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 #310546] Sun, 23 September 2012 20:30 Go to previous messageGo to next message
JAsmine

 
Messages:321
Registered:May 2011
Flugente
I'd also put additional attention on the magsize and possible ammo types. For example, the 5-7 has a magsize of 20, which is all you'd ever need for a sidearm...

I'd regard mag capacity as rather unimportant, because I see a sidearm as a "backup" weapon. Kind of your last resort when you can't use your primary weapon (e.g. sniper rifle or machine gun) because of lack of APs. You'll never be able to empty your sidearm in this scenario because you simply don't have enough AP to do so.
And if you can survive one round (or interrupt), you can again use your primary weapon.
Of course, more mag capacity is always better than less, but for this role simply of less importance.

[Updated on: Sun, 23 September 2012 20:31] by Moderator


Re: Presentation: Weapon Effectiveness Scales on 6 Dimensions[message #310548] Sun, 23 September 2012 22:48 Go to previous messageGo to next message
sorca_2

 
Messages:206
Registered:September 2010
Location: California, USA
Well, I was going to work on Sniper/DMR and do Sidearm last, but everyone seems to be talking sidearms.

I added Size into our dataset (though it is ignored in all other roles because it is a non-combat variable like repair ease). After some extremely cursory research, it looks like there are four sizes of "sidearm" type weapons:

- Size 0, Small: fits in vest pocket, example: .38 Special, Glock 19
- Size 1, Standard: fits in larger vest pocket and pistol holster, example: Glock 18, Colt M1911A1
- Size 2/3, Large: fits in larger vest pocket but not pistol holder, example: Beretta 93R, Steyr TMP
- Size 4, SMG: fits in SMG pocket but nothing smaller, example: MP5K, Mini-Uzi
(I could not see any difference between Size 2 and Size 3 in terms of pockets--corrections here appreciated)

This raises a key question: should weapons larger than this even receive a Sidearm score? It would be possible to just give larger weapons a "0" weighted score. If we did that, it leaves us with 88 sidearm-capable weapons.

Since this variable is Sidearm-specific, we'll give any items bigger than this a "0" score, small items a 20/20 score, standard items a 15/20 score, large items a 10/20 score, and SMG items a 5/20 score. Assuming the answer to the key question above is "no", another key question is: given that we're only talking about sidearm-sized weapons, how important is size? In other words, how much better is it to have a standard-size weapon over an SMG-size weapon?

Those issues aside, I kept elements of the CQB weights with only major changes being the inclusion of a small no semi-auto penalty (auto-only restriction wouldn't be great here) and the size variable. Without any other thoughts on the key questions above, I weighted size at 5% and gave 0 scores to items of Size 5 or larger. Here are the initial Sidearm weights to give you an idea of how much each variable matters:

RdyTime	Shts/4T	Damage	Accu	MagSize	RelodAP	Range	Brts/AP	BrstPen	Auto/AP	AutoPen	NoSemiA	MnlRlod	AtkVol	Reliab	Size	2Handed	Flash S	Suppres	Stock	TriggrG	Foregrp	Bipod	MatchS	Launchr	Chokes	Scpe10x	Scope7x	Scope4x	Scope2x	Reflex	MagAdpt	RiflLAM
13%	15%	4%	3%	1%	3%	1%	4%	1%	3%	1%	3%	7%	0%	1%	5%	4%	0%	0%	1%	4%	4%	0%	4%	0%	1%	0%	0%	0%	4%	8%	1%	1%


With those weights, here are your top 30 Sidearms:
Name	        WtdSdrm	SdrmRnk	RdyTime	Shts/4T	Damage	Accu	MagSize	RelodAP	Range	Brts/AP	BrstPen	Auto/AP	AutoPen	NoSemiA	MnlRlod	AtkVol	Reliab	Size	2Handed	Flash S	Suppres	Stock	TriggrG	Foregrp	Bipod	MatchS	Launchr	Chokes	Scpe10x	Scope7x	Scope4x	Scope2x	Reflex	MagAdpt	RiflLAM
HK MP7A1	64.24	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	5	10	10	10	0.5	10	10	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	10	0.5	0	0
Glock 19	61.94	2	20	19	3	2.5	8	19.5	1	1	1	1	1	10	20	12	20	20	10	10	10	0	0	10	0	10	0	0	0	0	0	0	1	0	0
SIG P229R	61.35	3	20	19	2	2.5	8	19.5	0.95	1	1	1	1	10	20	16	15.5	20	10	10	10	0	0	10	0	10	0	0	0	0	0	0	1	0	0
SIG P239 SAS	61.03	4	20	19	2	2.5	4	19.5	0.85	1	1	1	1	10	20	16	15.5	20	10	10	10	0	0	10	0	10	0	0	0	0	0	0	1	0	0
Glock 18	60.88	5	20	19	3	2.5	8	19.5	2.5	1	2	20	4.5	10	20	18.5	12.5	15	10	10	10	0	0	0	0	10	0	0	0	0	0	0	1	0	0
Beretta 93R	60.64	6	17.5	18	3	5	8	19.5	5	17	4.5	1	1	10	20	18.5	6.5	10	10	10	10	0	10	10	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	3	0	0
SIG P226 SAS	60.58	7	20	19	3	2.5	8	19.5	2	1	1	1	1	10	20	18.5	15.5	15	10	10	10	0	0	10	0	10	0	0	0	0	0	0	2	0	0
Glock 17	60.49	8	20	19	3	2.5	8	19.5	2.5	1	1	1	1	10	20	18.5	20	15	10	10	10	0	0	10	0	10	0	0	0	0	0	0	1	0	0
HK USP	        59.82	9	20	18	3	5	7	19.5	2	1	1	1	1	10	20	12	6.5	15	10	10	10	0	0	10	0	10	0	0	0	0	0	0	3	0	0
Springfield X	59.82	10	20	18	4.5	2.5	7	19.5	3.5	1	1	1	1	10	20	14.5	15.5	20	10	10	10	0	0	10	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	3	0	0
SIGP226AS40	59.62	11	20	17	4.5	2.5	7	19.5	2	1	1	1	1	10	20	14.5	15.5	15	10	10	10	0	0	10	0	10	0	0	0	0	0	0	3	0	0
.38 Special	59.53	12	20	16	3	5	2	11	1	1	1	1	1	10	20	19.5	15.5	20	10	0	0	0	0	10	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	10	5	0	0
HK MP5KA4	59.28	13	15	16	3	7.5	14	11	2.5	13.5	4.5	15.5	4.5	10	20	18.5	6.5	5	10	10	10	0	10	10	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	10	4	0	0
Walther P99	59.25	14	20	19	3	2.5	8	19.5	1	1	1	1	1	10	20	12	15.5	20	10	10	10	0	0	10	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	1	0	0
SIG Pro	        59.24	15	20	19	3	2.5	7	19.5	0.95	1	1	1	1	10	20	2.75	6.5	15	10	10	10	0	0	10	0	10	0	0	0	0	0	0	1	0	0
Steyr TMP	58.95	16	17.5	18	3	5	14	17	4	1	4.5	15.5	4.5	10	20	16	6.5	10	10	10	10	0	0	10	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	10	2	0	0
FN Five-seveN	58.69	17	20	20	4.5	5	9.5	19.5	4	1	1	1	1	10	20	19.5	6.5	15	10	10	10	0	0	10	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0.5	0	0
SIG P226R	58.64	18	17.5	19	3	2.5	8	19.5	2	1	1	1	1	10	20	18.5	15.5	15	10	10	10	0	0	10	0	10	0	0	0	0	0	0	2	0	0
SR-2 Veresk	58.44	19	17.5	18	4.5	8	14	17	6.5	1	4.5	15.5	4.5	10	20	16	6.5	5	10	10	10	0.5	0	10	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	10	2	0	0
FAMAE Mini SA	58.38	20	14	16	2	6	14	11	0.95	15	4.5	15.5	4.5	10	20	18.5	6.5	5	10	10	10	1.5	10	10	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	10	4	0	0
HK UCP	        58.34	21	20	20	3	5	9.5	19.5	4	1	1	1	1	10	20	19.5	6.5	15	10	10	10	0	0	10	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0.5	0	0
AEK-919K "Kas	58.32	22	17.5	19	2	17	14	17	5.66	1	11.5	15.5	11.5	10	20	19.5	6.5	5	10	10	10	0.5	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	10	1	0	0
HK P7M8	        58.23	23	20	19	3	2.5	4	19.5	1	1	1	1	1	10	20	18.5	6.5	20	10	10	10	0	0	10	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	1	0	0
Makarov PMM	58.14	24	20	20	1	2.5	6	17	0.85	1	1	1	1	10	20	19.5	6.5	20	10	10	10	0	0	10	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0.5	0	0
Makarov PM	57.98	25	20	20	1	2.5	4	17	0.85	1	1	1	1	10	20	20	6.5	20	10	10	10	0	0	10	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0.5	0	0
PSM	        57.8	26	20	20	0.25	2.5	4	17	0.75	1	1	1	1	10	20	20	6.5	20	10	10	10	0	0	10	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0.5	0	0
Kimber Eclips	57.69	27	17.5	17	4.5	2.5	4	19.5	2	1	1	1	1	10	20	11	12.5	15	10	10	10	0	0	10	0	10	0	0	0	0	0	0	4	0	0
SIG P226R .40	57.67	28	17.5	17	4.5	2.5	7	19.5	2	1	1	1	1	10	20	14.5	15.5	15	10	10	10	0	0	10	0	10	0	0	0	0	0	0	3	0	0
Skorpion vz.8	57.45	29	17.5	20	2	7.5	9.5	11	2	1	11.5	15.5	11.5	10	20	19.5	6.5	10	10	10	10	0.5	0	10	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0.5	0	0
SIG P210	57	30	17.5	18	3	6	4	17	3	1	1	1	1	10	20	16	6.5	15	10	10	10	0	0	10	0	10	0	0	0	0	0	0	2	0	0


Re: Presentation: Weapon Effectiveness Scales on 6 Dimensions[message #310550] Sun, 23 September 2012 23:36 Go to previous messageGo to next message
JAsmine

 
Messages:321
Registered:May 2011
Quote:
In other words, how much better is it to have a standard-size weapon over an SMG-size weapon?

Probably doesn't matter at all. It is important that the gun isn't too big. But as long as it isn't bigger as a certain max. value, it should be okay.

Because of what I explained above, reload-ap should have less weight... imo.

I wonder if being one-handed is of any advantage for a sidearm? Firing two guns at once costs more AP and since speed (= as few AP as possible) is vital for sidearms, maybe it isn't helpful to be one-handed and should have less weight?

Re: Presentation: Weapon Effectiveness Scales on 6 Dimensions[message #310551] Sun, 23 September 2012 23:51 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Headhunter

 
Messages:268
Registered:November 2009
Location: Sweden
Rifle-LAM and Adapter should be at 0, as they are of no use for sidearms, and Damage could be a little higher.

Quote:
This raises a key question: should weapons larger than this even receive a Sidearm score?


Well, I'd say that CQB covered short-range backup-weapons in general so it seems kind of redundant to include larger weapons in Sidearm.
Re: Presentation: Weapon Effectiveness Scales on 6 Dimensions[message #310555] Mon, 24 September 2012 01:26 Go to previous messageGo to next message
sorca_2

 
Messages:206
Registered:September 2010
Location: California, USA
Thanks again for all of this feedback--the goal here is to make a system that the community will believe in, and I certainly wouldn't be able to do that on my own.

JAsmine
Probably doesn't matter at all. It is important that the gun isn't too big. But as long as it isn't bigger as a certain max. value, it should be okay.

Because of what I explained above, reload-ap should have less weight... imo.

I wonder if being one-handed is of any advantage for a sidearm? Firing two guns at once costs more AP and since speed (= as few AP as possible) is vital for sidearms, maybe it isn't helpful to be one-handed and should have less weight?


I agree that Size was over-emphasized, but it still matters somewhat (with two otherwise-identical sidearms, we would prefer the smaller one) so I reduced the weight significantly. I did the same thing for one-handed for the same reason--it isn't inherently that useful for a sidearm (since we're already accounting for size) but the option of dual-wielding is still better than not having that option.

