Bounty Hunter Archive

great analysis, and good spreadsheet lmador! I had a similar file made up for when I Examine marks, but this is quite well done....

-Mala

---

Raphayl wrote:
Wow! That comes off mighty condescending and boastful.

---

---

Raphayl wrote:
I assumed people would use my post as a launching point for doing their own comparisons, not as a launching point for attack or ridicule.

---

---

Raphayl wrote:

...and determine which one is better for a given situation. (You only presented numbers for 1 situation, so you assumed the weapons to be in this situation.)

---

---

Raphayl wrote:

This is convenient because, with an even distribution, you can easily find out your Average Base Damage Per Hit. (You assume average damage, just as I did.)

---

---

Raphayl wrote:
A weapon with a higher Effectiveness Rating will outperform a weapon with a lower Effectiveness Rating, provided: 1) The Armor Rating of the target critter is equal to or lower than the Armor Piercing Rating for both weapons. 2) The target critter is not vulnerable to the damage type of either weapon. 3) The Weapon Skill Speed is the same for both weapons. 4) The 1.0 second speed cap is not in effect for either weapon. (Wow... 4 assumptions all right here together!)

---

---

Raphayl wrote:
The weapon with the higher Effectiveness Rating MAY continue to outperform the weapon with the lower Effectiveness Rating even if one or more of these conditions aren't met. But if all four conditions are met, then the weapon with the higher Effectiveness Rating will always be the superior weapon. (So the numbers assume that all 4 previous assumptions take place. Nested assuming?)

---

No. This simply says that the assertion made previously may continue to hold true even if one or more of the conditions fail to be met. But it may not. There is no guarantee that the assertion will hold true if one or more of the conditions are not met. However, if all four conditions are met, the assertion is guaranteed to hold true.

---

Raphayl wrote:
I have taken the stock list of one of the Weaponsmiths on my server. (You are assuming that the weapons on this smith's vendor were all made without bias, and were all made off equally viable resources.)

---

No. Like many other folks, you are mistakenly assuming that the purpose of this exercise was to provide the Ultimate Weapon Comparison Bible(tm). That was never the point of the exercise, and the folks who are interpreting it that way are barking very much up the wrong tree.

The purpose of the exercise was to provide a mathematical tool to allow folks to compare weapons (presumably two weapons that they themselves are thinking of buying for their own use) in a quick, easy way. The weapon comparisons I did with the stock list of the vendor on my server were done largely for illustrative purposes, so that folks could see how the formula worked in practice. I assumed that most folks would clearly understand that the numbers I was getting for the weapons in that list would not necessarily reflect the numbers for similar weapons on their server.

---

Raphayl wrote:
But the math is valid, assuming the speed formula I saw was correct. (Tsk tsk... you assumed rather than verify?)

---

Yes, since I'm on dial-up and would therefore have any efforts to verify this fact thwarted to a large degree by latency issues.

But that's okay, because I explicitly stated that the weapon formula was an assumption on my part. See, that's the nifty thing about mathematics. There's nothing wrong with making reasonable assumptions, as long as you state them explicitly so that others can come along later and provide "peer review" for your efforts. If it turns out that my use of the speed formula in this manner is wrong, someone will come along eventually and point it out. And then the formula will be revised and made better, which will benefit everyone in the long run.

So that's alright.

---

Raphayl wrote:
Additionally, all of the calculations in this post are made with one fundamental assumption in mind: That Melee weapons work like Ranged weapons with it comes to things like the 1.0 second speed cap, damage distributions, the 1.5x modifier for Base Damage, etc. But I don't play a melee class, so I don't know if these assumptions are true, or if they're baseless. (Another assumption without verification...)

---

And another assumption explicitly stated so that folks who know the actual facts can come along and revise the formula.

I mean, y'know, if I'd been trying to hide these assumptions and pretend that I was speaking ex cathedra, then yeah, you'd have a valid gripe. As it is, I said that I was proceeding on an assumption. And, not surprisingly, you're saying the same thing.

And yes, according to you, it was indeed a FLAWED assumption.

Which is, of course, why I went to all the trouble to warn you (and everyone else reading it) about it in the first place.

I do not claim to be perfect. I will always, however, put all of my cards on the table for everyone to see anytime I'm doing something like this, so that any mistakes I've made can be corrected, and so any unreasonable or inaccurate assumptions can be revised. Again, that's the entire purpose of peer review.

---

Raphayl wrote:
Unlisted assumption: Your calculations assume that no one uses sliced weapons.

---

Again, the post is not meant to be the Ultimate Weapon Comparison Bible(tm). The rating for the specific DX2 pistol made by a single weaponsmith on one server out of 20 is not meant to be representative of anything other than...the rating for that specific weapon by that specific weaponsmith on that particular server. If you have a sliced weapon, plug the values in to the Effectiveness Rating formula and do your own math.

