| Author |
Damage numbers |
Phoebuzz
Grand Admiral
Joined: November 17, 2003
Posts: 110
|  Posted: 2010-05-12 15:17
I did not know where to post this, so here it is.
These test were made with an EAD and a Mandi, both unmodded, against ICC sensor plats.
Several salvos of each weapon types were fired, then the final damage was adjusted by the plat's shield regen (1% every 12.5s).
These tests took more than an hour to do, I had to redo them several time each to minimize the risk of error, but still, some are still possible.
UGTO/EAD:
Standard Chemical Lasers (168.6gu) (0.72e/4s)
25gu
10.25%/8 /4s
32.0dps
10.25%/8 /0.72s
178.0dpe
90gu
6.4%/8 /4s
20.0dps
155gu
2.4%/8 /4s
7.5dps
2.4%/8 /0.72e
41.7dpe
Heavy Chemical Lasers (273.5gu) (5.8e/13s)
25gu
43.5%/5 /13s
67.0dps
43.5%/5 /5.8e
150.0dpe
268gu
10.0%/5 /13s
15.4dps
10.0%/5 /5.8e
34.5dpe
Proton Torps (?e/7.6s)
16.8%/8/7.6s
27.6dps
K'luth/Mandi:
Disruptors (208gu) (1.6e/8s)
10.5%/8 /8s (108gu/168.6gu = 64%)
16.4dps
10.5%/8 /1.6e (117gu/168.6gu = 69%)
82.0dpe
Assault Disruptors (324gu) (9.4e/22.5s)
28.5%/5 /22.5s (224gu/273.5gu = 82%)
24.8dps
28.5%/5 /9.4e (213gu/273.5gu = 78%)
60.7dpe
AM Torps (1.2e/8s)
13.1%/6/8s
27.3dps
13.1%/6/1.2e
182.0dpe
Heavy Psi Cannons (?e/4s)
6.7%/4/4s
41.9dps
Psi Cannons (?e/4s)
6.7%/8/4s
20.9dps
Plasma Cannons (0.4e/4s)
7.9%/8/4s
24.7dps
7.9%/8/0.4e
246.9dpe
Analysis:
HCLs do 100% more damage of CLs.
Assault Disruptors fo 50% more damage than Disruptors.
Heavy Cannons are two normal cannons strapped together.
Cannons do 50% more damage than disruptors.
Cannons do the same damage as assault disruptors.
Cannons are 4 time more energy efficient than assault disruptors. (Energy efficient means damage/energy, not energy/time.)
CL and HCL do roughly 100% at point blank and 20% damage at max range.
Disruptors do ~46% damage on the CLs' damage scale.
Assault Disruptors do ~35% damage on the HCLs' damage scale.
I'd test more weapons, but I couldn't login the beta server for quite some time. :/
[ This Message was edited by: Phoebuzz on 2010-05-12 16:04 ]
_________________
|
Pope
Fleet Admiral
Joined: June 11, 2002
Posts: 2449
From: World of tomorrow
| Posted: 2010-05-12 15:50
This is all very nice, but what is your point? The dev team can get those (or derivate) data from the resources.
_________________
|
Bardiche
Chief Marshal
Joined: November 16, 2006
Posts: 1247
| Posted: 2010-05-12 15:51
Thanks! In the future, there's a Private Message option to send someone data in private. I don't think it matters too much though, and it's useful for others as a means of how to test things.
NotAsStupid: I asked him for these numbers for private purposes. I thought he'd PM them but he decided to post them here. 
[ This Message was edited by: Bardiche on 2010-05-12 15:52 ]
_________________
|
BackSlash
Marshal
Galactic Navy
Joined: March 23, 2003
Posts: 11183
From: Bristol, England
| Posted: 2010-05-12 16:03
Quote:
|
On 2010-05-12 15:17, Phoebuzz wrote:
Analysis:
HCLs do 100% more damage of CLs.
Assault Disruptors fo 50% more damage than Disruptors.
Heavy Cannons are two normal cannons strapped together.
Cannons do 50% more damage than disruptors.
Cannons do the same damage as assault disruptors.
Cannons are 4 time more energy efficient than assault disruptors. (Energy efficient means damage/energy, not energy/time.)
CL and HCL do roughly 100% at point blank and 20% damage at max range.
Disruptors do ~46% damage on the CLs' damage scale.
Assault Disruptors do ~35% damage on the HCLs' damage scale.
|
|
HCL's do under 4x the damage of CL's.
DA's do just over 4x the damage of D's at low levels, 2x at high levels.
DA's do about 65% of a HCL's max damage.
D's do about 50% of a CL's max damage at low levels, at high levels they do 120% damage compared to CL's.
Bare in mind that the figures are skewed in favour of HCL's and CL's due to the fact that they have falloff.
CL's do 15% of their damage at max range.
HCL's do 25% of their damage at max range.
It's more trickly to compare beams ot cannons in raw data due to the fact that beams work in a much different way.
Interesting to see your cannon/beam results though. Thanks.
[ This Message was edited by: BackSlash on 2010-05-12 16:11 ]
_________________
|
Phoebuzz
Grand Admiral
Joined: November 17, 2003
Posts: 110
| Posted: 2010-05-12 16:16
Quote:
|
On 2010-05-12 16:03, BackSlash wrote:
Quote:
|
On 2010-05-12 15:17, Phoebuzz wrote:
Analysis:
HCLs do 100% more damage of CLs.
Assault Disruptors fo 50% more damage than Disruptors.
Heavy Cannons are two normal cannons strapped together.
Cannons do 50% more damage than disruptors.
Cannons do the same damage as assault disruptors.