I downweighted reload AP slightly based on your logic. If you ran of out ammo with your sidearm, you're probably better off reloading one of your other weapons with the way our inventory system works.

(Sidenote: this is actually relevant to an argument I made long ago for (optional) AP use required to access the sling and pack slots to increase the relevance of sidearms--in real life it's faster to reload a pistol than put your pistol away and switch to an M4 and reload it. Or better yet, have a secondary M4 in your sling in case your first one runs out of ammo and you'll probably never need a pistol at all... which makes no sense, and I view it as an exploit. But I digress.)

Headhunter
Rifle-LAM and Adapter should be at 0, as they are of no use for sidearms, and Damage could be a little higher.

Well, I'd say that CQB covered short-range backup-weapons in general so it seems kind of redundant to include larger weapons in Sidearm.

I gave 0 scores to larger weapons, so that's not an issue anymore. No weapons were receiving a bonus for RifleLAM anyway, but I put it down to 0 weight just to eliminate it from our analysis. The Spectre M4 is the only sidearm that an take a mag adapter. I cut the weight down to half that of the magsize weight (it still gets a small amount of credit for versatility). Regarding damage, we just reduced and eliminated some variables, so the proportional impact of damage will increase a little bit on its own.

Based on the above changes, here are the new weights:
RdyTime	Shts/4T	Damage	Accu	MagSize	RelodAP	Range	Brts/AP	BrstPen	Auto/AP	AutoPen	NoSemiA	MnlRlod	AtkVol	Reliab	Size	2Handed	Flash S	Suppres	Stock	TriggrG	Foregrp	Bipod	MatchS	Launchr	Chokes	Scpe10x	Scope7x	Scope4x	Scope2x	Reflex	MagAdpt	RiflLAM
15.0%	16.5%	4.5%	3.0%	1.5%	1.5%	1.5%	4.5%	1.5%	3.0%	1.5%	3.0%	7.5%	0.0%	1.5%	1.5%	1.5%	0.0%	0.0%	1.5%	4.5%	4.5%	0.0%	4.5%	0.0%	1.5%	0.0%	0.0%	0.0%	4.5%	9.2%	0.8%	0.0%


And here's a new top 30:
Name	        WtdSdrm	SdrmRnk	RdyTime	Shts/4T	Damage	Accu	MagSize	RelodAP	Range	Brts/AP	BrstPen	Auto/AP	AutoPen	NoSemiA	MnlRlod	AtkVol	Reliab	Size	2Handed	Flash S	Suppres	Stock	TriggrG	Foregrp	Bipod	MatchS	Launchr	Chokes	Scpe10x	Scope7x	Scope4x	Scope2x	Reflex	MagAdpt	RiflLAM
HK MP7A1	66.09	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	5	10	10	10	0.5	10	10	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	10	0.5	0	0
HK MP5KA4	61.16	2	15	16	3	7.5	14	11	2.5	13.5	4.5	15.5	4.5	10	20	18.5	6.5	5	10	10	10	0	10	10	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	10	4	0	0
Beretta 93R	60.63	3	17.5	18	3	5	8	19.5	5	17	4.5	1	1	10	20	18.5	6.5	10	10	10	10	0	10	10	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	3	0	0
FAMAE Mini SAF	60.17	4	14	16	2	6	14	11	0.95	15	4.5	15.5	4.5	10	20	18.5	6.5	5	10	10	10	1.5	10	10	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	10	4	0	0
SR-2 Veresk	59.72	5	17.5	18	4.5	8	14	17	6.5	1	4.5	15.5	4.5	10	20	16	6.5	5	10	10	10	0.5	0	10	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	10	2	0	0
Glock 18	59.62	6	20	19	3	2.5	8	19.5	2.5	1	2	20	4.5	10	20	18.5	12.5	15	10	10	10	0	0	0	0	10	0	0	0	0	0	0	1	0	0
AEK-919K "Kasht	59.59	7	17.5	19	2	17	14	17	5.66	1	11.5	15.5	11.5	10	20	19.5	6.5	5	10	10	10	0.5	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	10	1	0	0
Glock 19	59.49	8	20	19	3	2.5	8	19.5	1	1	1	1	1	10	20	12	20	20	10	10	10	0	0	10	0	10	0	0	0	0	0	0	1	0	0
SIG P226 SAS	59.29	9	20	19	3	2.5	8	19.5	2	1	1	1	1	10	20	18.5	15.5	15	10	10	10	0	0	10	0	10	0	0	0	0	0	0	2	0	0
Glock 17	59.19	10	20	19	3	2.5	8	19.5	2.5	1	1	1	1	10	20	18.5	20	15	10	10	10	0	0	10	0	10	0	0	0	0	0	0	1	0	0
Steyr TMP	58.99	11	17.5	18	3	5	14	17	4	1	4.5	15.5	4.5	10	20	16	6.5	10	10	10	10	0	0	10	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	10	2	0	0
SIG P229R	58.84	12	20	19	2	2.5	8	19.5	0.95	1	1	1	1	10	20	16	15.5	20	10	10	10	0	0	10	0	10	0	0	0	0	0	0	1	0	0
SIG P239 SAS	58.49	13	20	19	2	2.5	4	19.5	0.85	1	1	1	1	10	20	16	15.5	20	10	10	10	0	0	10	0	10	0	0	0	0	0	0	1	0	0
HK USP	        58.45	14	20	18	3	5	7	19.5	2	1	1	1	1	10	20	12	6.5	15	10	10	10	0	0	10	0	10	0	0	0	0	0	0	3	0	0
Agram 2000	58.42	15	17.5	17	3	6	14	11	5	1	4.5	15.5	4.5	10	20	18.5	6.5	5	10	10	10	0	0	10	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	10	4	0	0
SIG P226 SAS.40	58.23	16	20	17	4.5	2.5	7	19.5	2	1	1	1	1	10	20	14.5	15.5	15	10	10	10	0	0	10	0	10	0	0	0	0	0	0	3	0	0
Skorpion vz.82	57.86	17	17.5	20	2	7.5	9.5	11	2	1	11.5	15.5	11.5	10	20	19.5	6.5	10	10	10	10	0.5	0	10	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0.5	0	0
SIG Pro	        57.82	18	20	19	3	2.5	7	19.5	0.95	1	1	1	1	10	20	2.75	6.5	15	10	10	10	0	0	10	0	10	0	0	0	0	0	0	1	0	0
.38 Special	57.57	19	20	16	3	5	2	11	1	1	1	1	1	10	20	19.5	15.5	20	10	0	0	0	0	10	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	10	5	0	0
FN Five-seveN	57.21	20	20	20	4.5	5	9.5	19.5	4	1	1	1	1	10	20	19.5	6.5	15	10	10	10	0	0	10	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0.5	0	0
Springfield XD	57.16	21	20	18	4.5	2.5	7	19.5	3.5	1	1	1	1	10	20	14.5	15.5	20	10	10	10	0	0	10	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	3	0	0
SIG P226R	57.15	22	17.5	19	3	2.5	8	19.5	2	1	1	1	1	10	20	18.5	15.5	15	10	10	10	0	0	10	0	10	0	0	0	0	0	0	2	0	0
HK UCP	        56.83	23	20	20	3	5	9.5	19.5	4	1	1	1	1	10	20	19.5	6.5	15	10	10	10	0	0	10	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0.5	0	0
Walther P99	56.54	24	20	19	3	2.5	8	19.5	1	1	1	1	1	10	20	12	15.5	20	10	10	10	0	0	10	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	1	0	0
PP-93	        56.47	25	17.5	20	3	6	14	17	7.25	1	11.5	15.5	11.5	10	20	19.5	6.5	5	10	10	10	0.5	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	1	0	0
Kimber EclipseP	56.11	26	17.5	17	4.5	2.5	4	19.5	2	1	1	1	1	10	20	11	12.5	15	10	10	10	0	0	10	0	10	0	0	0	0	0	0	4	0	0
SIG P226R .40	56.09	27	17.5	17	4.5	2.5	7	19.5	2	1	1	1	1	10	20	14.5	15.5	15	10	10	10	0	0	10	0	10	0	0	0	0	0	0	3	0	0
SIG P210	55.56	28	17.5	18	3	6	4	17	3	1	1	1	1	10	20	16	6.5	15	10	10	10	0	0	10	0	10	0	0	0	0	0	0	2	0	0
Makarov PMM	55.53	29	20	20	1	2.5	6	17	0.85	1	1	1	1	10	20	19.5	6.5	20	10	10	10	0	0	10	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0.5	0	0
HK P7M8	        55.42	30	20	19	3	2.5	4	19.5	1	1	1	1	1	10	20	18.5	6.5	20	10	10	10	0	0	10	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	1	0	0


Please let me know if you think the new weights need more work or if you see the typical "something's wrong with the weights because gun X is clearly better than gun Y."
Re: Presentation: Weapon Effectiveness Scales on 6 Dimensions[message #310556] Mon, 24 September 2012 01:52 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Flugente

 
Messages:3045
Registered:April 2009
Location: Germany
Well, I think everyone's view will vary depending on ho you sue sidearms - eg. are they viable secondary weapons for regular use (like a tricked out MP7) or are they just backup weapons to be used as a last resort (main gun jammed or out of ammo). I personally wouldn't define a SMG as a sidearm...

I also think you should look at the weight of the scope - it is the main reason (besides reliability and size) that the .38 currently shows up as a better sidearm than a 5-7, which I find very hard to believe Smile


Re: Presentation: Weapon Effectiveness Scales on 6 Dimensions[message #310557] Mon, 24 September 2012 01:52 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Headhunter

 
Messages:268
Registered:November 2009
Location: Sweden
What the #
Re: Presentation: Weapon Effectiveness Scales on 6 Dimensions[message #310558] Mon, 24 September 2012 02:12 Go to previous messageGo to next message
DepressivesBrot

 
Messages:3728
Registered:July 2009
I think Flug nailed it - there's no good reason for a scope on a sidearm. Or rather, why the scope should be beneficial and define a sidearm as 'superior'. On the issue of SMG's as sidearms though:
They're just big machine pistols, as long as they can be carried in an MP holster, they don't take more space than a puny Makarov and only marginally more weight. And if you can hit two birds with one stone by having a sidearm efficient enough for CQC ... that's nice if your overburdened gunner doesn't want to lug a sidearm and a carbine.

Also, we might want to apply some small-ish damage bonus if 'superior'* ammo is available?
*SAP or AET

Btw, did anyone ever try the .38 or the Makarov as a sidearm? Maybe they are actually good at it?


Re: Presentation: Weapon Effectiveness Scales on 6 Dimensions[message #310559] Mon, 24 September 2012 03:13 Go to previous messageGo to next message
sorca_2

 
Messages:206
Registered:September 2010
Location: California, USA
Strongly suspect that size is the culprit for the .38; I'll check on that.

I guess we could do an AET bonus, but it would be more like an attachment bonus (i.e. a bonus for the ability to equip AET).
Re: Presentation: Weapon Effectiveness Scales on 6 Dimensions[message #310561] Mon, 24 September 2012 06:57 Go to previous messageGo to next message
sorca_2

 
Messages:206
Registered:September 2010
Location: California, USA
I added an AET variable and messed around with the weights some more. I swapped Accuracy and Range because Range is more important than Accuracy in OCTH. I lowered the Match Sights to have comparable weighted score impact to the small range and accuracy bonuses they grant. I lowered the Scope 2x to the same level as the Match Sights. I lowered reliability because we don't put nearly as many rounds through sidearms as weapons in other roles. I lowered the auto and burst variabless slightly because those are essentially "bonus" characteristics, not hugely important for sidearms. As DB points out, the weapons are also rated on CQB independently, and it's just gravy if they're good at both.