---

Raphayl wrote:
Unlisted assumption: You assume all melee professions have no skills that alter the damage output of weapons.

---

No, I think I covered that pretty completely in the "if [my assumptions about melee combat are] flawed in one or more respects, then the conclusions will be as well" disclaimer there at the end.

Oddly, the TKA folks don't seem too het up about it. They're already trying to figure out ways to add the TKA bonuses to the work I've done.

---

Raphayl wrote:
For future reference, all you need to do is post your findings; there is no need to try and belittle others in the attempt.

---

For future reference, you might try being less eager to take offense at non-existent slights. Especially in cases where you think the slight is in response to a post that cannot be found on the first 10 pages of the Fencer forum.

I'm glad we were able to clear the air on this issue. Happy gaming.

Volsted Gridban
4/4/4/0 Ranger, Master Rifleman,
Surveyor of planetary resources. Purveyor of animal resources.
Author of Volsted's Weapon Analysis Guide, Volsted's Power Fishing Guide,
and Volsted's Animal Resource Guide
Draining MMORPG combat mechanics through the Mighty Sieve of Mathematics since 1999

---

Raphayl wrote:
Wow! That comes off mighty condescending and boastful.

---

---

Raphayl wrote:
I assumed people would use my post as a launching point for doing their own comparisons, not as a launching point for attack or ridicule.

---

---

Raphayl wrote:

...and determine which one is better for a given situation. (You only presented numbers for 1 situation, so you assumed the weapons to be in this situation.)

---

---

Raphayl wrote:

This is convenient because, with an even distribution, you can easily find out your Average Base Damage Per Hit. (You assume average damage, just as I did.)

---

---

Raphayl wrote:
A weapon with a higher Effectiveness Rating will outperform a weapon with a lower Effectiveness Rating, provided: 1) The Armor Rating of the target critter is equal to or lower than the Armor Piercing Rating for both weapons. 2) The target critter is not vulnerable to the damage type of either weapon. 3) The Weapon Skill Speed is the same for both weapons. 4) The 1.0 second speed cap is not in effect for either weapon. (Wow... 4 assumptions all right here together!)

---

---

Raphayl wrote:
The weapon with the higher Effectiveness Rating MAY continue to outperform the weapon with the lower Effectiveness Rating even if one or more of these conditions aren't met. But if all four conditions are met, then the weapon with the higher Effectiveness Rating will always be the superior weapon. (So the numbers assume that all 4 previous assumptions take place. Nested assuming?)

---

No. This simply says that the assertion made previously may continue to hold true even if one or more of the conditions fail to be met. But it may not. There is no guarantee that the assertion will hold true if one or more of the conditions are not met. However, if all four conditions are met, the assertion is guaranteed to hold true.

---

Raphayl wrote:
I have taken the stock list of one of the Weaponsmiths on my server. (You are assuming that the weapons on this smith's vendor were all made without bias, and were all made off equally viable resources.)

---

No. Like many other folks, you are mistakenly assuming that the purpose of this exercise was to provide the Ultimate Weapon Comparison Bible(tm). That was never the point of the exercise, and the folks who are interpreting it that way are barking very much up the wrong tree.

The purpose of the exercise was to provide a mathematical tool to allow folks to compare weapons (presumably two weapons that they themselves are thinking of buying for their own use) in a quick, easy way. The weapon comparisons I did with the stock list of the vendor on my server were done largely for illustrative purposes, so that folks could see how the formula worked in practice. I assumed that most folks would clearly understand that the numbers I was getting for the weapons in that list would not necessarily reflect the numbers for similar weapons on their server.

---

Raphayl wrote:
But the math is valid, assuming the speed formula I saw was correct. (Tsk tsk... you assumed rather than verify?)

---

Yes, since I'm on dial-up and would therefore have any efforts to verify this fact thwarted to a large degree by latency issues.

But that's okay, because I explicitly stated that the weapon formula was an assumption on my part. See, that's the nifty thing about mathematics. There's nothing wrong with making reasonable assumptions, as long as you state them explicitly so that others can come along later and provide "peer review" for your efforts. If it turns out that my use of the speed formula in this manner is wrong, someone will come along eventually and point it out. And then the formula will be revised and made better, which will benefit everyone in the long run.

So that's alright.

---

Raphayl wrote:
Additionally, all of the calculations in this post are made with one fundamental assumption in mind: That Melee weapons work like Ranged weapons with it comes to things like the 1.0 second speed cap, damage distributions, the 1.5x modifier for Base Damage, etc. But I don't play a melee class, so I don't know if these assumptions are true, or if they're baseless. (Another assumption without verification...)

