mg5xRRL.jpg

 

(Edit: this picture should be correct) http://imgur.com/JMYsqWI.jpg

 

I picked 23% evasion for the target. The left graph shows the envelopes for 1000 dps, which are small to non-existant. The right graph shows the envelopes for 500 dps. This time, I separated Burst Laser Cannon into two curves: BLC + Damage Capacitor, and the ever-popular combo of BLC + Damage Capacitor + Targeting Telemetry + Wingman. These damage rates are sustainable until blaster power pool is depleted. I didn't put much effort into the railguns as they are simply too different, and the splash damage varies too much.

Edited October 17, 2015 by Linuxizer

[ALaggyGrunt]

On the left, you see really fast why people like BLC.

 

I bet these graphs, or some very much like them, got the devs in trouble when designing this game, though: they all assume you're constantly on target.

 

To make more realistic representation of what kind of damage you can expect out of a weapon, the graph would need to be more like:

Maximum damage in 0.25s window/accuracy at range and deflection.

 

Those are the kind of scenarios you're going to get against competent pilots.

[Linuxizer]

On the left, you see really fast why people like BLC.

 

I bet these graphs, or some very much like them, got the devs in trouble when designing this game, though: they all assume you're constantly on target.

 

To make more realistic representation of what kind of damage you can expect out of a weapon, the graph would need to be more like:

Maximum damage in 0.25s window/accuracy at range and deflection.

 

Those are the kind of scenarios you're going to get against competent pilots.

 

Good comments. You made me realize there was a mistake I somehow left out the tracking penalty in the BLC + DC + TT + WM curves. It makes a small difference. I also added LC + FC + TT + WM and QLC + FC + TT + WM.

 

These graphs are valid for any positive time window up to blaster power pool depletion (about 6s for most lasers). For a window of 0.25s, the left graph shows the envelopes for >= 250 damage while the right graph shows the envelopes for >= 125 damage.

 

For example, using BLC + DC + TT + WM at a Gunship at 2800m at 20 degrees, in a 0.25s window, assuming perfect aim, the combo gives 250 damage on average. The BLC has a 0.75s reload time, giving a 67% chance that it is reloading during the entire 0.25s window (therefore doing 0 damage), and a 33% chance that it is ready to fire (for a further 2% chance to miss, 78% chance of 662 damage or 20% chance of 1158 damage). Statistically, you can expect to do 250 damage on average in a 0.25s window.

[ALaggyGrunt]

Not quite what I meant.

 

I was talking about what happens when you have 0.25s time windows spaced apart by a second or three. So BLC cycles, ready for the next shot when you get one.

Railguns are pretty similar: shoot something, it runs and hides if it's smart. Have a new shot charged and ready to go when it peeks out-another heavy hit. The graphs represent what happens if the target is nice enough to hold still. BLC and railguns are so powerful in a real fight because most people aren't nice enough to hold still, and you get very short windows of opportunity in which to fire.

 

The spacemachineguns will put out a lot less damage in that kind of fight.

 

Edit: The other thing you can do with burst lasers is shoot-fly-shoot-fly. It takes a bit of skill, but it's possible, and very powerful when you're shooting around obstacles.

Edited October 18, 2015 by ALaggyGrunt

[Linuxizer]

Not quite what I meant.

 

I was talking about what happens when you have 0.25s time windows spaced apart by a second or three. So BLC cycles, ready for the next shot when you get one.

Railguns are pretty similar: shoot something, it runs and hides if it's smart. Have a new shot charged and ready to go when it peeks out-another heavy hit. The graphs represent what happens if the target is nice enough to hold still. BLC and railguns are so powerful in a real fight because most people aren't nice enough to hold still, and you get very short windows of opportunity in which to fire.

 

The spacemachineguns will put out a lot less damage in that kind of fight.

 

Edit: The other thing you can do with burst lasers is shoot-fly-shoot-fly. It takes a bit of skill, but it's possible, and very powerful when you're shooting around obstacles.

 

What I did was relatively simple and I only took the weapon stats and ship stats from Dulfy or the in-game hangar screens. Modelling the firing opportunities and plotting combat performance is a bit more complicated. I'll have to think about this.