Here are the new weights:
RdyTime	Shts/4T	Damage	Accu	MagSize	RelodAP	Range	Brts/AP	BrstPen	Auto/AP	AutoPen	NoSemiA	MnlRlod	AtkVol	Reliab	Size	2Handed	Flash S	Suppres	Stock	TriggrG	Foregrp	Bipod	MatchS	Launchr	Chokes	Scpe10x	Scope7x	Scope4x	Scope2x	Reflex	MagAdpt	RiflLAM	AET
17.3%	19.1%	5.2%	1.7%	1.7%	1.7%	3.5%	3.5%	0.9%	1.7%	0.9%	3.5%	8.7%	0.0%	0.4%	0.9%	1.7%	0.0%	0.0%	1.7%	3.5%	5.2%	0.0%	1.4%	0.0%	1.7%	0.0%	0.0%	0.0%	2.6%	10.7%	0.9%	0.0%	5.2%


And here's a new top 30:
WeapName	WtdSdrm	SdrmRnk	RdyTime	Shts/4T	Damage	Accu	MagSize	RelodAP	Range	Brts/AP	BrstPen	Auto/AP	AutoPen	NoSemiA	MnlRlod	AtkVol	Reliab	Size	2Handed	Flash S	Suppres	Stock	TriggrG	Foregrp	Bipod	MatchS	Launchr	Chokes	Scpe10x	Scope7x	Scope4x	Scope2x	Reflex	MagAdpt	RiflLAM	AET
HK MP7A1	68.58	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	5	10	10	10	0.5	10	10	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	10	0.5	0	0	10
Beretta 93R	65.44	2	17.5	18	3	5	8	19.5	5	17	4.5	1	1	10	20	18.5	6.5	10	10	10	10	0	10	10	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	3	0	0	10
FN Five-seveN	63.97	3	20	20	4.5	5	9.5	19.5	4	1	1	1	1	10	20	19.5	6.5	15	10	10	10	0	0	10	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0.5	0	0	10
SIG P226 SAS	63.59	4	20	19	3	2.5	8	19.5	2	1	1	1	1	10	20	18.5	15.5	15	10	10	10	0	0	10	0	10	0	0	0	0	0	0	2	0	0	10
HK UCP	        63.55	5	20	20	3	5	9.5	19.5	4	1	1	1	1	10	20	19.5	6.5	15	10	10	10	0	0	10	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0.5	0	0	10
Springfield XD	63.23	6	20	18	4.5	2.5	7	19.5	3.5	1	1	1	1	10	20	14.5	15.5	20	10	10	10	0	0	10	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	3	0	0	10
Glock 17	63.21	7	20	19	3	2.5	8	19.5	2.5	1	1	1	1	10	20	18.5	20	15	10	10	10	0	0	10	0	10	0	0	0	0	0	0	1	0	0	10
HK MP5KA4	63.18	8	15	16	3	7.5	14	11	2.5	13.5	4.5	15.5	4.5	10	20	18.5	6.5	5	10	10	10	0	10	10	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	10	4	0	0	10
Glock 19	63.17	9	20	19	3	2.5	8	19.5	1	1	1	1	1	10	20	12	20	20	10	10	10	0	0	10	0	10	0	0	0	0	0	0	1	0	0	10
HK USP	        63.07	10	20	18	3	5	7	19.5	2	1	1	1	1	10	20	12	6.5	15	10	10	10	0	0	10	0	10	0	0	0	0	0	0	3	0	0	10
Steyr TMP	63.05	11	17.5	18	3	5	14	17	4	1	4.5	15.5	4.5	10	20	16	6.5	10	10	10	10	0	0	10	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	10	2	0	0	10
SIG P229R	62.77	12	20	19	2	2.5	8	19.5	0.95	1	1	1	1	10	20	16	15.5	20	10	10	10	0	0	10	0	10	0	0	0	0	0	0	1	0	0	10
Agram 2000	62.66	13	17.5	17	3	6	14	11	5	1	4.5	15.5	4.5	10	20	18.5	6.5	5	10	10	10	0	0	10	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	10	4	0	0	10
SIG Pro 	62.51	14	20	19	3	2.5	7	19.5	0.95	1	1	1	1	10	20	2.75	6.5	15	10	10	10	0	0	10	0	10	0	0	0	0	0	0	1	0	0	10
SIG P226 SAS.40	62.43	15	20	17	4.5	2.5	7	19.5	2	1	1	1	1	10	20	14.5	15.5	15	10	10	10	0	0	10	0	10	0	0	0	0	0	0	3	0	0	10
SIG P239 SAS	62.38	16	20	19	2	2.5	4	19.5	0.85	1	1	1	1	10	20	16	15.5	20	10	10	10	0	0	10	0	10	0	0	0	0	0	0	1	0	0	10
Walther P99	62.31	17	20	19	3	2.5	8	19.5	1	1	1	1	1	10	20	12	15.5	20	10	10	10	0	0	10	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	1	0	0	10
Glock 18	62.22	18	20	19	3	2.5	8	19.5	2.5	1	2	20	4.5	10	20	18.5	12.5	15	10	10	10	0	0	0	0	10	0	0	0	0	0	0	1	0	0	10
Tokarev TT-33	62	19	20	20	2	2.5	4	17	2.5	1	1	1	1	10	20	14.5	6.5	15	10	10	10	0	0	10	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0.5	0	0	10
FAMAE Mini SAF	61.95	20	14	16	2	6	14	11	0.95	15	4.5	15.5	4.5	10	20	18.5	6.5	5	10	10	10	1.5	10	10	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	10	4	0	0	10
HK P7M8 	61.72	21	20	19	3	2.5	4	19.5	1	1	1	1	1	10	20	18.5	6.5	20	10	10	10	0	0	10	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	1	0	0	10
SIG P226R	61.25	22	17.5	19	3	2.5	8	19.5	2	1	1	1	1	10	20	18.5	15.5	15	10	10	10	0	0	10	0	10	0	0	0	0	0	0	2	0	0	10
SR-2 Veresk	61.22	23	17.5	18	4.5	8	14	17	6.5	1	4.5	15.5	4.5	10	20	16	6.5	5	10	10	10	0.5	0	10	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	10	2	0	0	0
Kimber Eclipse  60.31	24	17.5	17	4.5	2.5	4	19.5	2	1	1	1	1	10	20	11	12.5	15	10	10	10	0	0	10	0	10	0	0	0	0	0	0	4	0	0	10
MP-443 Grach	60.28	25	17.5	19	3	2.5	8	19.5	2	1	1	1	1	10	20	18.5	6.5	15	10	10	10	0	0	10	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	2	0	0	10
MP-446 Viking	60.28	26	17.5	19	3	2.5	8	19.5	2	1	1	1	1	10	20	19.5	6.5	15	10	10	10	0	0	10	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	2	0	0	10
SIG P226R .40	60.09	27	17.5	17	4.5	2.5	7	19.5	2	1	1	1	1	10	20	14.5	15.5	15	10	10	10	0	0	10	0	10	0	0	0	0	0	0	3	0	0	10
CZ-75B  	59.98	28	17.5	18	4.5	2.5	7	19.5	3	1	1	1	1	10	20	17	15.5	15	10	10	10	0	0	10	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	2	0	0	10
FN Forty-Nine	59.95	29	17.5	18	3	2.5	7	19.5	2	1	1	1	1	10	20	16.75	15.5	15	10	10	10	0	0	10	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	3	0	0	10
Colt Delta Elit	59.94	30	17.5	16	6	2.5	4	19.5	4	1	1	1	1	10	20	11	6.5	15	10	10	10	0	0	10	0	10	0	0	0	0	0	0	4	0	0	10


Thoughts?
Re: Presentation: Weapon Effectiveness Scales on 6 Dimensions[message #310597] Mon, 24 September 2012 21:24 Go to previous messageGo to next message
sorca_2

 
Messages:206
Registered:September 2010
Location: California, USA
Worked on Sniper/DMR and Stealth a little bit, but I don't want to post anything else until I get at least one more confirmation that we're happy with the sidearms (DB seemed pleased enough).

I guess one way to think about our confidence in the weighted scores is in relation to the coolness levels and prices. If we can make ratings that are more reliable than those, we've had at least some measure of success. For example, I saw that the HK21 is probably a top-30 sniper rifle (even only in semi-auto) in addition to almost certainly being a top-30 MG (top 5? and who knows its general purpose rating), so its coolness factor of 8 is obviously underestimating the weapon. My early prediction is that the HK MP7 and the HK 21E are the best weapons in the game overall (edit: in the sense that they will be on the top of more than 1 category).

[Updated on: Mon, 24 September 2012 22:51] by Moderator

Re: Presentation: Weapon Effectiveness Scales on 6 Dimensions[message #310605] Mon, 24 September 2012 23:15 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Headhunter

 
Messages:268
Registered:November 2009
Location: Sweden
How come there aren't any .45's in the top 30? I'm not saying there should be, just curious. And what about the TT-33, is it really that good?


Honestly though, Sidearm looks finished.
Re: Presentation: Weapon Effectiveness Scales on 6 Dimensions[message #310606] Mon, 24 September 2012 23:43 Go to previous messageGo to next message
DepressivesBrot

 
Messages:3728
Registered:July 2009
Headhunter
How come there aren't any .45's in the top 30? I'm not saying there should be, just curious.
Might be because out of 10 .45 weapons, one is a carbine, 4 are rather heavy SMGs, one is the less-than-stellar Ingram M10 and one is the heavy and outsized SoaB known otherwise as the Mk23 SOCOM. That leaves the FN FNP-45 and two 1911 models which probably lost to the otherwise very similar 10mm entries due to their lower range.

Headhunter
And what about the TT-33, is it really that good?
Yeah. It's very quick with 0/17 - that gives it a -1/-4 over stuff like aforementioned 1911's and only 0/+2 on FN 5-7 and HK UCP, universally regarded as the best pistols in the game.


Re: Presentation: Weapon Effectiveness Scales on 6 Dimensions[message #310611] Tue, 25 September 2012 02:07 Go to previous messageGo to next message
sorca_2

 
Messages:206
Registered:September 2010
Location: California, USA
Here's a comparison of the TT-33 and the 1911A1, perhaps to answer both of your questions:
WeapName	WtdSdrm	SdrmRnk	RdyTime	Shts/4T	Damage	Accu	MagSize	RelodAP	Range	Brts/AP	BrstPen	Auto/AP	AutoPen	NoSemiA	MnlRlod	AtkVol	Reliab	Size	2Handed	Flash S	Suppres	Stock	TriggrG	Foregrp	Bipod	MatchS	Launchr	Chokes	Scpe10x	Scope7x	Scope4x	Scope2x	Reflex	MagAdpt	RiflLAM	AET
Tokarev TT-33	61.48	19	0	20.34	24	0	8	16	115	0	0	0	0	0	0	60	0	1	10	10	10	0	0	10	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0.5	0	0	10
Colt M1911A1	58.85	49	1	16.35	26	0	7	12	100	0	0	0	0	0	0	55	0	1	10	10	10	0	0	10	0	10	0	0	0	0	0	0	4	0	0	10
Diff in Scores	-2.63	-30	-2.35	-3.61	0.70	0.00	-0.09	0.23	-0.29	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.75	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	2.02	0.00	0.00	0.00

The difference is about 2.63 points. The 1911A1 loses about 4 points for readying (1 AP) and firing (1.7AP with reflex) slower. It loses another 0.3 for having 1.5 squares shorter range. It picks up .75 for being able to equip Match Sights (which make up for the range deficiency with a little extra for accuracy) and it gets another .7 for doing 2 more damage. So, all things considered, the TT-33 is faster than the 1911A1 can make up for in damage, and we valued speed over damage for sidearms. There's really no love for powerful pistols in JA2--the Redhawk Alaskan is probably the worst weapon all-around.

