Home » MODDING HQ 1.13 » v1.13 Modding, Customising, Editing » v1.13 Weapon & Item Refinement » Presentation: Weapon Effectiveness Scales on 6 Dimensions
| Re: Presentation: Weapon Effectiveness Scales on 6 Dimensions[message #310404]
|
Wed, 19 September 2012 18:57  
|
|
 JAsmine |
 |
Messages:306
Registered:May 2011 |
|
|
My proposal for revising the variables:
Importance 5/5 (vital to the role):
ubShotsPer4Turns
APsToReloadManually
ubReadyTime
Importance 4/5 (important to the role):
ubReadyTime
ubMagSize
ubBurstPenalty
BurstShotsPerBurstAP
bAutofireShotsPerFiveAP
AutoPenalty
Stock - Folding/Retractable
Trigger Group
Foregrip
Reflex/Kobra
Magazine Adapter
Importance 3/5 (helpful to the role):
Damage
Match Sights
Scope 2x
Magazine Adapter
APsToReload
ubMagSize
ubBurstPenalty
AutoPenalty
Importance 2/5 (mildly helpful to the role):
bAccuracy
APsToReload
Rifle LAM, Aimpoint, ISM
Importance 1/5 (barely helpful to the role):
usRange
bReliability
Shotgun Chokes, Duckbill
Importance 0/5 (irrelevant to the role):
NoSemiAuto
AttackVolume
Flash Suppressor
Suppressor
Grenade Launcher
Scope 10x, PSO-3
Scope 7x
Scope 4x, PSO-1, ZF-42, No 32, PEM
Explanation:
I made mag size in general (w/wo adapter) less important. Large mags are of course better than small mags, but this is true for all roles, isn't it? Being able to fire quickly is more important in CQB, so I made ready time more important. I crossed out reliability, because it is equally important for all roles. APs to reload made more important, because taking up to many APs to reload can be deadly in CQB. Burst/auto penalty made less important, because at close range it isn't as bad when your guns "spray".
All changes were also made, so that maybe LMGs shouldn't surpass some PDWs or MPs...
What do you think??
[Updated on: Wed, 19 September 2012 18:58] by Moderator Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Presentation: Weapon Effectiveness Scales on 6 Dimensions[message #310405]
|
Wed, 19 September 2012 19:37
|
|
| sorca_2 |
 |
Messages:202
Registered:September 2010
Location: California, USA |
|
|
HeadhunterHow about upping ReadyTime to 5/5 and lowering the Burst-related stuff to 3/5?
Yes, Tais made this exact suggestion as well.
JAsmineMy proposal for revising the variables:
Thanks for your suggestions (and Sam_Hotte)--please keep them coming! After talking in IRC (very special thanks to DepressivesBrot and Tais), we came to much of the same conclusions.
Burst/AP was lowered to 3/5 and Auto/AP was lowered to 2/5. Burst Penalty and Auto Penalty were reduced to 1/5 because the penalties don't matter very much at those short ranges. Magazine size and mag adapters were downgraded to 1/5 for the same reasons you stated. ReadyTime was bumped up to 5/5 again for the same reason you stated. Reflex scopes and Stocks were moved up to correspond to readytime and ShotsPer4Turns. The only thing I take issue with is getting rid of Reliability. Much like my rationale for damage as 3/5 for all weapons, a more reliable weapon is always better than a less reliable one, and that should be reflected (though very slightly at 1/5).
Here are the revised importance rates. I also converted the burst- and auto- related scales to simple 1-20 scales where semi-automatics get 1s. Because of the triggergroup variable, these weapons were getting hit much to heavily, and I think this account for the huge burst preference we saw before. I will post a new list of top weapons to see what you guys think.
Importance 5/5 (vital to the role):
ubReadyTime
ubShotsPer4Turns
APsToReloadManually
Reflex/Kobra
Stock - Folding/Retractable
Importance 4/5 (important to the role):
(none)
Importance 3/5 (helpful to the role):
BurstShotsPerBurstAP
Trigger Group
Damage
Match Sights
Scope 2x
Foregrip
Importance 2/5 (mildly helpful to the role):
bAutofireShotsPerFiveAP
bAccuracy
APsToReload
Rifle LAM, Aimpoint, ISM
Importance 1/5 (barely helpful to the role):
ubBurstPenalty
AutoPenalty
ubMagSize
Magazine Adapter
usRange
bReliability
Shotgun Chokes, Duckbill
Importance 0/5 (irrelevant to the role):
NoSemiAuto
AttackVolume
Flash Suppressor
Suppressor
Grenade Launcher
Scope 10x, PSO-3
Scope 7x
Scope 4x, PSO-1, ZF-42, No 32, PEM