---

And another assumption explicitly stated so that folks who know the actual facts can come along and revise the formula.

I mean, y'know, if I'd been trying to hide these assumptions and pretend that I was speaking ex cathedra, then yeah, you'd have a valid gripe. As it is, I said that I was proceeding on an assumption. And, not surprisingly, you're saying the same thing.

And yes, according to you, it was indeed a FLAWED assumption.

Which is, of course, why I went to all the trouble to warn you (and everyone else reading it) about it in the first place.

I do not claim to be perfect. I will always, however, put all of my cards on the table for everyone to see anytime I'm doing something like this, so that any mistakes I've made can be corrected, and so any unreasonable or inaccurate assumptions can be revised. Again, that's the entire purpose of peer review.

---

Raphayl wrote:
Unlisted assumption: Your calculations assume that no one uses sliced weapons.

---

Again, the post is not meant to be the Ultimate Weapon Comparison Bible(tm). The rating for the specific DX2 pistol made by a single weaponsmith on one server out of 20 is not meant to be representative of anything other than...the rating for that specific weapon by that specific weaponsmith on that particular server. If you have a sliced weapon, plug the values in to the Effectiveness Rating formula and do your own math.

---

Raphayl wrote:
Unlisted assumption: You assume all melee professions have no skills that alter the damage output of weapons.

---

No, I think I covered that pretty completely in the "if [my assumptions about melee combat are] flawed in one or more respects, then the conclusions will be as well" disclaimer there at the end.

Oddly, the TKA folks don't seem too het up about it. They're already trying to figure out ways to add the TKA bonuses to the work I've done.

---

Raphayl wrote:
For future reference, all you need to do is post your findings; there is no need to try and belittle others in the attempt.

---

For future reference, you might try being less eager to take offense at non-existent slights. Especially in cases where you think the slight is in response to a post that cannot be found on the first 10 pages of the Fencer forum.

I'm glad we were able to clear the air on this issue. Happy gaming.

Volsted Gridban
4/4/4/0 Ranger, Master Rifleman,
Surveyor of planetary resources. Purveyor of animal resources.
Author of Volsted's Weapon Analysis Guide, Volsted's Power Fishing Guide,
and Volsted's Animal Resource Guide
Draining MMORPG combat mechanics through the Mighty Sieve of Mathematics since 1999

"The "87% fewer flawed assumptions" is, in fact, a self-deprecating reference to myself...."

That's all you had to say, Volsted. I owe you an apology just based upon this statement, none of the rest of your defense was necessary. You just happen to chose a bad title with poor timing. The post you couldn't find on the first 10 pages is on page 4, called Anatomy of a SGW Melee Weapon. It was 12 sections long over 14 or so posts (due to the post-size limit) and took me two weeks of work to create. It just recently slipped back a few pages due to all the recent"who can do what with what, and how did you get it, and is yours better than mine" posts.

Like you I did it with the best of intentions. and with 24 hours of posting it I regretted it. Like you I re-read it a dosen or so times, but somehow the flaws don't reveal themselves until 3 seconds after you hit the final "Submit" button. Of course, if you can see the flaws in your own work, everyone else will. Rather than give people a basicexample of how to compare weapons it was torn apart. Some of the true Fencers understood what I was trying to accomplish, but there are always those that just have to have the last word on anything. You really should take a look at it, and you might understand why I may have responded the way I did. Your post is almost a abbreviated carbon copy of what I did, so it just seemed too obvious that your post was a taunt. It seems you are under constant attack as a correspondent with certain types of people out to challenge your every word. If I posted that the background color of this post was indigo, someone would feel compelled to say it was dark navy. I guess it has made me a bitdefensive.

Again, I apologize for chewing on you. There is nothing wrong with your assumptions ( well, most of them ), so you don't have to defend them. I noted the number of your assumptions again due to the title, nature, and timing of your post. Please refer down to the last portion of my first reply where I said if you intended this to be a genuine attempt to help out then it is greatly welcomed. When I am wrong I don't have a problem admitting it. Please accept my apology.

~Lyahpar~

La Femme Fencer

"Thrust if you love Fencers!"

i wanna start by saying this is a wonderful and informative post.. i just have one problem. i fail to see the importance of the volsted rating. i have all my secondary statscompletely even with one another, no lie, i am kinda obsessive compulsive about such things.

FWG5 Pistol, Volsted Rating: 7.5/2.3/4.6

with the lowest being 2.3 this weapon i can shoot and not really have to worry about HAM at all. It adds up eventually, but not really a worry.

Advanced Laser Carbine, Volsted Rating: 3.4/2.1/4.3

Lowest on this one is 2.1 but THIS WEAPON IS A NIGHTMARE TO SHOOT as are all carbines i own. 2 shots and i am literally half dead.