Here's for DB's proposition about the similar 10mm pistols:
WeapName	WtdSdrm	SdrmRnk	RdyTime	Shts/4T	Damage	Accu	MagSize	RelodAP	Range	Brts/AP	BrstPen	Auto/AP	AutoPen	NoSemiA	MnlRlod	AtkVol	Reliab	Size	2Handed	Flash S	Suppres	Stock	TriggrG	Foregrp	Bipod	MatchS	Launchr	Chokes	Scpe10x	Scope7x	Scope4x	Scope2x	Reflex	MagAdpt	RiflLAM	AET
Kimber E Pro II	60.31	23	1	16.7	26	0	8	12	110	0	0	0	0	0	0	74	1	1	10	10	10	0	0	10	0	10	0	0	0	0	0	0	4	0	0	10
Colt M1911A1	58.85	49	1	16.35	26	0	7	12	100	0	0	0	0	0	0	55	0	1	10	10	10	0	0	10	0	10	0	0	0	0	0	0	4	0	0	10
Diff in Scores	-1.46	-26	0.00	-1.03	0.00	0.00	-0.09	0.00	-0.20	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	-0.14	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00

The Eclipse Pro II is literally better in every way--shoots faster, holds 1 more round, is more reliable. The 1911A1 stands no chance.

I checked out the Mk 23 vs. the Eclipse for good measure and it's much tighter:

WeapName	WtdSdrm	SdrmRnk	RdyTime	Shts/4T	Damage	Accu	MagSize	RelodAP	Range	Brts/AP	BrstPen	Auto/AP	AutoPen	NoSemiA	MnlRlod	AtkVol	Reliab	Size	2Handed	Flash S	Suppres	Stock	TriggrG	Foregrp	Bipod	MatchS	Launchr	Chokes	Scpe10x	Scope7x	Scope4x	Scope2x	Reflex	MagAdpt	RiflLAM	AET
Kimber E Pro II	60.31	23	1	16.7	26	0	8	12	110	0	0	0	0	0	0	74	1	1	10	10	10	0	0	10	0	10	0	0	0	0	0	0	4	0	0	10
HK Mk 23 SOCOM	59.53	38	1	16.07	26	1	14	12	125	0	0	0	0	0	0	50	0	2	10	10	10	0	0	10	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	5	0	0	10
Diff in Scores	-0.78	-15	0.00	-1.03	0.00	0.23	0.28	0.00	0.28	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	-0.14	-0.23	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	-0.75	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.58	0.00	0.00	0.00


EDIT: The Eclipse Pro II is very slightly faster (like 1/3 of an AP faster after accounting for reflex sights), it's smaller and more reliable. The Mk 23 is more accurate and has longer range, but this is offset by the Eclipse's ability to accept match sights. Since they do the same damage, it comes down to a matter of whether the Mk 23's 6 extra magazine rounds are better than the Eclipse's small speed, size, and reliability advantages in terms of being a sidearm. We didn't value magazine size much for reasons stated above, but even if we did, it still probably wouldn't be enough. Still, we're only talking about a 0.7% score difference here.

[Updated on: Tue, 25 September 2012 02:44] by Moderator

Re: Presentation: Weapon Effectiveness Scales on 6 Dimensions[message #310613] Tue, 25 September 2012 06:46 Go to previous messageGo to next message
sorca_2

 
Messages:206
Registered:September 2010
Location: California, USA
I'm assuming that we're happy with the sidearms, so here are the sniper rifle/DMR weights:

RdyTime	Shts/4T	Damage	Accu	MagSize	RelodAP	Range	Brts/AP	BrstPen	Auto/AP	AutoPen	NoSemiA	MnlRlod	AtkVol	Reliab	Size	2Handed	Flash S	Suppres	Stock	TriggrG	Foregrp	Bipod	MatchS	Launchr	Chokes	Scpe10x	Scope7x	Scope4x	Scope2x	Reflex	MagAdpt	RiflLAM	AET
1.1%	2.1%	9.6%	5.3%	1.1%	1.1%	32.0%	0.0%	0.0%	0.0%	0.0%	5.3%	8.0%	0.0%	0.0%	0.0%	0.0%	0.0%	0.0%	0.1%	0.0%	0.0%	6.4%	3.2%	0.0%	0.0%	10.7%	7.5%	0.0%	0.0%	1.2%	0.0%	5.3%	0.0%


And here are the top 30 with those weights. It took some tweaking to get bolt-action rifles to have sufficient penalties to compare with semi-autos.
WeapName	WtSnp	SnpRank	RdyTime	Shts/4T	Damage	Accu	MagSize	RelodAP	Range	Brts/AP	BrstPen	Auto/AP	AutoPen	NoSemiA	MnlRlod	AtkVol	Reliab	Size	2Handed	Flash S	Suppres	Stock	TriggrG	Foregrp	Bipod	MatchS	Launchr	Chokes	Scpe10x	Scope7x	Scope4x	Scope2x	Reflex	MagAdpt	RiflLAM	AET
Knight SR-25	87.06	1	5.5	5	17	17	9.5	11	18.8	1	1	1	1	10	20	3.5	6.5	0	0	10	10	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	0	10	0
M21 EBR	        86.63	2	3	6	16.66	17	9.5	11	18.64	1	1	1	1	10	20	3.5	15.5	0	0	10	10	19	0	10	10	0	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	0	10	0
OSV-96  	85.83	3	0.0001	0.012	20	18	1	11	19.58	1	1	1	1	10	20	1	6.5	0	0	0	0	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	0	0	0
HK PSG1  	84.99	4	1	6	18.5	17.33	9.5	11	19	1	1	1	1	10	20	3.5	6.5	0	0	10	0	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	10	10	0	10	0	0	0	0
Gepard M2	84.91	5	0.001	0.025	20	17	1	2	19.58	1	1	1	1	10	20	1	6.5	0	0	0	0	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	0	0	0
Barrett M82A2	84.84	6	3	0.05	19.6	17	5	2	19.43	1	1	1	1	10	20	1	15.5	0	0	0	0	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	0	0	0
Barrett M98	84.69	7	1	0.1	19.05	17	5	2	19.58	1	1	1	1	10	20	1	6.5	0	0	0	0	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	0	0	0
Walther WA 2000	84.53	8	8	7	18.5	17.33	1	3.5	19	1	1	1	1	10	20	3.5	6.5	0	0	10	10	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	0	0	0
HK MSG90A1	83.43	9	2	5	17	17	9.5	11	18.75	1	1	1	1	10	20	3.5	15.5	0	0	10	10	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	10	10	0	10	0	0	0	0
M21 Tactical	83.2	10	3	6	16.66	17	9.5	11	18.64	1	1	1	1	10	20	3.5	15.5	0	0	10	10	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	0	0	0
Benelli R-1	83.16	11	4	2.5	18.5	17	1	2	18.85	1	1	1	1	10	20	3.5	6.5	0	0	0	0	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	0	0	0
Zastava M76	82.73	12	3.5	5	16.66	17	5	11	18.6	1	1	1	1	10	20	3.5	6.5	0	0	10	10	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	10	10	10	0	0	0	0	0
DSR-1   	82.42	13	8	2.5	19.05	20	5	3.5	19.7	1	1	1	1	10	4.5	1	6.5	0	0	0	10	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	0	10	0
Galil Sniper	82.09	14	3.5	6	16.66	17	9.5	11	18	1	1	1	1	10	20	3.5	12.5	0	0	0	10	18.5	0	10	10	0	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	0	0	0
AI AWM  	82.03	15	0.66	2	19.1	19.66	5	2	19.81	1	1	1	1	10	4.5	1	6.5	0	0	0	10	19.5	0	10	10	0	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	0	10	0
VSSK Vychlop	80.04	16	9	0.05	19.4	17	1	2	17	1	1	1	1	10	20	13	6.5	0	0	10	10	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	0	0	0
S&O Shorty	79.84	17	11	8	18.5	19.66	1	2	19.004	1	1	1	1	10	8.5	3.5	6.5	0	0	10	0	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	0	0	0
FN SCAR-H SV	79.68	18	5.5	5	16.66	17	9.5	11	17.86	1	4.5	6.5	4.5	10	20	3.5	15.5	0	0	10	10	15.5	10	10	10	0	10	0	0	10	10	10	16	0	10	0
Dragunov SVD	79.24	19	3	3	18.5	17.33	5	5.5	18.9	1	1	1	1	10	20	2.75	6.5	0	0	10	0	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	10	0	10	0	0	0	0	0
Sako TRG 42	78.59	20	2	1	19.1	19.66	5	1.875	19.83	1	1	1	1	10	4.5	1	6.5	0	0	0	0	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	0	0	0
Erma SR-100	78.47	21	0.33	1.5	19.15	18	5	3.5	20	1	1	1	1	10	4.5	1	6.5	0	0	0	0	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	0	0	0
SVU      	78.45	22	10.5	6	17	17	5	3.5	18.62	1	1	1	1	10	20	8.5	6.5	0	0	10	0	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	10	0	10	0	0	0	0	0
Parker Hale M82	78.18	23	3.5	4	18.5	19.66	1	3.5	19.001	1	1	1	1	10	4.5	3.5	6.5	0	0	10	10	0	10	10	10	0	0	0	10	10	10	10	17	0	0	0
Blaser R93 LRS2	78.11	24	3	3	18.5	20	1	2	18.8	1	1	1	1	10	8	3.5	6.5	0	0	10	0	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	0	0	0
Dragunov SVDS	78.08	25	3	3	17	17.33	5	5.5	18.7	1	1	1	1	10	20	2.75	6.5	0	0	10	0	19	0	10	10	0	0	0	10	0	10	0	0	0	0	0
CZ 700  	77.72	26	2	5	18.5	19.66	5	11	19	1	1	1	1	10	4.5	3.5	6.5	0	0	10	10	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	0	0	0
FR-F2   	77.52	27	1	4	18.5	19.66	5	11	19	1	1	1	1	10	4.5	3.5	6.5	0	0	10	0	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	0	0	0
M14 EBR 	77.36	28	3.5	5	16.66	12.5	9.5	11	17.5	1	11.5	6.5	11.5	10	20	3.5	6.5	0	0	10	0	18.5	0	10	10	0	10	0	0	10	10	10	16	0	10	0
Sako TRG 22	77.17	29	3	4	18.5	20	5	2	19.001	1	1	1	1	10	4.5	3.5	6.5	0	0	10	0	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	0	0	0
SV-98    	76.98	30	2	3	18.5	19.33	5	5.5	19.001	1	1	1	1	10	4.5	2.75	3	0	0	10	0	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	0	0	0



Thoughts?

[Updated on: Tue, 25 September 2012 06:46] by Moderator

Re: Presentation: Weapon Effectiveness Scales on 6 Dimensions[message #310617] Tue, 25 September 2012 11:01 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Headhunter

 
Messages:268
Registered:November 2009
Location: Sweden
sorca_2
I'm assuming that we're happy with the sidearms


Aye.

Quote:
And here are the top 30 with those weights. It took some tweaking to get bolt-action rifles to have sufficient penalties to compare with semi-autos.
Thoughts?


It looks a bit too favorable for semi-autos, try reducing those penalties a little.
Re: Presentation: Weapon Effectiveness Scales on 6 Dimensions[message #310624] Tue, 25 September 2012 15:39 Go to previous messageGo to next message
sorca_2

 
Messages:206
Registered:September 2010
Location: California, USA
There are 17 bolt-action sniper rifles in the game and 11 of them are in the top 30. But I guess you're saying that they seem to be low because the first one doesn't appear until #13.

Without any specific "we'd expect gun X to be better than gun Y" examples, here's a comparison of the HK PSG1 to the AI AWM:
WeapName	WtSnp	SnpRank	RdyTime	Shts/4T	Damage	Accu	MagSize	RelodAP	Range	Brts/AP	BrstPen	Auto/AP	AutoPen	NoSemiA	MnlRlod	AtkVol	Reliab	Size	2Handed	Flash S	Suppres	Stock	TriggrG	Foregrp	Bipod	MatchS	Launchr	Chokes	Scpe10x	Scope7x	Scope4x	Scope2x	Reflex	MagAdpt	RiflLAM	AET
HK PSG1 	84.99	4	21	12.07	39	7	20	20	795	0	0	0	0	0	0	85	0	8	0	10	0	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	10	10	0	10	0	0	0	0
AI AWM  	82.03	15	22	10.26	42	11	10	32	1370	0	0	0	0	0	28	100	0	9	0	0	10	19.5	0	10	10	0	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	0	10	0
Diff in Scores	-2.96	-11	-0.02	-0.53	0.36	0.77	-0.30	-0.59	1.61	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	-7.68	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.13	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	3.30	0.00


The difference in points is about 3. The AWM takes about 30 more AP to fire after accounting for manual reloading, resulting in a total penalty of 8.20. The PSG1 also readies 1AP faster, but the AWM defeats this with a stock bonus. The PSG1 reloads 12 AP faster. The AWM does 3 more damage (bonus 0.36), has much longer range (bonus 1.31) and can accept a rifle LAM (bonus 3.3).