Report message to a moderator
|
Sergeant 1st Class
|
|
|
|
| Re: Presentation: Weapon Effectiveness Scales on 6 Dimensions[message #310406]
|
Wed, 19 September 2012 20:09
|
|
| sorca_2 |
|
Messages:202
Registered:September 2010
Location: California, USA |
|
|
Here's a new top 30--roughly the top 10% of CQB weapons with their scaled stats (remember, they're 1-20):
Name CQB Scr WtCQB CQBRank RdyTime Shts/4T Damage Accu MagSize RelodAP Range Brts/AP BrstPen Auto/AP AutoPen NoSemiA APRelod AtkVol Reliab Flash S Suppres Stock TriggrG Foregrp Bipod MatchS Launchr Chokes Scpe10x Scope7x Scope4x Scope2x Reflex MagAdpt RiflLAM
HK MP7A1 501.82 74.54 1 17.5 20 4.5 12.5 16.66 17 6.5 1 11.5 15.5 11.5 10 20 18.5 12.5 10 10 10 10 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 10 0 10
KAC PDW 517.6 73.34 2 15 20 10.5 12.5 14 11 8 1 19.5 6.5 18.5 10 20 19.6 12.5 10 10 10 10 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 10 10 0 10
AK-107 583.5 70.7 3 7 12 10.5 12.5 14 11 12 10 19.5 15.5 20 10 20 8.5 18.5 10 10 10 10 10 10 0 10 0 10 10 10 10 10 0 10
AK-108 582.92 70.55 4 7 10 10.5 12.5 14 11 12.71 13.5 18.5 15.5 18.5 10 20 8.5 18.5 10 10 10 10 10 10 0 10 0 10 10 10 10 10 0 10
HK G36C 529 70.19 5 12.5 14 8 12.5 14 11 10 4.5 18.5 6.5 11.5 10 20 13 20 10 10 10 10 10 0 0 0 0 0 10 10 10 10 10 10
Colt M4A1 512.28 70.18 6 12.5 15 10.5 12.5 14 11 12.14 1 11.5 15.5 11.5 10 20 8.5 4.75 10 10 10 10 10 0 0 10 0 0 10 10 10 10 10 10
FAMAE SAF 449.5 70.08 7 13.5 15 4.5 12.5 14 11 7 18.5 4.5 19 4.5 10 20 18.5 6.5 10 10 10 10 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 10 0 0
AN-94 "Abakan 561.64 69.74 8 5.5 14 10.5 17.66 14 11 11.66 20 20 6.5 18.5 10 20 20 6.5 10 10 10 10 10 10 0 10 0 10 10 10 10 10 0 0
AEK-971 571.92 69.6 9 7 13 10.5 12.5 14 11 12.71 13.5 19.5 15.5 20 10 20 18.5 12.5 10 10 10 10 10 10 0 10 0 10 10 10 10 10 0 0
XM-8 Compact 506.5 69.54 10 13.75 16 8 17 14 11 10 1 11.5 6.5 11.5 10 20 13 6.5 10 10 10 10 10 0 0 10 0 0 10 10 10 10 10 10
AEK-973 573.34 69.34 11 7 9 14 12.5 14 11 12.42 13.5 18.5 15.5 18.5 10 20 6.5 12.5 10 10 10 10 10 10 0 10 0 10 10 10 10 10 10 0
HK 416 10" 549.6 68.99 12 10.5 14 8 12.5 14 11 10.3 1 11.5 15.5 11.5 10 20 13 18.5 10 10 10 10 10 10 0 10 0 0 10 10 10 10 10 10
Colt M4 Comma 491.1 68.76 13 13.5 17 10.5 7.5 14 11 10.8 1 11.5 6.5 11.5 10 20 8.5 6.5 10 10 10 10 10 0 0 10 0 0 10 10 10 10 10 10
HK MP5A4 466 68.76 14 13.75 15 4.5 17 14 11 7.5 10 4.5 15.5 4.5 10 20 18.5 6.5 10 10 10 10 10 0 0 10 0 0 0 0 10 10 10 0
XM-8 Baseline 527 68.67 15 12.5 14 10.5 17 14 11 11 1 11.5 6.5 11.5 10 20 13 6.5 10 10 10 10 10 10 0 10 0 0 10 10 10 10 10 10
Colt M16A1 536.22 68.29 16 10.5 12 13 12.5 14 11 12.86 1 11.5 15.5 11.5 10 20 16 4.75 10 10 10 10 10 10 0 10 0 0 10 10 10 10 10 10
HK 416 14" 551.28 68.07 17 9 12 10.5 12.5 14 11 12.14 1 11.5 15.5 11.5 10 20 13 18.5 10 10 10 10 10 10 0 10 0 0 10 10 10 10 10 10
FAMAE SAF Sil 447.82 67.51 18 12 12 3 17 14 11 5.66 15 11.5 15.5 11.5 10 20 18.5 6.5 0 10 10 10 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 10 0 0
SIG SG552 Com 519 67.21 19 10.5 13 8 12.5 14 11 10 4.5 11.5 6.5 11.5 10 20 12 15.5 10 10 10 10 10 10 0 0 0 0 10 10 10 10 10 10
FN SCAR-L CQC 526.6 66.91 20 12 13 8 12.5 14 11 10.3 1 11.5 6.5 11.5 10 20 13 15.5 10 10 10 10 10 10 0 10 0 0 10 10 10 10 10 10
FN P90 489.78 66.61 21 15 20 6 17 18.1 5.5 9.54 1 18.5 15.5 18.5 10 20 19.5 15.5 10 10 0 10 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 10 0 0
HK 416 16" 529.84 66.41 22 8 12 10.5 12.5 14 11 12.42 1 11.5 15.5 11.5 10 20 13 18.5 10 10 10 10 10 10 0 10 0 0 10 10 10 10 0 10
XM-8 Sharpsho 535.6 66.34 23 10.5 11 10.5 17 14 11 15.3 1 11.5 6.5 11.5 10 20 13 6.5 10 10 10 10 10 10 0 10 0 10 10 10 10 10 10 10
SIG SG551 SWA 531 66.31 24 8 12 10.5 12.5 14 11 12 4.5 11.5 6.5 11.5 10 20 12 15.5 10 10 10 10 10 10 0 10 0 0 10 10 10 10 10 10
Colt XM177-E1 495.1 66.18 25 13.25 15 8 7.5 14 11 10.3 1 11.5 15.5 11.5 10 20 8.5 4.75 10 10 10 10 10 10 0 10 0 0 10 10 10 10 10 0
FAMAE Mini SA 408.4 65.97 26 14 16 2 6 14 11 0.95 15 4.5 15.5 4.5 10 20 18.5 6.5 10 10 10 10 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 10 0 0
HK 53A3 478.76 65.62 27 10.5 12 8 12.5 14 11 9.88 4.5 11.5 6.5 11.5 10 20 12 6.5 10 10 10 10 10 0 0 0 0 0 10 10 10 10 10 10