Cannons are 4 time more energy efficient than assault disruptors. (Energy efficient means damage/energy, not energy/time.)
CL and HCL do roughly 100% at point blank and 20% damage at max range.
Disruptors do ~46% damage on the CLs' damage scale.
Assault Disruptors do ~35% damage on the HCLs' damage scale.
|
|
HCL's do under 4x the damage of CL's.
DA's do just over 4x the damage of D's at low levels, 2x at high levels.
DA's do about 65% of a HCL's max damage.
D's do about 50% of a CL's max damage at low levels, at high levels they do 120% damage compared to CL's.
Bare in mind that the figures are skewed in favour of HCL's and CL's due to the fact that they have falloff.
CL's do 15% of their damage at max range.
HCL's do 25% of their damage at max range.
It's more trickly to compare beams ot cannons in raw data due to the fact that beams work in a much different way.
[ This Message was edited by: BackSlash on 2010-05-12 16:04 ]
|
|
I'm taking reload into consideration, as alphas have not mattered in quite a few years. (Beside being quite scary to the receiving party.)
And the cloaking/uncloaking is far too slow to allow any advantage to the ADs long reloads. (22.5s) You could scale all (non-PDable) weapons so they re-fire once every 4s (with appropriately scaled damage & energy cost) and the combat would barely be any difference ingame, except for the lag of course.
Thanks about the exact max range diminishing return on CLs.
_________________
|
Bardiche
Chief Marshal
Joined: November 16, 2006
Posts: 1247
| Posted: 2010-05-12 16:59
So far my analysis is providing that K'Luth's damage output versus efficiency of combat range is achieved at 200~300gu range, providing you don't want the enemy to immediately run out of laser range.
Crunching down numbers (under the assumption energy usage is listed per device rather than per group), it looks like the K'Luth Assault Disruptor, when compared to the UGTO Heavy Chemical Laser, is energy efficient by a ~0.035 margin, per device.
I haven't yet calculated energy efficiency VS damage output at a common range, but from the looks of it the K'Luth weaponry is more energy efficient than they look at a first glance, offset by their "burst" mode of attack consuming more energy in one go.
This is actually surprising. Huh. I'd always thought K'Luth weren't energy efficient.
_________________
|
BackSlash
Marshal
Galactic Navy
Joined: March 23, 2003
Posts: 11183
From: Bristol, England
| Posted: 2010-05-12 17:03
Don't be silly Bard, you must be wrong. Afterall we're all stealth UGTO biased and only want UGTO to be amazing.
_________________
|
Bardiche
Chief Marshal
Joined: November 16, 2006
Posts: 1247
| Posted: 2010-05-12 17:27
Quote:
|
On 2010-05-12 17:03, BackSlash wrote:
Don't be silly Bard, you must be wrong. Afterall we're all stealth UGTO biased and only want UGTO to be amazing.
|
|
Snark snark snaaark. That's my job. Hush, go sit in the corner and reflect on your misdoings.
_________________
|
Phoebuzz
Grand Admiral
Joined: November 17, 2003
Posts: 110
| Posted: 2010-05-12 17:47
Quote:
|
On 2010-05-12 16:59, Bardiche wrote:
So far my analysis is providing that K'Luth's damage output versus efficiency of combat range is achieved at 200~300gu range, providing you don't want the enemy to immediately run out of laser range.
Crunching down numbers (under the assumption energy usage is listed per device rather than per group), it looks like the K'Luth Assault Disruptor, when compared to the UGTO Heavy Chemical Laser, is energy efficient by a ~0.035 margin, per device.
I haven't yet calculated energy efficiency VS damage output at a common range, but from the looks of it the K'Luth weaponry is more energy efficient than they look at a first glance, offset by their "burst" mode of attack consuming more energy in one go.
This is actually surprising. Huh. I'd always thought K'Luth weren't energy efficient.
|
|
That number crunching is rationalizing.
You are making up a scenario to try to make disruptors look good... compared to EADs.
Beams are underpowered, all of them.
Disruptors don't have the consolation prize of ripping at close range, they just suck at all range.
You then go to make a scenario where the CLs are at their very worse to make disruptors seem to look good.
I'm going to tell you again since you missed it the first time.
A single cannon does the same damage over time as an assault disruptor.
That alone makes UGTO ship deal way more damage than K'luth's because they simply have more cannons.
The ridiculous energy inefficiency of beams is just adding insult to injury.
[ This Message was edited by: Phoebuzz on 2010-05-12 17:52 ]
_________________
|
Bardiche
Chief Marshal
Joined: November 16, 2006
Posts: 1247
| Posted: 2010-05-12 18:49
That was just a preliminary reaction, and not at all the intended basis I'd requested them for... noting that something takes less energy means almost nothing.
_________________
|
Pope
Fleet Admiral
Joined: June 11, 2002
Posts: 2449
From: World of tomorrow
| Posted: 2010-05-13 18:37
There's a reason why all the GOOD UGTO players use BD's... And they rip your dread to shreds with it. (It even out-maneuvers a K'luth cruiser... Try it)
We all know this.. You're saying the Team doesn't?
_________________
|
Kenny_Naboo
Marshal
Pitch Black
Joined: January 11, 2010
Posts: 3823
From: LobsterTown
| Posted: 2010-05-14 01:52
In a given timeframe, PC outranges and out-damages, and even has a higher ROF, compared to beams, be it CL or Ruptors....
Kluths are beam heavy.
You do the math.
[ This Message was edited by: Kenny_Naboo on 2010-05-14 01:56 ]
_________________
... in space, no one can hear you scream.....
|
English
Deutsch
Nederlands
)