We can tweak these bonuses with the weights, but it's going to hard to deal with the fact that you can fire the PSG1 three times for every time you fire the AWM once.

[Updated on: Tue, 25 September 2012 15:40] by Moderator

Re: Presentation: Weapon Effectiveness Scales on 6 Dimensions[message #310625] Tue, 25 September 2012 15:47 Go to previous messageGo to next message
DepressivesBrot

 
Messages:3728
Registered:July 2009
I don't think preferring semi automatic DMRs is a big issue. The sniper role in the game is much closer to Private Jackson than to Gunny Hathcock anyway - integrated instead of lone hunter, just-beyond-AR-range instead of a-mile-away.


Re: Presentation: Weapon Effectiveness Scales on 6 Dimensions[message #310626] Tue, 25 September 2012 15:57 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Sam Hotte

 
Messages:2033
Registered:March 2009
Location: Middle of Germany
Why are the following weights for sniper/DMR role:
1. "Matchsight" more important than many, e.g. 2x- and 4x scope?
2. "No semi-auto fire" as important as accuracy?
Re: Presentation: Weapon Effectiveness Scales on 6 Dimensions[message #310649] Wed, 26 September 2012 01:46 Go to previous messageGo to next message
sorca_2

 
Messages:206
Registered:September 2010
Location: California, USA
Thanks--the match sights were an oversight, so I zeroed them out. Of course, none of real sniper rifles or DMRs were impacted because none of them had match sights anyway. "NoSemiAuto" is a misleadingly-named field that the game gives for weapons that can only fire on automatic (like certain MGs, and I think a SIG SMG). You may have thought that was a punishment for bolt-action weapons because they aren't "semi-auto", but it's really punishing weapons that can't fire single shots because they wouldn't be very good for sniping. The field should probably be named NoSingleShots but that's above my pay grade.

I bumped up damage a little bit, bumped reload AP down a little bit, and bumped RifleLAM down a little bit. There was a slight reordering, but the list is largely the same. For example, even though those changes were beneficial to the AWM, its rank didn't shift.

Here are the new weights and top 30.

RdyTime	Shts/4T	Damage	Accu	MagSize	RelodAP	Range	Brts/AP	BrstPen	Auto/AP	AutoPen	NoSemiA	MnlRlod	AtkVol	Reliab	Size	2Handed	Flash S	Suppres	Stock	TriggrG	Foregrp	Bipod	MatchS	Launchr	Chokes	Scpe10x	Scope7x	Scope4x	Scope2x	Reflex	MagAdpt	RiflLAM	AET
1.11%	2.22%	11.08%	5.54%	1.11%	0.55%	33.25%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	5.54%	8.31%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.11%	0.00%	0.00%	6.65%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	11.08%	7.76%	0.00%	0.00%	1.24%	0.00%	4.43%	0.00%


WeapName	WtSnp	SnpRank	RdyTime	Shts/4T	Damage	Accu	MagSize	RelodAP	Range	Brts/AP	BrstPen	Auto/AP	AutoPen	NoSemiA	MnlRlod	AtkVol	Reliab	Size	2Handed	Flash S	Suppres	Stock	TriggrG	Foregrp	Bipod	MatchS	Launchr	Chokes	Scpe10x	Scope7x	Scope4x	Scope2x	Reflex	MagAdpt	RiflLAM	AET
Knight SR-25	88.91	1	5.5	5	17	17	9.5	11	18.8	1	1	1	1	10	20	3.5	6.5	0	0	10	10	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	0	10	0
OSV-96  	88.53	2	0.0001	0.012	20	18	1	11	19.58	1	1	1	1	10	20	1	6.5	0	0	0	0	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	0	0	0
M21 EBR 	88.45	3	3	6	16.66	17	9.5	11	18.64	1	1	1	1	10	20	3.5	15.5	0	0	10	10	19	0	10	10	0	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	0	10	0
Gepard M2	87.9	4	0.001	0.025	20	17	1	2	19.58	1	1	1	1	10	20	1	6.5	0	0	0	0	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	0	0	0
Barrett M82A2	87.8	5	3	0.05	19.6	17	5	2	19.43	1	1	1	1	10	20	1	15.5	0	0	0	0	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	0	0	0
Barrett M98	87.6	6	1	0.1	19.05	17	5	2	19.58	1	1	1	1	10	20	1	6.5	0	0	0	0	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	0	0	0
HK PSG1 	87.57	7	1	6	18.5	17.33	9.5	11	19	1	1	1	1	10	20	3.5	6.5	0	0	10	0	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	10	10	0	10	0	0	0	0
Walther WA 2000	87.35	8	8	7	18.5	17.33	1	3.5	19	1	1	1	1	10	20	3.5	6.5	0	0	10	10	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	0	0	0
Benelli R-1	86.01	9	4	2.5	18.5	17	1	2	18.85	1	1	1	1	10	20	3.5	6.5	0	0	0	0	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	0	0	0
HK MSG90A1	85.88	10	2	5	17	17	9.5	11	18.75	1	1	1	1	10	20	3.5	15.5	0	0	10	10	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	10	10	0	10	0	0	0	0
M21 Tactical	85.63	11	3	6	16.66	17	9.5	11	18.64	1	1	1	1	10	20	3.5	15.5	0	0	10	10	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	0	0	0
Zastava M76	85.14	12	3.5	5	16.66	17	5	11	18.6	1	1	1	1	10	20	3.5	6.5	0	0	10	10	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	10	10	10	0	0	0	0	0
DSR-1   	84.56	13	8	2.5	19.05	20	5	3.5	19.7	1	1	1	1	10	4.5	1	6.5	0	0	0	10	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	0	10	0
Galil Sniper	84.49	14	3.5	6	16.66	17	9.5	11	18	1	1	1	1	10	20	3.5	12.5	0	0	0	10	18.5	0	10	10	0	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	0	0	0
AI AWM  	84.22	15	0.66	2	19.1	19.66	5	2	19.81	1	1	1	1	10	4.5	1	6.5	0	0	0	10	19.5	0	10	10	0	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	0	10	0
VSSK Vychlop	82.89	16	9	0.05	19.4	17	1	2	17	1	1	1	1	10	20	13	6.5	0	0	10	10	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	0	0	0
S&O Shorty	82.62	17	11	8	18.5	19.66	1	2	19.004	1	1	1	1	10	8.5	3.5	6.5	0	0	10	0	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	0	0	0
Dragunov SVD	81.89	18	3	3	18.5	17.33	5	5.5	18.9	1	1	1	1	10	20	2.75	6.5	0	0	10	0	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	10	0	10	0	0	0	0	0
Sako TRG 42	81.39	19	2	1	19.1	19.66	5	1.875	19.83	1	1	1	1	10	4.5	1	6.5	0	0	0	0	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	0	0	0
FN SCAR-H SV	81.35	20	5.5	5	16.66	17	9.5	11	17.86	1	4.5	6.5	4.5	10	20	3.5	15.5	0	0	10	10	15.5	10	10	10	0	10	0	0	10	10	10	16	0	10	0
Erma SR-100	81.22	21	0.33	1.5	19.15	18	5	3.5	20	1	1	1	1	10	4.5	1	6.5	0	0	0	0	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	0	0	0
SVU     	81.05	22	10.5	6	17	17	5	3.5	18.62	1	1	1	1	10	20	8.5	6.5	0	0	10	0	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	10	0	10	0	0	0	0	0
Parker Hale M82	80.88	23	3.5	4	18.5	19.66	1	3.5	19.001	1	1	1	1	10	4.5	3.5	6.5	0	0	10	10	0	10	10	10	0	0	0	10	10	10	10	17	0	0	0
Blaser R93 LRS2	80.86	24	3	3	18.5	20	1	2	18.8	1	1	1	1	10	8	3.5	6.5	0	0	10	0	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	0	0	0
Dragunov SVDS	80.61	25	3	3	17	17.33	5	5.5	18.7	1	1	1	1	10	20	2.75	6.5	0	0	10	0	19	0	10	10	0	0	0	10	0	10	0	0	0	0	0
CZ 700  	80.15	26	2	5	18.5	19.66	5	11	19	1	1	1	1	10	4.5	3.5	6.5	0	0	10	10	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	0	0	0
FR-F2   	79.95	27	1	4	18.5	19.66	5	11	19	1	1	1	1	10	4.5	3.5	6.5	0	0	10	0	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	0	0	0
Sako TRG 22	79.9	28	3	4	18.5	20	5	2	19.001	1	1	1	1	10	4.5	3.5	6.5	0	0	10	0	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	0	0	0
Steyr SSG-P1	79.6	29	3.5	4	18.5	19.66	1	3.5	19	1	1	1	1	10	4.5	3.5	6.5	0	0	10	0	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	0	0	0
SV-98   	79.59	30	2	3	18.5	19.33	5	5.5	19.001	1	1	1	1	10	4.5	2.75	3	0	0	10	0	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	0	0	0


I'll continue working on the Stealth role and see if you guys have any other issues with the Sniper/DMR weights.
Re: Presentation: Weapon Effectiveness Scales on 6 Dimensions[message #310657] Wed, 26 September 2012 11:01 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Headhunter

 
Messages:268
Registered:November 2009
Location: Sweden
sorca_2
I'll continue working on the Stealth role and see if you guys have any other issues with the Sniper/DMR weights.


I guess not, it's just that whenever I go up against elites with semi-autos they seem to need at least 2 shots while high-damaging bolt-actions (.338 and above) only rarely need more than one. But I suppose in the grand scheme of things semi-autos are generally more useful.
Re: Presentation: Weapon Effectiveness Scales on 6 Dimensions[message #310664] Wed, 26 September 2012 15:02 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Sam Hotte

 
Messages:2033
Registered:March 2009
Location: Middle of Germany
Probably i just have a very different logic about how weights could be derived.
I'd say if a weapon is full auto only or not is very unimportant to sniper role. No need to artificially put full auto weapons down regarding the role: If there was a weapon that excels at range, accuracy etc. (everything that is important for sniping) but it was full auto - so what? Would still be good at sniper role.

Just to explain why i asked about it.
Re: Presentation: Weapon Effectiveness Scales on 6 Dimensions[message #310666] Wed, 26 September 2012 15:28 Go to previous messageGo to next message
DepressivesBrot

 
Messages:3728
Registered:July 2009
That's weird but true.


Re: Presentation: Weapon Effectiveness Scales on 6 Dimensions[message #310673] Wed, 26 September 2012 16:45 Go to previous messageGo to next message
sorca_2

 
Messages:206
Registered:September 2010
Location: California, USA
Headhunter
sorca_2
I'll continue working on the Stealth role and see if you guys have any other issues with the Sniper/DMR weights.


I guess not, it's just that whenever I go up against elites with semi-autos they seem to need at least 2 shots while high-damaging bolt-actions (.338 and above) only rarely need more than one. But I suppose in the grand scheme of things semi-autos are generally more useful.


Agreed. You can always take 2 shots per turn with a semi-auto (i.e. potentially kill 2 targets) but you'll probably never take more than 1 with a bolt-action.

Sam_Hotte
Probably i just have a very different logic about how weights could be derived.
I'd say if a weapon is full auto only or not is very unimportant to sniper role. No need to artificially put full auto weapons down regarding the role: If there was a weapon that excels at range, accuracy etc. (everything that is important for sniping) but it was full auto - so what? Would still be good at sniper role.

Just to explain why i asked about it.