Colt 9mm SMG 465.4 65.52 28 13.25 14 4.5 12.5 14 11 8.2 1 11.5 15.5 11.5 10 20 18.5 6.5 10 10 10 10 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 10 10 10 0
AK-105 507.9 65.43 29 9 12 8 12.5 14 11 10.2 1 18.5 6.5 18.5 10 20 18.5 18.5 10 10 10 10 10 0 0 0 0 0 10 10 10 10 0 10
AK-102 510.3 65.23 30 9 10 10.5 12.5 14 11 10.9 1 18.5 6.5 18.5 10 20 8.5 18.5 10 10 10 10 10 0 0 0 0 10 10 10 10 10 0 10
Some notable movers from before:
- The MP7 rose from 20 to 1, passing the KAC PDW
- The P90 rose from 44 to 21
- The Magpul rose from 65 to 32
- The HK23E fell from 16 to 65
- The HKMG36 fell from 13 to 42
- The Colt M4A1 rose from 24 to 6
I'll do a more detailed analysis below--it will take me a little while, meanwhile you guys can let me know what you think of the new top 30.
[Updated on: Wed, 19 September 2012 20:11] by Moderator Report message to a moderator
|
Sergeant 1st Class
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Presentation: Weapon Effectiveness Scales on 6 Dimensions[message #310410]
|
Wed, 19 September 2012 21:28
|
|
| sorca_2 |
|
Messages:202
Registered:September 2010
Location: California, USA |
|
|
Here are some details on the MP7, P90, and Magpul. The values represent how many "CQB Points" were earned for each variable.
Name CQB Scr WtCQB CQBRank RdyTime Shts/4T Damage Accu MagSize RelodAP Range Brts/AP BrstPen Auto/AP AutoPen NoSemiA APRelod AtkVol Reliab Flash S Suppres Stock TriggrG Foregrp Bipod MatchS Launchr Chokes Scpe10x Scope7x Scope4x Scope2x Reflex MagAdpt RiflLAM
HK MP7A1 501.82 73.71 1 9.73 11.12 1.5 2.78 1.85 3.78 0.72 0.33 1.28 3.45 1.28 0 11.12 0 1.39 0 0 5.56 3.34 3.34 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.34 5.56 0 2.22
FN P90 489.78 65.87 21 8.34 11.12 2 3.78 2.01 1.22 1.06 0.33 2.06 3.45 2.06 0 11.12 0 1.72 0 0 0 3.34 3.34 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.34 5.56 0 0
Magpul PDR-D 474.7 64.3 32 9.73 11.12 4.34 2.78 1.56 0.78 1.12 0.33 2.06 1.45 2.06 0 11.12 0 1.39 0 0 0 0 3.34 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.34 5.56 0 2.22
Here are the differences between the MP7 and P90 in terms of CQB Points:
Name RdyTime Shts/4T Damage Accu MagSize RelodAP Range Brts/AP BrstPen Auto/AP AutoPen NoSemiA APRelod AtkVol Reliab Flash S Suppres Stock TriggrG Foregrp Bipod MatchS Launchr Chokes Scpe10x Scope7x Scope4x Scope2x Reflex MagAdpt RiflLAM
FN P90 -1.39 0 0.5 1 0.16 -2.56 0.34 0 0.78 0 0.78 0 0 0 0.33 0 0 -5.56 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -2.22
The P90 loses 1.39 points for slower readytime, 2.56 points for reloading more slowly (it's a bullpup), 5.56 because the MP7 has an integral stock and the P90 can't equip one, and 2.22 due to RifleLAM/Aimpoint. Of course, the MP7 can't equip a Rifle LAM or Aimpoint, so that's troubling.
It looks like the ISM attachment struck again--18 weapons that can equip an ISM but not a RifleLAM/Aimpoint did not have their bonuses removed when I moved the ISM from the RifleLAM variable to the Reflex Sight variable. This also somewhat explains the sudden appearance of the XM-8 weapons. I will fix this and recalculate. I'm going to put the Reflex Sights and Stocks down a step in importance because the base stats (ReadyTime and ShotsPer4Turns) are more important than attachments that modify them. This is a good lesson we'll have to remember for later.
HeadhunterAnyways, good work with doing all this stuff and thanks for taking the time!
Thank you. I have officially realized why no one (including myself) has succeeding in doing this before.
If the AK's are still at the top after these changes, I'll do a comparison analysis on one of them.
[Updated on: Wed, 19 September 2012 21:30] by Moderator Report message to a moderator
|
Sergeant 1st Class
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Presentation: Weapon Effectiveness Scales on 6 Dimensions[message #310439]
|
Thu, 20 September 2012 16:12
|
|
| sorca_2 |
|
Messages:202
Registered:September 2010
Location: California, USA |
|
|
JAsmine(imo):
It doesn't make sense too go on adapting list-data again and again, until only "desired" guns show up at the top, because maybe the list also indicates, that some guns simply have unbalanced values.
