Fencer Archive
Thread: Anatomy of a SWG Melee Weapon
If 2h Curved are AP2 then just multiply theirnumbers by 1.08 (rather than the 0.47 for AP0) and see where they end up.(Or take the shortcut and mulitply my final numbers on it by 2.3 and that will get you there too.) However, that just further serves toaccentuate the existing damage gap between the weapon categories.
"A lot of your 'averages' are misleading. You keep making the assumption that the distribution is uniform, such as when you calculate the average bonus from AP. In reality, AR 3 mobs are very rare compared to AR 0 or AR 1 mobs."
I made no such assumption... you're just assuming I did. In fact, I specifically mentioned that I used the average because not everyone hunts the same things, and that if someone wants to stick to a specific AR category they just need to recalculate using that figure. As for the rarity of certain AR's, that all depends on where you hunt, now doesn't it? Most of the mobs I tend to go for are AR2+. So "rarity" is a function of situation.
"I'm also not sure why it's required to boil things down to 'best', even for a given individual."
It's not required. It's simply a very commonly asked question. I was attempting to demonstrate for those persons how they can go about determining that for themself if they wished to have an "answer" that suits their needs.
"You're not interested in the performance of the average weapon; you're interested in the performance of the best weapon for a given situation."
You can't say what I'm interested in, because I haven't told you.
JK! Of course everyone is interested in the performance of each wepaon in a particular situation, but as I mentioned, it just isn't feasible to create tables and calculations for every possible situation crossed to every weapon. I was trying to demonstatrate that it is possible for everyone to do that for themselves. I just did a generic run through.
Is there an echo in here, or am I repeating myself?
As a matter of fact, though, I AM interested in the "average" weapon of a category. Many people are not looking at the entire picture when they claim "my class has lousy accuracy" or "my class has lousy damage" or "my class has lousy defense", etc... by looking at the average capabilities of the wepaons in each class we might better see why those other conditions may exist. If the top weapon you can use only hits for tiny amounts of damage and your competitor hits extremely hard, do you want them as accurate as you are? Bonuses are usually evened out with hindrances, I was trying to see if the numbers lended themselves to showing us why certain things may be the way they are.
"You do need to consider the defense mods. Because defense mods stack, they provide the biggest incentive for secondary classes (i.e. do I want to be a pistoleer/fencer, or a pistoleer/swordsman). etc etc"
In a thesis aboutweapon stats? Why? How will secondaryclasses alter the performance of my weapon? That would be a completely different thesis. I'll let you do that one.
"Also, when considering specials, you need to realize that not all specials are going to have the same delay, damage, or HAM multipliers. This makes calculating a single figure for HAM usage, damage or delay between the various weapon categories not very useful."
On the contrary, it makes having a single number even more useful. I'm quite aware that not all specials have the same delay multiplier (if fact I recall a post where you were arguing with that that didn't after I said they did... wasn't that you? I could be mistaken, I'll have to look it up.) However,does that delay multiplier change from weapon to weapon? No, it doesn't. The ending delay changes, but it is still derived off the original number, so it will still scale relative to that number. If you have two weapons, at 2.0 delay weapon and a 4.0 delay weapon, and perform a X2 delay special they scale to a 4.0 weapon and a 8.0 weapon.... they kept the same relative scale. Therefore it's a moot point. The same is true of damage, and of HAM multipliers. They are multipliers. They multiply the original numbers by the same amount regardless of the weapon. Since they do not discriminate between weapons, the data is not going to change the efficiency of one weapon over another. You are correct that the ending numbers will all change... but they won't change relative to each other. Therefore, going to the lowest common denominator saves a whole lot of unnecessarycalculations that end up at the samerevelation.
"Furthermore, specials come with an accuracy bonus - the amount which varies between each special."
Yes, they do change from special to special... but they don't induce a change from weapon to weapon. If a special induces a accuracy modifier to one weapon, they would induce that same accuracy modifier to any weapon that performed that special. This is a thesis on weapon comparisons, not specials comparisons. However, if the specials ever changed to the point where even the multiplier changed based upon the certain factors of the weapon, then what you are stating would be critical to the comparison between weapons.
"Another thing to keep in mind is that HAM usage can be countered by buffs."
Yes, they can. And do those buffs add more or less to your stats if you have different weapons equipped? Or does any weapon you equip gain the benefit from them? Regardless of the weapon you equip, the buffs remain the same, and any weapon you wield benefits from those buffs. Therefore, this fact is not relevant when comparing the efficiency of a weapon.
The only difference is when you consider the spread of HAM costs. Weapons that not have have efficient Mind useage will be more hurtful since Mind is the most difficult to buff, and the most unlikely to get healed during combat. It is due to this that I separated out the HAM costs into the various costs so that factor could be considered.
"Finally, I'm always skeptical about 'specific weapon' comparisons. The success levels at experimentation and the important stats of the resources are always going to vary significantly from weapon to weapon."
Did you read the whole thesis? I stated right at the beginning that weapons would vary from server to server, and that I was just going to compare what I could get ahold of. If the weapons available to you vary, you can do the same study with your weapons. I merely did a study of the weapons available to me because I was interested in which of the weapons (available to me) was the best for me. I used specific weapons so I could have specific values, and not just out of the air hypothetical numbers. This whole thesis was originally just a learning project to better see how various weapons performed, and how to be able to more easily identify a weapon that would perform as I desired by looking at its listed stats.