I think nosemiauto weapons deserve a penalty because 1) it's inherently a bad stat-- with two otherwise identical weapons, we'd always prefer the one that doesn't have nosemiauto and 2) with the power of the weapons we're talking about, you're almost certainly wasting bullets on overkill (or missing) which are APs you should be spending on lining up your next target. In terms of what relevant weapons we're talking about, the first one is the FN MAG way down at #65. If the penalty was removed altogether, it stays at #50. I ended up knocking the penalty down a notch and it moved to #60.

I also severely reduced the RifleLAM penalty after talking with DB because its bonus isn't helpful at long range.

So here are the new weights and top 30:
RdyTime	Shts/4T	Damage	Accu	MagSize	RelodAP	Range	Brts/AP	BrstPen	Auto/AP	AutoPen	NoSemiA	MnlRlod	AtkVol	Reliab	Size	2Handed	Flash S	Suppres	Stock	TriggrG	Foregrp	Bipod	MatchS	Launchr	Chokes	Scpe10x	Scope7x	Scope4x	Scope2x	Reflex	MagAdpt	RiflLAM	AET
1.17%	2.33%	11.67%	5.83%	1.17%	0.58%	35.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	4.67%	8.75%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.12%	0.00%	0.00%	7.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	11.67%	8.17%	0.00%	0.00%	1.31%	0.00%	0.58%	0.00%

WeapName	WtSnp	SnpRank	RdyTime	Shts/4T	Damage	Accu	MagSize	RelodAP	Range	Brts/AP	BrstPen	Auto/AP	AutoPen	NoSemiA	MnlRlod	AtkVol	Reliab	Size	2Handed	Flash S	Suppres	Stock	TriggrG	Foregrp	Bipod	MatchS	Launchr	Chokes	Scpe10x	Scope7x	Scope4x	Scope2x	Reflex	MagAdpt	RiflLAM	AET
OSV-96  	90.61	1	0.00	0.012	20	18	1	11	19.58	1	1	1	1	10	20	1	6.5	0	0	0	0	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	0	0	0
Gepard M2	89.95	2	0.00	0.025	20	17	1	2	19.58	1	1	1	1	10	20	1	6.5	0	0	0	0	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	0	0	0
Barrett M82A2	89.85	3	3	0.05	19.6	17	5	2	19.43	1	1	1	1	10	20	1	15.5	0	0	0	0	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	0	0	0
Barrett M98	89.65	4	1	0.1	19.05	17	5	2	19.58	1	1	1	1	10	20	1	6.5	0	0	0	0	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	0	0	0
HK PSG1 	89.62	5	1	6	18.5	17.33	9.5	11	19	1	1	1	1	10	20	3.5	6.5	0	0	10	0	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	10	10	0	10	0	0	0	0
Walther WA 2000	89.39	6	8	7	18.5	17.33	1	3.5	19	1	1	1	1	10	20	3.5	6.5	0	0	10	10	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	0	0	0
Knight SR-25	88.56	7	5.5	5	17	17	9.5	11	18.8	1	1	1	1	10	20	3.5	6.5	0	0	10	10	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	0	10	0
M21 EBR 	88.09	8	3	6	16.66	17	9.5	11	18.64	1	1	1	1	10	20	3.5	15.5	0	0	10	10	19	0	10	10	0	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	0	10	0
Benelli R-1	88.01	9	4	2.5	18.5	17	1	2	18.85	1	1	1	1	10	20	3.5	6.5	0	0	0	0	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	0	0	0
HK MSG90A1	87.87	10	2	5	17	17	9.5	11	18.75	1	1	1	1	10	20	3.5	15.5	0	0	10	10	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	10	10	0	10	0	0	0	0
M21 Tactical	87.61	11	3	6	16.66	17	9.5	11	18.64	1	1	1	1	10	20	3.5	15.5	0	0	10	10	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	0	0	0
Zastava M76	87.11	12	3.5	5	16.66	17	5	11	18.6	1	1	1	1	10	20	3.5	6.5	0	0	10	10	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	10	10	10	0	0	0	0	0
Galil Sniper	86.44	13	3.5	6	16.66	17	9.5	11	18	1	1	1	1	10	20	3.5	12.5	0	0	0	10	18.5	0	10	10	0	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	0	0	0
VSSK Vychlop	84.78	14	9	0.05	19.4	17	1	2	17	1	1	1	1	10	20	13	6.5	0	0	10	10	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	0	0	0
S&O Shorty	84.51	15	11	8	18.5	19.66	1	2	19.004	1	1	1	1	10	8.5	3.5	6.5	0	0	10	0	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	0	0	0
DSR-1   	84.08	16	8	2.5	19.05	20	5	3.5	19.7	1	1	1	1	10	4.5	1	6.5	0	0	0	10	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	0	10	0
Dragunov SVD	83.76	17	3	3	18.5	17.33	5	5.5	18.9	1	1	1	1	10	20	2.75	6.5	0	0	10	0	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	10	0	10	0	0	0	0	0
AI AWM   	83.73	18	0.66	2	19.1	19.66	5	2	19.81	1	1	1	1	10	4.5	1	6.5	0	0	0	10	19.5	0	10	10	0	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	0	10	0
Sako TRG 42	83.24	19	2	1	19.1	19.66	5	1.875	19.83	1	1	1	1	10	4.5	1	6.5	0	0	0	0	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	0	0	0
Erma SR-100	83.06	20	0.33	1.5	19.15	18	5	3.5	20	1	1	1	1	10	4.5	1	6.5	0	0	0	0	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	0	0	0
SVU     	82.89	21	10.5	6	17	17	5	3.5	18.62	1	1	1	1	10	20	8.5	6.5	0	0	10	0	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	10	0	10	0	0	0	0	0
Parker Hale M82	82.72	22	3.5	4	18.5	19.66	1	3.5	19.001	1	1	1	1	10	4.5	3.5	6.5	0	0	10	10	0	10	10	10	0	0	0	10	10	10	10	17	0	0	0
Blaser R93 LRS2	82.69	23	3	3	18.5	20	1	2	18.8	1	1	1	1	10	8	3.5	6.5	0	0	10	0	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	0	0	0
Dragunov SVDS	82.43	24	3	3	17	17.33	5	5.5	18.7	1	1	1	1	10	20	2.75	6.5	0	0	10	0	19	0	10	10	0	0	0	10	0	10	0	0	0	0	0
CZ 700   	81.96	25	2	5	18.5	19.66	5	11	19	1	1	1	1	10	4.5	3.5	6.5	0	0	10	10	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	0	0	0
FR-F2   	81.76	26	1	4	18.5	19.66	5	11	19	1	1	1	1	10	4.5	3.5	6.5	0	0	10	0	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	0	0	0
Sako TRG 22	81.7	27	3	4	18.5	20	5	2	19.001	1	1	1	1	10	4.5	3.5	6.5	0	0	10	0	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	0	0	0
Steyr SSG-P1	81.39	28	3.5	4	18.5	19.66	1	3.5	19	1	1	1	1	10	4.5	3.5	6.5	0	0	10	0	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	0	0	0
SV-98   	81.38	29	2	3	18.5	19.33	5	5.5	19.001	1	1	1	1	10	4.5	2.75	3	0	0	10	0	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	0	0	0
FN SCAR-H SV	80.77	30	5.5	5	16.66	17	9.5	11	17.86	1	4.5	6.5	4.5	10	20	3.5	15.5	0	0	10	10	15.5	10	10	10	0	10	0	0	10	10	10	16	0	10	0


Still working on stealth.
Re: Presentation: Weapon Effectiveness Scales on 6 Dimensions[message #310678] Wed, 26 September 2012 19:15 Go to previous messageGo to next message
elenhil

 
Messages:59
Registered:June 2008
If MAMLite is incorporated in the trunk (making damage very diverse indeed), how hard will it be to take it into account? It will definitely skew the list in favour of bigger guns.
Re: Presentation: Weapon Effectiveness Scales on 6 Dimensions[message #310679] Wed, 26 September 2012 19:19 Go to previous messageGo to next message
DepressivesBrot

 
Messages:3728
Registered:July 2009
1) It's a very big IF
2) Once the weights are set, it doesn't matter what the input is, you'll just get a (slightly) different list that represents the new suitability ratings for all guns.


Re: Presentation: Weapon Effectiveness Scales on 6 Dimensions[message #310682] Wed, 26 September 2012 20:45 Go to previous messageGo to next message
elenhil

 
Messages:59
Registered:June 2008
The thing is, MAMLite modifies damage through ammo coefficients, not direct through weapon damage figures.
Re: Presentation: Weapon Effectiveness Scales on 6 Dimensions[message #310685] Wed, 26 September 2012 23:22 Go to previous messageGo to next message
sorca_2

 
Messages:206
Registered:September 2010
Location: California, USA
We'll have to add new variables and weight them, then. There's no way to future-proof such a system against new variables; we can only update it accordingly. As long as we're only adding 1 or 2 things that can be extracted from XMLs, 85% of the work will already be done, and the only weighting will be the importance of the new variables relative to the existing ones. We're doing OCTH first because it's the most straightforward and well understood.

For example, we'll have to do that if we want NCTH ratings. I'm just unsure about NCTH's current state and whether it would be worth the work at this time.
Re: Presentation: Weapon Effectiveness Scales on 6 Dimensions[message #310705] Thu, 27 September 2012 17:47 Go to previous messageGo to next message
sorca_2

 
Messages:206
Registered:September 2010
Location: California, USA
The stealth weights took a lot of tinkering, but I think it's pretty solid. After some balancing, I was able to get scaled scores relative to the "final minimum volume" created by doing attack volume * inverse of suppressor reduction * inverse of cold ammo reduction.

Remember that stealth is a "template", not a true role--it's meant to be applied to other roles (i.e. for a stealth CQB weapon, look at both stealth score and CQB score). These are the stealth weights (not very interesting to look at):
RdyTime	Shts/4T	Damage	Accu	MagSize	RelodAP	Range	Brts/AP	BrstPen	Auto/AP	AutoPen	NoSemiA	MnlRlod	AtkVol	Reliab	Size	2Handed	Flash S	Suppres	Stock	TriggrG	Foregrp	Bipod	MatchS	Launchr	Chokes	Scpe10x	Scope7x	Scope4x	Scope2x	Reflex	MagAdpt	RiflLAM	AET	Cold
0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	2.44%	0.00%	0.00%	9.76%	87.80%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%


Obviously the minimum volume is by far the most important variable, followed by the ability equip a flash suppressor, and a tiny bonus for reliability because suppressors reduce reliability.

Since there are only a few important variables, I'm going to show you a list of the top weapons and their relevant stealth variables. WtdStl is their stealth score, Flash S is the ability to equip a flash suppressor (10=yes, 0=no), AtkVol is the actual in-game volume, Reliab is the actual in-game reliability, Cold is the inverse of the noise reduction granted to the weapon by cold ammunition (if it can equip it) and FinalVol is the minimum volume the weapon can attain when using a suppressor (either integral or appropriate to its weapon type) and cold ammunition.

WeapName	WtdStl	Flash S	AtkVol	Cold	Reliab	FinalVol
HK SL9SD	99.04	10	80	0.2	0	2.4
VSSK Vychlop	98.58	10	70	0.2	0	2.8
FAMAE SAF Silen 98.12	10	50	0.6	0	3
HK MP5SD5	98.12	10	50	0.6	0	3
Calico M-960A	97.69	10	50	0.6	4	7.5
Glock 17	97.69	10	50	0.6	4	7.5
Spectre M4	97.5	10	50	0.6	3	7.5
Beretta 92F	97.12	10	50	0.6	2	7.5
HK MP5N 	97.12	10	50	0.6	2	7.5
SIG MP41/44	97.12	10	50	0.6	2	7.5
SIG P226 SAS	97.12	10	50	0.6	2	7.5
SIG P226R	97.12	10	50	0.6	2	7.5
Glock 18	96.73	10	50	0.6	1	7.5
Beretta 92FS	96.65	10	51	0.6	2	7.65
FN BDA 9	96.65	10	51	0.6	2	7.65
FN PRO-9	96.65	10	51	0.6	2	7.65
MP-446 Viking	96.42	10	45	0.6	0	6.75
Agram 2000	95.96	10	50	0.6	0	7.5
Beretta 93R	95.96	10	50	0.6	0	7.5
Calico M-950	95.96	10	50	0.6	0	7.5
Colt 9mm SMG	95.96	10	50	0.6	0	7.5
FAMAE Mini SAF	95.96	10	50	0.6	0	7.5
FAMAE SAF	95.96	10	50	0.6	0	7.5
HK MP5A4	95.96	10	50	0.6	0	7.5
HK MP5KA4	95.96	10	50	0.6	0	7.5
HK P7M8 	95.96	10	50	0.6	0	7.5
Jati-Matic GG-9 95.96	10	50	0.6	0	7.5
MAB PA-15	95.96	10	50	0.6	0	7.5
MAT-49   	95.96	10	50	0.6	0	7.5
Mini-Uzi	95.96	10	50	0.6	0	7.5
MP-443 Grach	95.96	10	50	0.6	0	7.5
Sphinx 3000	95.96	10	50	0.6	0	7.5
Sterling L2A3	95.96	10	50	0.6	0	7.5
Steyr AUG Para	95.96	10	50	0.6	0	7.5
VIS-35  	95.96	10	50	0.6	0	7.5
Walther MPL	95.96	10	50	0.6	0	7.5

Since many weapons have the same values, there are many "tie scores" and I don't want to spend time ranking them until we're happy.