DepressivesBrotAgreed. At some point we should accept the formula and rather look at the offending guns.
Right, I fully and completely acknowledge that. I'm not as concerned about individual weapons as I am about our feeling that the weights are accurate. Really, the whole "5/5 importance" thing is just a mental shortcut to get us in the vicinity of the real percentages we want (because it would be too hard to come up with exact percentages for 30 variables at the beginning).
In fact, let's forget the weapon list for a minute and check this out: the table below shows the percentage of the CQB score assigned to each variable by our importance weights. If we think these proportions are right, then the weapon list is just a byproduct of our accurate weights and we aren't being biased.
RdyTime Shts/4T Damage Accu MagSize RelodAP Range Brts/AP BrstPen Auto/AP AutoPen NoSemiA MnlRlod AtkVol Reliab Flash S Suppres Stock TriggrG Foregrp Bipod MatchS Launchr Chokes Scpe10x Scope7x Scope4x Scope2x Reflex MagAdpt RiflLAM
10% 10% 6% 4% 2% 4% 2% 6% 2% 4% 2% 0% 10% 0% 2% 0% 0% 1% 6% 6% 0% 6% 0% 2% 0% 0% 0% 6% 8% 2% 4%
First, I just realized that I labeled it "APRelod" before but it's really APsToReloadManually... I hope that wasn't confusing anyone (so I renamed it to MnlRlod). Anyway, the percentages seem fine except for, as DB points out, RifleLAM which I will adjust down to 2%. It's true that the reflex sight variable should be scaled like the stocks are, but I really can't figure out how to do it. Does anyone know how to calculate the AP bonus granted to a weapon by a Reflex Sight?
The only other question left for CQB is: are the 10% values for ReadyTime and ShotsPer4Turns big enough? From our room-clearing discussion, it seems like ShotsPer4Turns and Readytime should be much more, perhaps even double that. Thoughts?
EDIT: Tais offered the following nugget of wisdom on this topic: "Even if you come around the corner with a .22, if you fire enough rounds fast enough you will most certainly win every encounter."
[Updated on: Thu, 20 September 2012 16:24] by Moderator Report message to a moderator
|
Sergeant 1st Class
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Presentation: Weapon Effectiveness Scales on 6 Dimensions[message #310448]
|
Thu, 20 September 2012 18:20
|
|
| sorca_2 |
|
Messages:202
Registered:September 2010
Location: California, USA |
|
|
Sam_HotteBetween those two stats, ready time is less important than firing speed: on coming around Tais' corner i most probably have to raise the gun just once, but want to combat as many targets as ever possible.
So if at all, raise Shts/4T relative importance.
(Unless you'd see Tais' corner more like hit and run tactics - look around corner, raise gun, fire like 90% of your APs and hide again behind corner/wall; repeat next turn - then both stats are probably equally important)
I definitely use that tactic. Either way, it seems to me that CQB requires the most movement of all the roles (sniping hardly requires any), so you have the least amount of APs to work with and therefore weapons that take less AP are highly prized. As a consequence, CQB weapons would also be the best to have in most unplanned interrupt situations.
I suggested a 20%/20% split, and perhaps you'd like a 30%/10% split. Maybe we could compromise at 25%/15%. 
Report message to a moderator
|
Sergeant 1st Class
|
|
|
|
| Re: Presentation: Weapon Effectiveness Scales on 6 Dimensions[message #310449]
|
Thu, 20 September 2012 18:40
|
|
| Sam Hotte |
 |
Messages:1965
Registered:March 2009
Location: Middle of Germany |
|
|
sorca_2Sam_HotteBetween those two stats, ready time is less important than firing speed: on coming around Tais' corner i most probably have to raise the gun just once, but want to combat as many targets as ever possible.
So if at all, raise Shts/4T relative importance.
(Unless you'd see Tais' corner more like hit and run tactics - look around corner, raise gun, fire like 90% of your APs and hide again behind corner/wall; repeat next turn - then both stats are probably equally important)
I definitely use that tactic. Either way, it seems to me that CQB requires the most movement of all the roles (sniping hardly requires any), so you have the least amount of APs to work with and therefore weapons that take less AP are highly prized. As a consequence, CQB weapons would also be the best to have in most unplanned interrupt situations.
But then again, current evaluation is a bit biased against pistols/MPs since we do not appreciate dual wielding but prefer things like stocks and RifleLAM.
Just mentioning it, tho, maybe it might be useful do have another role like IIRC Jasmine mentioned "Sidearm, quick react self defense" or something.
Report message to a moderator
|
Sergeant Major
|
|
|
|
| Re: Presentation: Weapon Effectiveness Scales on 6 Dimensions[message #310485]
|
Fri, 21 September 2012 18:43
|
|
| sorca_2 |
|
Messages:202
Registered:September 2010
Location: California, USA |
|
|
Sam_HotteBut then again, current evaluation is a bit biased against pistols/MPs since we do not appreciate dual wielding but prefer things like stocks and RifleLAM.
Just mentioning it, tho, maybe it might be useful do have another role like IIRC Jasmine mentioned "Sidearm, quick react self defense" or something.