Flamethrower, Volsted Rating: 2.6/11.6/11.6

lowest on this is 2.6 and this weapon doesn't even need a volsted rating... i'm sure anyone with only 1 in all their secondaries could shoot this dude all day long and not ever even see their HAMs go down a pixel.

VolstedGridban,

I'm positive that the -50 accuracy mod at melee range doesn't mean that it will miss 50% of the time. Some professions have positive mods at melee range, that doesn't mean they'll hit 100%+ of the time. The -50 is factored in with the Pikeman's innate accuracy mods to determine the real accuracy mod for your hits.

---

VolstedGridban wrote:
Base Damage: The damage that appears in your "Battlespam" (i.e. the text which shows up in your Combat window). The minimum amount of Base Damage you can do with autofire will be the minimum damage rating of your weapon multiplied by 1.5.

---

Social Conformer and others:

Here are the rifle effectiveness numbers at master rifleman, when all these rifle hit the speed cap of 1 sec. This is based off Volsted's numbers:

Rifles

Laser Rifle; 29-376 Damage; 5.7 Speed; 14-22-59 HAM; AP: Medium
Effectiveness Rating: 83.3 / 474.8 for master rifleman
Volsted Rating: 5.9/3.8/1.4
Hits Speed Cap at: +83


SG-82 Rifle; 104-166 Damage; 5.6 Speed; 25-22-42 HAM; AP: None
Effectiveness Rating: 36.2 / 202.7 for master rifleman
Volsted Rating: 1.4/1.6/0.9
Hits Speed Cap at: +83


Advanced E11 Rifle; 91-174 Damage; 4.7 Speed; 13-23-36 HAM; AP: Medium
Effectiveness Rating: 66.1 / 310.7 for master rifleman
Volsted Rating: 5.5/2.9/1.8
Hits Speed Cap at: +79


Jawa Ion Rifle; 100-181 Damage; 6.2 Speed; 14-29-46 HAM; AP: Light
Effectiveness Rating: 42.5 / 263.5 for master rifleman
Volsted Rating: 3.0/1.5/0.9
Hits Speed Cap at: +84


T21 Rifle; 118-333 Damage; 7.2 Speed; 40-33-75 HAM; AP: Heavy
Effectiveness Rating: 91.8 / 661 for master rifleman
Volsted Rating: 2.3/2.8/1.2
Hits Speed Cap at: +87

So yes, the slow weapons have more room to improve, so to speak. The T21 will improve the most and is pretty lethal in the hands of a master rifleman.

Rico, I think you are about right, but you are forgetting that there is a base unarmed damage. After all, even non tka's can hit with unarmed for a miniscule amount of damage, and they dont have any unarmed damage+ mods. Also, the unarmed damage+ is a percentage increase, not a straight up number I think. Otherwise, Master TK's wouldnt be able to manage 3000dmg uh3's when I can barely manage 1000 with my noviceTK; theirs would be closer to 1700.

So, let us pretend that the base unarmed damage is something like 50-75 for a novice brawler(A guess). Now, with185 unarmed damage+ you would be doing (1 + 1.85)(1.5)[50, 75] = [213 - 320]. With novice brawler, you would be doing [75-112].

This seems a bit too high for novice brawler; I remember doing 40-60 regularly while leveling my first few unarmed trees. Also, the master numbers seem a little low, it should probably be in the 450-600 range. A fix for this would be if there were different base damages for different class levels. For example, someone without even brawler has a base unarmed damage of 10-20. Novice brawlers could have 30-50. TKA's could have 100-150. That would be about right I think.

Just thought of this

What should be said is that HAM is not used on Auto-attack, so the volsted rating is irrelevant as it stands, but the idea is sound - once fitted to a special attack, you can get a very real and important statistical number. Remember, the multiplier on the specials is just as important as the HAM costs on the weapons themselves.

Volsted, I charge you with updating your formulae, because I'm drunk, tired and don't really care enough to try to dig up all those math memories.

Oh, and because you did such a good job the first few times.

Denzien, Bria server


Artisan 3/0/0/4          Scout 4/0/4/2


Brawler 4/0/0/0         Smuggler 1/0/1/0


Marksman 4/4/0/4      Rifleman 4/1/3/3

heh kinda funny when looking at speed,

A master carbineer can't shoot ANY carbine at speed cap. Granted a master carbineer does come close to shooting an E11 carbine at speed cap, where he has 60 out of the 62 speed needed.

Anyways very nice work.

LOL well this entire back and forth could have been avoided if the original poster answered my question re: just what assumptions was he referring to?

I also felt, given the bevy of non fencers that interjected/attempted to derail THAT post, that this title/post was a similar effort.

Save yer energies Raph!!! Ya need em all for those DEVS!!!!

Seena