The SL9SD is the best because its integral suppressor reduces its attack volume by 85%, then its special ammo reduces it by another 80%. The MP5SD5 is great because its integral suppressor reduces volume by 90% and cold ammo reduces this by another 40%.

Thoughts?
Re: Presentation: Weapon Effectiveness Scales on 6 Dimensions[message #310706] Thu, 27 September 2012 18:01 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Sam Hotte

 
Messages:2033
Registered:March 2009
Location: Middle of Germany
Looks OK to me.
Thx again for the time and effort you invest in this. Smile
:super:
Re: Presentation: Weapon Effectiveness Scales on 6 Dimensions[message #310709] Thu, 27 September 2012 18:38 Go to previous messageGo to next message
sorca_2

 
Messages:206
Registered:September 2010
Location: California, USA
Thanks Sam, much appreciated. Would you believe that we're almost done with OCTH? Once we are done, I'll start a new thread with recommendations based on everything we've found.

I'll work on MGs next, then we'll do "general purpose". I expect MGs to be somewhat easy like Sniper Rifles and general purpose to be a battle royale.

[Updated on: Thu, 27 September 2012 18:40] by Moderator

Re: Presentation: Weapon Effectiveness Scales on 6 Dimensions[message #310716] Thu, 27 September 2012 22:24 Go to previous messageGo to next message
sorca_2

 
Messages:206
Registered:September 2010
Location: California, USA
Here are the MG weights. Note that we favor large-caliber long range GPMGs for this role because of their high damage and range. The SAW/LMG-type weapons would have lower scores here but much higher scores in the General Purpose and CQB roles than large MGs. This reflects the fact that they are compromise weapons.

RdyTime	Shts/4T	Damage	Accu	MagSize	RelodAP	Range	Brts/AP	BrstPen	Auto/AP	AutoPen	NoSemiA	MnlRlod	AtkVol	Reliab	Size	2Handed	Flash S	Suppres	Stock	TriggrG	Foregrp	Bipod	MatchS	Launchr	Chokes	Scpe10x	Scope7x	Scope4x	Scope2x	Reflex	MagAdpt	RiflLAM	AET	Cold
0.95%	1.90%	10.46%	0.95%	23.77%	0.48%	14.26%	1.90%	0.48%	7.61%	2.85%	0.00%	4.75%	0.00%	0.95%	0.00%	2.85%	0.00%	0.00%	0.95%	2.85%	4.75%	2.85%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.95%	0.95%	0.00%	5.86%	5.71%	0.95%	0.00%	0.00%


DB presented the idea of a Tracer variable, but tracers are available in 9mm, 5.56, 7.62x51, 7.62x39, 7.62x54R, and 5.45 so really only non-9mm pistol caliber weapons would be punished and their stats are far too low to matter anyway.

Here's the top 30 so far:
WeapName	WtdMG	MGRank	RdyTime	Shts/4T	Damage	Accu	MagSize	RelodAP	Range	Brts/AP	BrstPen	Auto/AP	AutoPen	NoSemiA	MnlRlod	AtkVol	Reliab	Size	2Handed	Flash S	Suppres	Stock	TriggrG	Foregrp	Bipod	MatchS	Launchr	Chokes	Scpe10x	Scope7x	Scope4x	Scope2x	Reflex	MagAdpt	RiflLAM	AET	Cold
FN MAG  	81.69	1	0.167	7	16.66	17	19	2	17.41	1	18.5	15.5	18.5	0	20	9.41	15.5	0	0	0	6	19.7	0	10	10	0	0	0	0	0	10	0	15	10	10	0	10
HK 21E  	81.66	2	0.66	8	16.66	8	19	2	17.5	10	11.5	15.5	11.5	10	20	9.41	12.5	0	0	10	6	0	10	10	10	0	0	0	0	10	10	10	14	10	10	0	10
FN Minimi	76.05	3	2	13	10.5	17	20	2	14	1	18.5	19	18.5	0	20	10.38	15.5	0	0	10	11.5	9.25	0	10	10	0	0	0	0	0	10	0	8	10	10	0	10
HK 23E  	74.69	4	3	14	10.5	12.5	19	2	13	10	18.5	15.5	20	10	20	10.3	12.5	0	0	10	11.5	0	10	10	10	0	0	0	0	10	10	10	7	10	10	0	10
Pecheneg	74.67	5	0.33	4	18.5	8	20	5.5	17	1	4.5	6.5	4.5	0	20	8.888	6.5	0	0	0	2	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	17	10	0	0	0
M60E3   	74.1	6	1	7	16.66	8	19	2	17.5	1	11.5	6.5	11.5	0	20	10	6.5	0	0	0	6.5	0	0	10	10	0	0	0	0	0	10	0	15	10	0	0	10
PKM     	73.06	7	0.66	4	18.5	8	20	5.5	17	1	4.5	6.5	4.5	0	20	10.38	6.5	0	0	0	3.7	19.5	0	0	10	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	17	10	0	0	0
HK MG36 RAS	72.97	8	4	12	10.5	12.5	19	5.5	14	4.5	18.5	6.5	18.5	10	20	10.6666	18.5	0	0	10	12.9	17	10	10	10	0	10	0	0	10	10	10	10	10	10	0	10
Ares M4 Shrike	72.51	9	7	13	10.5	12.5	19	5.5	12.42	1	11.5	19	11.5	10	20	10.389	6.5	0	0	10	11.5	13	0	10	10	0	0	0	0	10	10	10	8	10	10	0	10
Browning M1919 	72.29	10	0.084	9	17	12.5	19	2	17.86	1	18.5	3.63	18.5	0	20	10.3	6.5	0	0	0	6.8	20	0	0	10	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	13	10	0	0	10
CETME Ameli	72.03	11	3.5	13	10.5	12.5	20	2	14	1	18.5	19	18.5	0	20	10.2564	12.5	0	0	0	11.2	0	0	0	10	0	0	0	0	0	10	0	8	10	0	0	10
RPK     	71.81	12	3	8	14.25	12.5	18.5	5.5	15.3	1	11.5	6.5	11.5	10	20	10	12.5	0	0	0	6.5	19	0	10	10	0	0	0	0	0	10	10	14	10	0	0	10
HK MG36  	71.79	13	4	11	10.5	12.5	19	5.5	14	4.5	18.5	6.5	18.5	10	20	10.666	18.5	0	0	10	12.9	17	10	10	10	0	10	0	0	0	10	0	10	10	0	0	10
AEK-973 	71.79	13	7	9	14	12.5	14	11	12.42	13.5	18.5	15.5	18.5	10	20	10	12.5	0	0	10	10	13	10	10	10	0	10	0	10	10	10	10	13	10	0	0	10
XM-8 Automatic	71.22	15	4	9	10.5	17	19	5.5	14.66	1	11.5	6.5	11.5	10	20	11.428	6.5	0	0	10	14	17	10	10	10	0	10	0	0	10	10	10	12	10	0	0	10
HK MG43 	71.21	16	2	14	10.5	12.5	20	2	14	1	19.5	15.5	20	0	20	10.3	6.5	0	0	0	11.5	9.25	0	0	10	0	0	0	0	0	10	10	7	10	10	0	10
Rheinmetall MG3	70.55	17	0.33	7	16.66	12.5	19	2	17.33	1	4.5	19	4.5	0	20	9.4117	15.5	0	0	0	6	0	0	0	10	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	10	0	0	10
FN Minimi SPW	69.8	18	4	13	10.5	17	20	2	12.42	1	18.5	6.5	18.5	0	20	12.307	12.5	0	0	10	14.5	17	0	10	10	0	0	0	0	0	10	0	8	10	10	0	10
Diemaco C7A2	68.55	19	7	10	10.5	12.5	14	11	14.66	1	11.5	15.5	11.5	10	20	10.38	6.5	0	0	10	11.5	13	10	10	10	0	10	0	0	10	10	10	11	10	10	0	10
Ultimax 	68.3	20	3.5	10	10.5	8	19	5.5	14.66	1	18.5	3.63	18.5	0	20	10.389	12.5	0	0	10	6.8	18.5	0	10	10	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	11	10	0	0	10
Colt M16A1	68.18	21	10.5	12	13	12.5	14	11	12.86	1	11.5	15.5	11.5	10	20	14.54	4.75	0	0	10	15.1	6	10	10	10	0	10	0	0	10	10	10	10	10	10	0	10
RPK-74  	67.61	22	3.5	13	13	12.5	18	5.5	15.3	1	18.5	6.5	18.5	10	20	10.389	12.5	0	0	10	6.8	18.5	0	10	10	0	0	0	0	0	10	10	8	0	10	0	10
SIG SG550	67.58	23	5.5	9	13	12.5	14	11	15	4.5	11.5	6.5	11.5	10	20	11.111	15.5	0	0	10	13	15.5	10	10	10	0	10	0	0	10	10	10	12	10	10	0	10
RPD     	67.41	24	2	8	14.25	12.5	18.5	5.5	14.66	1	11.5	6.5	11.5	0	20	10	6.5	0	0	0	6.5	19.33	0	0	10	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	13	10	0	0	10
AK-108  	67.07	25	7	10	10.5	12.5	14	11	12.71	13.5	18.5	15.5	18.5	10	20	10.389	18.5	0	0	10	11.5	13	10	10	10	0	10	0	10	10	10	10	11	0	10	0	10
SA vz.58	67.01	26	9	8	14	8	14	11	11.33	1	4.5	15.5	4.5	10	20	10	15.5	0	0	10	10	9	10	10	10	0	10	0	0	10	10	10	14	10	0	0	10
HK G11  	66.84	27	12	13	10.5	8	18	17	15.3	20	20	6.5	18.5	10	20	11.428	15.5	0	0	10	4.3	0	10	0	10	0	0	0	0	10	10	10	8	0	0	0	0
SIG SG540	66.8	28	7	11	10.5	12.5	14	11	13	1	11.5	15.5	11.5	10	20	11.111	6.5	0	0	10	13	13	10	10	10	0	10	0	0	10	10	10	11	10	0	0	10
HK 416 14"	66.62	29	9	12	10.5	12.5	14	11	12.14	1	11.5	15.5	11.5	10	20	11.428	18.5	0	0	10	14	9	10	10	10	0	10	0	0	10	10	10	9	10	10	0	10
FAMAS G2	66.46	30	12	15	10.5	12.5	14	3.5	14.33	17	11.5	19	11.5	10	20	10.389	4.75	0	0	10	11.5	0	10	0	10	0	10	0	0	10	10	10	6	10	0	0	10


Let me know what you think so far.