Based on this, I added a new variable: 2-Handed, and gave it the same weight as damage (moderate importance to CQB). I don't imagine this variable will be very useful to other roles besides Sidearm, but it's true that this was being overlooked--obviously a one-handed weapon has an advantage over an identical 2-handed weapon. In CQB this is especially true because range and accuracy aren't really factors. I downweighted RifleLAM by one more notch.
Using DB's Reflex Bonus calculation in the other thread, I was able to calculate the Reflex/Kobra/ISM bonus and make the variable reflective of the actual AP reduction provided (e.g. bonus from Reflex Sight for CAWS is huge while integral bonus for the P90 is tiny). With experimentation, I was able to determine that giving this revised variable 56% of the weight of the ShotsPer4Turns variable gives equal scaled score values for weapons with equal total ShotsPer4Turns (e.g. Spectre M4 w/o reflex gets same score as Desert Eagle .357 w/Reflex).
I also increased the weight of ReadyTime and ShotsPer4Turns such that ReadyTime accounts for 15% and ShotsPer4Turns and Reflex sight together account for 25%.
I believe the weights are now nearly as accurate as we can make them, and please let me know if you see the need for any further revisions.
With those potentially-final weights, here is the potentially-final list of the top 30 CQB weapons:
Name CQB Scr WtCQB CQBRank Total RdyTime Shts/4T Damage Accu MagSize RelodAP Range Brts/AP BrstPen Auto/AP AutoPen NoSemiA MnlRlod AtkVol Reliab 2Handed Flash S Suppres Stock TriggrG Foregrp Bipod MatchS Launchr Chokes Scpe10x Scope7x Scope4x Scope2x Reflex MagAdpt RiflLAM
HK MP7A1 453.82 66.3 1 256.16 17.5 20 4.5 12.5 16.66 17 6.5 1 11.5 15.5 11.5 10 20 18.5 12.5 10 10 10 0.5 10 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 0.5 0 0
FN P90 470.78 62.61 2 260.14 15 20 6 17 18.1 5.5 9.54 1 18.5 15.5 18.5 10 20 19.5 15.5 0 10 10 0 10 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 0.5 0 0
KAC PDW 461.6 62.1 3 260.6 15 20 10.5 12.5 14 11 8 1 19.5 6.5 18.5 10 20 19.6 12.5 0 10 10 1 10 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 10 1 0 0
HK MP5KA4 393.5 60.92 4 226 15 16 3 7.5 14 11 2.5 13.5 4.5 15.5 4.5 10 20 18.5 6.5 10 10 10 0 10 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 4 0 0
FAMAE SAF 426.5 60.9 5 237.5 13.5 15 4.5 12.5 14 11 7 18.5 4.5 19 4.5 10 20 18.5 6.5 0 10 10 2.5 10 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 6 0 0
Sawed-Off Sho 374.534 60.83 6 199.017 17.5 6 16 2.5 0.167 18 0.85 20 20 1 1 10 20 3.5 6.5 10 0 0 0 10 0 0 0 0 10 0 0 0 10 16 0 0
Magpul PDR-D 435.7 60.79 7 247.6 17.5 20 13 12.5 14 3.5 10.1 1 18.5 6.5 18.5 10 20 19.5 12.5 0 10 10 0 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 10 0.5 0 0
Beretta 93R 356.5 60.69 8 207.5 17.5 18 3 5 8 19.5 5 17 4.5 1 1 10 20 18.5 6.5 10 10 10 0 10 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0
HK G11 517.6 60.4 9 285.3 12 13 10.5 8 18 17 15.3 20 20 6.5 18.5 10 20 13 15.5 0 10 0 0 10 0 10 0 0 0 0 10 10 10 8 0 0
Jati-Matic GG 392.5 60.03 10 225.5 17.5 16 4.5 6 14 11 7 1 11.5 6.5 11.5 10 20 18.5 6.5 10 10 10 0 10 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 4 0 0
SR-2 Veresk 376 60 11 216 17.5 18 4.5 8 14 17 6.5 1 4.5 15.5 4.5 10 20 16 6.5 10 10 10 0.5 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 2 0 0
FAMAE Mini SA 389.4 59.94 12 223.95 14 16 2 6 14 11 0.95 15 4.5 15.5 4.5 10 20 18.5 6.5 10 10 10 1.5 10 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 4 0 0
AEK-919K "Kas 398.82 59.87 13 229.16 17.5 19 2 17 14 17 5.66 1 11.5 15.5 11.5 10 20 19.5 6.5 10 10 10 0.5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 1 0 0
HK G36C 511 59.86 14 287 12.5 14 8 12.5 14 11 10 4.5 18.5 6.5 11.5 10 20 13 20 0 10 10 4 10 10 0 0 0 0 0 10 10 10 7 10 10
HK MP5A4 440 59.45 15 249.25 13.75 15 4.5 17 14 11 7.5 10 4.5 15.5 4.5 10 20 18.5 6.5 0 10 10 2 10 10 0 0 10 0 0 0 0 10 5 10 0
Colt M4A1 490.28 59.31 16 279.39 12.5 15 10.5 12.5 14 11 12.14 1 11.5 15.5 11.5 10 20 8.5 4.75 0 10 10 4 10 10 0 0 10 0 0 10 10 10 5 10 10
Glock 18 349.5 59.27 17 204 20 19 3 2.5 8 19.5 2.5 1 2 20 4.5 10 20 18.5 12.5 10 10 10 0 0 0 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0
FAMAS G2 491.66 59.26 18 280.08 12 15 10.5 12.5 14 3.5 14.33 17 11.5 19 11.5 10 20 8.5 4.75 0 10 10 0 10 0 10 0 10 0 0 10 10 10 6 10 0
AEK-971 575.92 59.22 19 332.21 7 13 10.5 12.5 14 11 12.71 13.5 19.5 15.5 20 10 20 18.5 12.5 0 10 10 13 10 10 10 0 10 0 10 10 10 10 9 0 0
AEK-973 585.34 59.08 20 330.92 7 9 14 12.5 14 11 12.42 13.5 18.5 15.5 18.5 10 20 6.5 12.5 0 10 10 13 10 10 10 0 10 0 10 10 10 10 13 10 0
Colt M4 Comma 464.1 59.04 21 266.3 13.5 17 10.5 7.5 14 11 10.8 1 11.5 6.5 11.5 10 20 8.5 6.5 0 10 10 2.5 10 10 0 0 10 0 0 10 10 10 4 10 10
Steyr TMP 361 58.86 22 208.5 17.5 18 3 5 14 17 4 1 4.5 15.5 4.5 10 20 16 6.5 10 10 10 0 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 2 0 0
AK-107 587.5 58.7 23 333 7 12 10.5 12.5 14 11 12 10 19.5 15.5 20 10 20 8.5 18.5 0 10 10 13 10 10 10 0 10 0 10 10 10 10 9 0 10
AK-108 590.92 58.62 24 334.71 7 10 10.5 12.5 14 11 12.71 13.5 18.5 15.5 18.5 10 20 8.5 18.5 0 10 10 13 10 10 10 0 10 0 10 10 10 10 11 0 10
FAMAE SAF Sil 435.82 58.59 25 237.16 12 12 3 17 14 11 5.66 15 11.5 15.5 11.5 10 20 18.5 6.5 0 0 10 5 10 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 9 0 0
AN-94 "Abakan 566.64 58.37 26 328.32 5.5 14 10.5 17.66 14 11 11.66 20 20 6.5 18.5 10 20 20 6.5 0 10 10 15.5 10 10 10 0 10 0 10 10 10 10 7 0 0
XM-8 Compact 458.5 58.34 27 265.75 13.75 16 8 17 14 11 10 1 11.5 6.5 11.5 10 20 13 6.5 0 10 10 2 10 10 0 0 10 0 0 10 10 10 4 10 0
Colt M16A1 528.22 58.3 28 302.11 10.5 12 13 12.5 14 11 12.86 1 11.5 15.5 11.5 10 20 16 4.75 0 10 10 6 10 10 10 0 10 0 0 10 10 10 10 10 10
HK 416 10" 535.6 58.27 29 304.3 10.5 14 8 12.5 14 11 10.3 1 11.5 15.5 11.5 10 20 13 18.5 0 10 10 6 10 10 10 0 10 0 0 10 10 10 7 10 10
Agram 2000 357.5 58.21 30 208 17.5 17 3 6 14 11 5 1 4.5 15.5 4.5 10 20 18.5 6.5 10 10 10 0 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 4 0 0
Notable new appearances since last time:
HK MP5KA4
Sawed-Off Shotgun
Beretta 93R
Jati-Matic GG-95 PDW
Glock 18
Steyr TMP
You'll notice that the AKs are still hanging around because they're just that good, even if they aren't as fast. Let's compare a lower-ranked SMG, the MP5/40A3 with the AEK-971. The first two rows are their in-game stats and the third row shows the differences in the scaled scores.
Name CQB Scr WtCQB CQBRank RdyTime Shts/4T Damage Accu MagSize RelodAP Range Brts/AP BrstPen Auto/AP AutoPen NoSemiA MnlRlod Reliab 2Handed Flash S Suppres Stock TriggrG Foregrp Bipod MatchS Launchr Chokes Scpe10x Scope7x Scope4x Scope2x Reflex MagAdpt RiflLAM
AEK-971 575.92 59.22 19 15 14.37 30 5 30 20 350 0.3 5 4 6 0 0 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 0
HK MP5/40A3 409.5 56.3 48 7 13.46 27 5 30 20 175 0.273 8 4 9 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0
Score Diff -166.42 -2.92 -29 5.1 -3.7 -1.1 0 0 0 -0.4 -0.9 -1.3 0 -1.3 0 0 -0.5 0 0 0 -0.8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.1 0 0
The MP5/40 makes gains in ReadyTime and Reflex (bigger reflex bonus because it fires slower) but loses in ShotsPer4Turns, Stock (because it readies slower), Damage, Range, Burst Rate and Penalty, Auto Penalty and Reliability (yes, it's more reliable than the HK for whatever reason...). In summary, the MP5/40 has 3 points lower ReadyTime--which is great for CQB--but the AEK-971 is so much better in basically every other respect that it surpasses the MP5/40.
Any thoughts on these?
Report message to a moderator
|
Sergeant 1st Class
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Presentation: Weapon Effectiveness Scales on 6 Dimensions[message #310491]
|
Sat, 22 September 2012 00:06
|
|
| sorca_2 |
|
Messages:202
Registered:September 2010
Location: California, USA |
|
|
JAsmineI'm not quite sure, but a quick glance at the new list makes me feel like one handed guns are getting a boost which might be too strong.