[Updated on: Thu, 27 September 2012 22:25] by Moderator

Re: Presentation: Weapon Effectiveness Scales on 6 Dimensions[message #310719] Fri, 28 September 2012 01:08 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Headhunter

 
Messages:268
Registered:November 2009
Location: Sweden
It looks all right, nice to see the MAG beating the HK21... Smile
Re: Presentation: Weapon Effectiveness Scales on 6 Dimensions[message #310720] Fri, 28 September 2012 01:18 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Sam Hotte

 
Messages:2033
Registered:March 2009
Location: Middle of Germany
Sorca, could you explain the "Reflex" values, pls?
Obviously, this is no "binary" variable like a scope "can take it = 10; cannot take it = 0". So what does the different numbers mean?
Re: Presentation: Weapon Effectiveness Scales on 6 Dimensions[message #310721] Fri, 28 September 2012 01:26 Go to previous messageGo to next message
DepressivesBrot

 
Messages:3728
Registered:July 2009
It's the actual AP reduction given the JA2 Default Merc with 80MRK and 80AP, then scaled in his usual 0-20 range.


Re: Presentation: Weapon Effectiveness Scales on 6 Dimensions[message #310724] Fri, 28 September 2012 04:42 Go to previous messageGo to next message
sorca_2

 
Messages:206
Registered:September 2010
Location: California, USA
After re-examining the variables, I reconstructed the ReadyTime and ShotsPer4Turns variables based on the method I used for the stealth role.

The new variable "FRdyTim" has replaced ReadyTime and Stocks; it represents the weapon's final ReadyTime after accounting for stocks, if applicable. "FShtAP" has replaced ShotsPer4Turns and Reflex; it represents the weapon's final AP to fire a single shot after accounting for Reflex/Kobra/ISM. Each of the new variables was converted into a 1-20 scale as usual. In the weapon vs. weapon comparisons, the in-game values will still be shown.

The good news is that these variables are A) much more intuitive and easy to understand (instead of the other variables in combination) and B) they respond to changes in weight much easier. The bad news is that (in addition to being time-consuming) this may/may not impact the other roles we've already worked on. When we're done with MGs and general purpose, we can quickly check those out to make sure nothing crazy happened.

Here are the weights with the redesigned variables:
FRdyTim	FShtAP	Damage	Accu	MagSize	RelodAP	Range	Brts/AP	BrstPen	Auto/AP	AutoPen	NoSemiA	MnlRlod	AtkVol	Reliab	Size	2Handed	Flash S	MinVol	TriggrG	Foregrp	Bipod	MatchS	Launchr	Chokes	Scpe10x	Scope7x	Scope4x	Scope2x	MagAdpt	RiflLAM	AET
5.26%	5.26%	11.58%	1.05%	26.32%	0.53%	15.79%	2.11%	0.53%	8.42%	3.16%	0.00%	5.26%	0.00%	1.05%	0.00%	3.16%	0.00%	0.00%	3.16%	5.26%	3.16%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	1.05%	1.05%	0.00%	6.32%	1.05%	0.00%


And a new top 30:
WeapName	WtdMG	MGRank	FRdyTim	FShtAP	Damage	Accu	MagSize	RelodAP	Range	Brts/AP	BrstPen	Auto/AP	AutoPen	NoSemiA	MnlRlod	AtkVol	Reliab	Size	2Handed	Flash S	MinVol	TriggrG	Foregrp	Bipod	MatchS	Launchr	Chokes	Scpe10x	Scope7x	Scope4x	Scope2x	MagAdpt	RiflLAM	AET
HK 21E  	88.82	2	1.81	9.5	16.66	8	19	2	17.5	10	11.5	15.5	11.5	10	20	9.41	12.5	0	0	10	6	10	10	10	0	0	0	0	10	10	10	10	10	0
FN MAG  	88.01	1	3.66	9.5	16.66	17	19	2	17.41	1	18.5	15.5	18.5	0	20	9.41	15.5	0	0	0	6	0	10	10	0	0	0	0	0	10	0	10	10	0
FN Minimi	85.41	3	4.66	13	10.5	17	20	2	14	1	18.5	19	18.5	0	20	10.39	15.5	0	0	10	11.5	0	10	10	0	0	0	0	0	10	0	10	10	0
HK 23E  	83.83	4	2	13	10.5	12.5	19	2	13	10	18.5	15.5	20	10	20	10.39	12.5	0	0	10	11.5	10	10	10	0	0	0	0	10	10	10	10	10	0
Ares M4 Shrike	82.22	9	9	13	10.5	12.5	19	5.5	12.42	1	11.5	19	11.5	10	20	10.39	6.5	0	0	10	11.5	0	10	10	0	0	0	0	10	10	10	10	10	0
HK MG36 RAS	81.15	8	6	13	10.5	12.5	19	5.5	14	4.5	18.5	6.5	18.5	10	20	10.67	18.5	0	0	10	12.9	10	10	10	0	10	0	0	10	10	10	10	10	0
CETME Ameli	80.87	11	3	13	10.5	12.5	20	2	14	1	18.5	19	18.5	0	20	10.26	12.5	0	0	0	11.2	0	0	10	0	0	0	0	0	10	0	10	0	0
HK MG43  	80.23	16	4.66	13	10.5	12.5	20	2	14	1	19.5	15.5	20	0	20	10.39	6.5	0	0	0	11.5	0	0	10	0	0	0	0	0	10	10	10	10	0
Rheinmetall MG3	80.15	17	1.75	4.5	16.66	12.5	19	2	17.33	1	4.5	19	4.5	0	20	9.41	15.5	0	0	0	6	0	0	10	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	10	0	0
M60E3   	80.1	6	1.88	9.5	16.66	8	19	2	17.5	1	11.5	6.5	11.5	0	20	10	6.5	0	0	0	6.5	0	10	10	0	0	0	0	0	10	0	10	0	0
HK MG36 	79.95	13	6	13	10.5	12.5	19	5.5	14	4.5	18.5	6.5	18.5	10	20	10.67	18.5	0	0	10	12.9	10	10	10	0	10	0	0	0	10	0	10	0	0
Pecheneg	79.76	5	1.75	7.5	18.5	8	20	5.5	17	1	4.5	6.5	4.5	0	20	8.89	6.5	0	0	0	2	0	10	10	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	10	0	0
AEK-973	        79	13	9	9.5	14	12.5	14	11	12.42	13.5	18.5	15.5	18.5	10	20	10	12.5	0	0	10	10	10	10	10	0	10	0	10	10	10	10	10	0	0
FN Minimi SPW	78.22	18	6	13	10.5	17	20	2	12.42	1	18.5	6.5	18.5	0	20	12.31	12.5	0	0	10	14.5	0	10	10	0	0	0	0	0	10	0	10	10	0
Browning M1919 	77.85	10	3.33	9.5	17	12.5	19	2	17.86	1	18.5	3.63	18.5	0	20	10.39	6.5	0	0	0	6.8	0	0	10	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	10	0	0
Colt M16A1	77.85	21	12	13	13	12.5	14	11	12.86	1	11.5	15.5	11.5	10	20	14.55	4.75	0	0	10	15.1	10	10	10	0	10	0	0	10	10	10	10	10	0
XM-8 Automatic	77.76	15	6	9.5	10.5	17	19	5.5	14.66	1	11.5	6.5	11.5	10	20	11.43	6.5	0	0	10	14	10	10	10	0	10	0	0	10	10	10	10	0	0
Tavor TAR 21	77.59	36	11	16.5	10.5	8	14	3.5	14	1	11.5	15.5	11.5	10	20	10.67	6.5	0	0	10	12.9	10	10	10	0	10	0	0	10	10	10	10	10	0
PKM     	77.54	7	4.33	7.5	18.5	8	20	5.5	17	1	4.5	6.5	4.5	0	20	10.39	6.5	0	0	0	3.7	0	0	10	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	10	0	0
RPK     	77.45	12	5	9.5	14.25	12.5	18.5	5.5	15.3	1	11.5	6.5	11.5	10	20	10	12.5	0	0	0	6.5	0	10	10	0	0	0	0	0	10	10	10	0	0
FAMAS G2	77.45	30	9	16.5	10.5	12.5	14	3.5	14.33	17	11.5	19	11.5	10	20	10.39	4.75	0	0	10	11.5	10	0	10	0	10	0	0	10	10	10	10	0	0
Diemaco C7A2	77.03	19	9	13	10.5	12.5	14	11	14.66	1	11.5	15.5	11.5	10	20	10.39	6.5	0	0	10	11.5	10	10	10	0	10	0	0	10	10	10	10	10	0
HK G11  	76.33	27	9	13	10.5	8	18	17	15.3	20	20	6.5	18.5	10	20	11.43	15.5	0	0	10	4.3	10	0	10	0	0	0	0	10	10	10	0	0	0
HK 416 14"	76.08	29	11	13	10.5	12.5	14	11	12.14	1	11.5	15.5	11.5	10	20	11.43	18.5	0	0	10	14	10	10	10	0	10	0	0	10	10	10	10	10	0
Ultimax 	75.73	20	6	13	10.5	8	19	5.5	14.66	1	18.5	3.63	18.5	0	20	10.39	12.5	0	0	10	6.8	0	10	10	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	10	0	0
RPK-74  	75.7	22	6	13	13	12.5	18	5.5	15.3	1	18.5	6.5	18.5	10	20	10.39	12.5	0	0	10	6.8	0	10	10	0	0	0	0	0	10	10	0	10	0
AK-108  	75.37	25	9	13	10.5	12.5	14	11	12.71	13.5	18.5	15.5	18.5	10	20	10.39	18.5	0	0	10	11.5	10	10	10	0	10	0	10	10	10	10	0	10	0
Colt M4A1	75.26	52	13.5	16.5	10.5	12.5	14	11	12.14	1	11.5	15.5	11.5	10	20	10.39	4.75	0	0	10	11.5	10	10	0	0	10	0	0	10	10	10	10	10	0
SIG SG550	75.03	23	7	13	13	12.5	14	11	15	4.5	11.5	6.5	11.5	10	20	11.11	15.5	0	0	10	13	10	10	10	0	10	0	0	10	10	10	10	10	0
Steyr AUG HBAR	75.01	31	6	13	13	8	17.2	3.5	15.3	1	18.5	6.5	18.5	10	20	12.31	6.5	0	0	10	14.5	10	10	10	0	0	0	0	0	10	10	0	0	0


I didn't update MGRank so you can see where they used to be.
Re: Presentation: Weapon Effectiveness Scales on 6 Dimensions[message #310727] Fri, 28 September 2012 12:18 Go to previous messageGo to next message
DepressivesBrot

 
Messages:3728
Registered:July 2009
Nice Selection of GPMGs and LMGs up there.
Random thoughts:
- You won't get rid of the regular ARs unless going with a newer game version and accounting for heat resistance and quick detachable barrels - especially the M16 isn't renowned for its sustained fire capabilities, but it's perfectly adequate with r4870 game mechanics.
- C-Mag'ed bullpups are hilarious, I'm looking at you, TAR-21, and your friend FAMAS G2.
- How's the Mag Adapter calculated? Imo, there's another merge candidate to become 'Final Magsize'


Re: Presentation: Weapon Effectiveness Scales on 6 Dimensions[message #310730] Fri, 28 September 2012 13:47 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Sam Hotte

 
Messages:2033
Registered:March 2009
Location: Middle of Germany
Nice to see the HK21 beating the MAG again ... Wink
I 2nd DB's proposal about going for a "final magsize" combined variable.
Re: Presentation: Weapon Effectiveness Scales on 6 Dimensions[message #310731] Fri, 28 September 2012 14:09 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Headhunter

 
Messages:268
Registered:November 2009
Location: Sweden
Sam_Hotte
Nice to see the HK21 beating the MAG again ... Wink


It's a conspiracy! A conspiracy I say!
Re: Presentation: Weapon Effectiveness Scales on 6 Dimensions[message #310733] Fri, 28 September 2012 15:27 Go to previous messageGo to previous message
sorca_2

 
Messages:206
Registered:September 2010
Location: California, USA
Thanks for the feedback. Probly no time to work on this today but will continue soon.
Previous Topic: Underbarrel missile pod
Next Topic: OCTH and NCTH Damage Calculations and Caliber Damage.
Goto Forum:
  


Current Time: Sun Mar 26 10:15:41 EEST 2017

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.01645 seconds