D'oh, I meant to post the current weights. Here they are:
RdyTime Shts/4T Damage Accu MagSize RelodAP Range Brts/AP BrstPen Auto/AP AutoPen NoSemiA MnlRlod AtkVol Reliab 2Handed Flash S Suppres Stock TriggrG Foregrp Bipod MatchS Launchr Chokes Scpe10x Scope7x Scope4x Scope2x Reflex MagAdpt RiflLAM
14.67% 16.14% 4.40% 2.93% 1.47% 2.93% 1.47% 4.40% 1.47% 2.93% 1.47% 0.00% 7.34% 0.00% 1.47% 4.40% 0.00% 0.00% 1.47% 4.40% 4.40% 0.00% 4.40% 0.00% 1.47% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 4.40% 9.04% 1.47% 1.47%
Remember that essentially you have to combine ReadyTime with Stocks together and ShotsPer4Turns with Reflex to get their total effects.
So being 1-handed gives a 4.4% bonus currently. We can discuss whether that is too big.
JAsmineBut...
maybe it's just strange to have a list tell me that a Beretta 93R and a HK G11 should be almost equally good in the same situation... or Glock 18 and Colt M4A1.
The situation is you don't have many action points (because you got surprised/ambushed/flanked, got an unplanned interrupt, or you need to charge into a building/take cover), and you've got 1 or 2 enemies at close range.
Here is a comparison of a couple of the weapons you named that I did in the same fashion as the one I did in the last post with real game stats in the first 2 rows and difference in weighted scores in the third row.
93R vs. G11:
Name CQB Scr WtCQB CQBRank RdyTime Shts/4T Damage Accu MagSize RelodAP Range Brts/AP BrstPen Auto/AP AutoPen NoSemiA MnlRlod Reliab 2Handed Flash S Suppres Stock TriggrG Foregrp Bipod MatchS Launchr Chokes Scpe10x Scope7x Scope4x Scope2x Reflex MagAdpt RiflLAM
Beretta 93R 356.5 60.7 8 1 17.59 25 1 15 12 140 0.375 8 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0
HK G11 517.6 60.403 9 9 14.58 30 4 45 16 400 0.75 1 3 7 0 0 2 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 8 0 0
Score Diff 161.1 -0.29 1 -4.65 -4.65 1.9 0.51 0.85 -0.42 0.87 0.76 1.31 0.93 1.48 0 0 0.76 -2.54 0 0 0 0 -2.54 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.54 2.61 0 0
The first thing I notice is that there is less than 0.3 difference between them on a 100-point scale, so it's extremely close. The 93R's biggest benefits are that it readies 8AP faster, fires for 2 less AP per single shot, and it's one-handed. The G11 catches up by being slightly better in virtually every other way.
Report message to a moderator
|
Sergeant 1st Class
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Presentation: Weapon Effectiveness Scales on 6 Dimensions[message #310518]
|
Sat, 22 September 2012 19:13
|
|
| sorca_2 |
|
Messages:202
Registered:September 2010
Location: California, USA |
|
|
Sam_HotteBut the Shorty is already punished for not having burst with -4.82 pts in "Brst/AP". I'd think that there is no need to add to the relative loss in a stat that is not applicable to the gun at all.
On the contrary: Burst penalty means "there is a certain chance that 2nd shot in the burst misses more likely as if it was fired as single shot", doesn't it? So if a gun gets punished in firing speed (since it cannot burst), it's relatively better in accuracy/hitting target with 2 shots as the second shot is not affect by burst's recoil.
If you know what i mean ...
Not really, because it's not like the burst-capable weapon must use burst. Imagine two identical weapons, but one has burst capability. Obviously the burst-capable weapon is better because it gives you more options, tactically. The burst penalty variable has to be there to differentiate weapons with better/worse burst capability. For weapon roles that value auto and burst fire (really, everything but sniping), weapons are punished if (1) they have no auto shots (2) they have no auto penalty (3) they have no burst shots (4) they have no burst penalty (weapons that can accept the triggergroup do have a burst penalty, so they aren't punished here) or (5) they can't accept the triggergroup.
To keep this from being overly punitive, the penalty scores were weighted down. With the current CQB weights, burst shots/AP make up 4% of the total score, burst penalty is 1% of the score, auto shots/AP are 3% of the score and auto penalty is 1% of the score. Those percentages seem pretty fair to me. With our weights, for a semi-auto only or pump-action weapon to be decent at CQB, it would have to ready and fire extremely quickly.
Honestly, comparing the Super-Shorty to the Sawed-off probably wasn't a good comparison because (I assume) we'd expect the Sawed-off to be better anyway. I'll try to come up with some other examples to see if pistols or shotguns are being overly punished.
Report message to a moderator
|
Sergeant 1st Class
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Presentation: Weapon Effectiveness Scales on 6 Dimensions[message #310523]
|
Sat, 22 September 2012 22:25
|
|
| sorca_2 |
|
Messages:202
Registered:September 2010
Location: California, USA |
|
|
Sam_Hotte No burst/auto penalty is the lowest penalty you can have - and lower is better here. So punishing for not having a certain PENALTY seems contradictory to me.
Perhaps I should have explained that better-- currently the best is a 0 penalty and the worst is no penalty (a blank) and the other penalties are in between. For example, a Glock 17 gets a burst penalty score of 1/20 (it doesn't have burst) while a MP540A3 gets a burst penalty score of 4.5/20 and the G11 gets 20/20.
Sam_HotteFurthermore: It's already counted in, if the gun has no burst/auto (= (1),(3),(5)), so weighting the stat that differentiates the precision of bursts (between different burst capable guns) on a gun without burst is a systematical fault in the statistics, IMO.
If - for e.g. technical reasons - it'd be necessary to calculate the burst penalty on every gun, then no burst = no penalty should result in "no penalty at all is best value any gun can have here".
But that wouldn't work because of the following example: 2 identical weapons--one is semi-auto only and the other has auto with a high (really bad) penalty. Maybe think of the CAWS and a similar but semi-auto shotgun. With that system, the semi-auto only weapon would have an advantage because its auto penalty value would be "the best value any gun can have" (20/20)--better than the auto weapon's (4.5/20).
Honestly, it's just something I can't see a way around, but I still don't think these 1% differences we're talking about are huge causes for concern. Maybe we should move on to other roles and we'll have some perspective if we need to come back to this (especially after we do MGs).
DepressivesBrotLets just face it, shotguns are crap.
I wouldn't keep trying to adjust the formula for them because they just suck without getting a lot of love for their actual stats. As they are right now in the game, they can't do anything a decent SMG or Carbine or PDW or ... anything basically can't do better.
Agreed. I was just trying to see if anything was "unjustly" punishing the shotguns--I have no problems with "just" punishment, heh.
DepressivesBrotOtherwise, we might want to make sure at least the top pistols (5-7, UCP, SR1) get in shouting range of the ranks.
Currently the FiveseveN is at #79/307, the UCP is at #88/307, and the SR-1 Gyurza is at #132/307. Let me know if you think any of that sounds strange.
-----
EDIT:
Removing the foregrip penalty for semi-auto only weapons bumped the pistols and shotguns up and the foregrip-enabled weapons down. Those pistols all moved up about 30 places, and the highest-ranked pistol is the SIG P226 SAS.
-----
DepressivesBrotAre we going to do a sidearm category?
I haven't seen any other arguments for weapon roles, so I think we have room for Sidearm. If we get a better idea, though, it'll be the first one that gets cut.
Here's what we've got:
CQB -- Close range, not many action points to work with, 1 or 2 targets
General Purpose (still needs a better name) -- Medium range, average amount of action points to work with, 1 or 2 targets
MG -- Medium to long range, plenty of action points, more than 2 targets
Sniper/DMR -- Long range, plenty of action points, 1 or 2 targets
Stealth -- Low attack volume, can attach flash suppressor, can attach suppressor, reliability to compensate for suppressor use
**Sidearm -- Same as CQB but with a size restriction?
I'm thinking of working on Sniper next just to change things up. The last thing I'm going to change for CQB is that Foregrip issue (getting rid of Foregrip incompatibility penalty for semi-auto only weapons because they don't actually need one), and that will actually favor the pistols and shotguns anyway.
While I'm doing all of that, let's think about sniping, our variables, and weights. What are the most important stats for sniping? Range? How important is damage? Accuracy? How important is it to be able to equip only a 7x scope instead of 10x?
[Updated on: Sat, 22 September 2012 22:43] by Moderator Report message to a moderator
|
Sergeant 1st Class
|
|
|
|
| Re: Presentation: Weapon Effectiveness Scales on 6 Dimensions[message #310538]
|
Sun, 23 September 2012 17:03
|
|
| Sam Hotte |
|
Messages:1965
Registered:March 2009
Location: Middle of Germany |
|
|
sorca_2Sam_HotteFurthermore: It's already counted in, if the gun has no burst/auto (= (1),(3),(5)), so weighting the stat that differentiates the precision of bursts (between different burst capable guns) on a gun without burst is a systematical fault in the statistics, IMO.
If - for e.g. technical reasons - it'd be necessary to calculate the burst penalty on every gun, then no burst = no penalty should result in "no penalty at all is best value any gun can have here".
But that wouldn't work because of the following example: 2 identical weapons--one is semi-auto only and the other has auto with a high (really bad) penalty. Maybe think of the CAWS and a similar but semi-auto shotgun. With that system, the semi-auto only weapon would have an advantage because its auto penalty value would be "the best value any gun can have" (20/20)--better than the auto weapon's (4.5/20).
I don't see a problem here (but of course i'm not as familiar with the calculations and how does things work as you are). As the semi auto only gun is already punished in (1),(3) and (5) for not being burst/auto-capable, it still shouldn't be punished in stats that do not affect non-burst/non-auto.
Quote:Honestly, it's just something I can't see a way around, but I still don't think these 1% differences we're talking about are huge causes for concern. Maybe we should move on to other roles and we'll have some perspective if we need to come back to this (especially after we do MGs).
ACK. Let's leave it as currently is ATM.
Quote:DepressivesBrotLets just face it, shotguns are crap.
I wouldn't keep trying to adjust the formula for them because they just suck without getting a lot of love for their actual stats. As they are right now in the game, they can't do anything a decent SMG or Carbine or PDW or ... anything basically can't do better.
Agreed. I was just trying to see if anything was "unjustly" punishing the shotguns--I have no problems with "just" punishment, heh.
Very true: Shotguns are crap in the game; even if i do use an IMP having expert hunter trait, shotguns are hardly ever used at all.
Quote:While I'm doing all of that, let's think about sniping, our variables, and weights. What are the most important stats for sniping? Range? How important is damage? Accuracy? How important is it to be able to equip only a 7x scope instead of 10x?
In OCTH range is one of the most important stats ever, so yes, for the sniping role i see it as top requirement. As to scopes, i'm not sure, since i have not yet really gotten behind how things work if you enable headrock's dynamic aiming thingies in the ini.
Report message to a moderator
|
Sergeant Major
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Sat Oct 12 16:55:11 GMT+3 2024
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.02302 seconds
|
Blog
Search
Help
Members
Register
Login
Home
)