You used the word misleading have a dozen times about the information.Since I didn't set out to prove anything (as I stated in the beginngin and end) then I wasn't trying to convinve anyone of anything... so I couldn't have mislead them. I invted them to come along on a journey of exploration, with an open mind, and just to see how the numbers flipped back and forth based upon various features of the game that impact all weapons. We got to see how the DPS shifted before and after the speed cap, before and after the skill mods, before and after the AP/AR, etc. It was just interesting to see. I was hoping to be able to identify where the "weak point" wasfor each weapon category in the hopes of findingthe best way to overcome them. For example, One-handed wepoans held their own up until the 1.0 speed cap. Then they rapidly went downhill. This highlights that the speed cap may be an issue to bring up to the devs as a method of helping out my fellow fencers. Once again, I did not set out to "prove" or "disprove" and "convince" anyone of anything, so I could not have mislead them. They can follow the numbers and see how they add up. I explained how I arrived at every single number, and placed everything out in the open to see.
In retrospect, I'm getting the feeling I should have just done the experiment, learned what I was after,and not posted it here. It seemsany helpyou try to offer just gets thrown back in your facethat your trying to create some sort ofconspiracy. Perhaps it's best if I just stick to thelisted Correspondent duties I promised I'd do. Going beyond those those boundaries doesn't seem to produce the results I had intended. Shame.
Besides...we who actually read the entire post KNOW what your intent was.
Good job Raph.
Thank you VegitoX. I appreciate the support.
On a separete note, I noticed that a couple of posts that made comments were given ratings of "1". Whether it wasto prevent them from showing up on certain persons filters, or just to make a statement, I don't know, but that doesn't matter. Simply disagreeing with someone is not a reason to rate them as a 1, that's not what that's for. Save the "1" rating for posts that are either vulgur, abusive, spamming, trolling, or otherwise not adhering to the spirit or rules of the board. It is not to serve as an "I don't like you", or an "I don't agree with you" weapon. If you don't agree with someone, please explain why. But don't 1-star them. Not cool. Those posts may not have agreed with what I posted, but they have the right to say so.
Noules repeateda fewthings that I said.
And of course I agree with them.
But I think it's important to say that I found your analysis very interesting and useful (as a weaponsmith and a swordsman/ex-fencer). I was just saying what I was said in order to voice a bit of constructive criticism. I think that you (or anyone else who was interested) might break those tables into four tables for each AR (for better comparisons). A person could do all this work and then distill the results down to a more compact and informative set of metrics. For example, you could list the top 10 weapons for each AR. You could list ONLY the best weapon in each category for a given AR and compare that way.
Actually I don't think your results will change that much. But the assumption implied by an averaging over AR's leads to a result that just isn't as strong as it could be. That's all I'm saying. The work you've done here is still very good and I can understand the desire to pick out a few assumptions that make the results more clear-cut.
And what about those weapons on Test Center?
--- Flynn McDonnell
Great read! Nice work 
Re: Sliced Weapon Decay Rates
I have a friend who (during the summer) went through 3 high end guns in a weakbecause they were sliced, he used mods (I'm refering to those things with 100 charges that you plug into weapons) on them, and he used attacks that damaged the guns. The decay rate combinations of all three just ate up his weapons. I dont know if this still applies though, I believe the decay rates presented by mods were nerfed in the late August 'Big Update'. I also dont know if this is relevant to us meleers, hehe. We dont have any specials (thatI know of) that damage the weapons when used.
So... if you frequently use weapon modifiers on your weapons, use an attack that damages the weapon, *and* its sliced, you might have to worry about the extra decay, but otherwise, it shouldn't matter all that much. Especially if you dont have an attack that inherently causes extra damage to the weapon. I think that one was the big kicker. The other two causes of decay just accelerate the destruction.
Hope I make sense
Odeeso Arnsu, Shadowfire, Novice Fencer
(retired) Erebr Moltooki, Wanderhome,Novice Doctor/Rifleman
Raph, please don't let the malcontents get you down. You undertook a momentous task, analyzed it thoroughly, and without bias. Your logic was impeccable, and included only **relevent** dependent variables. You then digested your analysis and presented it in a way that everyone can appreciate. You are to be lauded. Please please don't stop what you are doing. Your Herculean efforts are appreciated. Very much.
Seena
No woories, StGabriel/Flynn, that's how I took it (constructive criticism). I knew where you were coming from. And as I said, I originally went the route of making individual tables for everything, but the task just kept growing and growing... Eventually I had to step back and agree that as long as I showed "how" to do it, then anyone interested enough could follow up. Given enough time (and if I actually thought people would still wade through that size of a post... I'm amazing they waded through the existing one, lol) then I probably would have made all the tables. It's all good
I probably over-reacted to Nouls000 (sp?) comments. I just had a really bad headache at the time I read it, and was already cranky. I should have withheld my response until I felt better. (Sorry, Nouls000)
As for the weapons on TC, yes, I'm tired of having to kill everything with just a dagger! 
Talk about making you appreciate even a poorly made Vibro! I'll be looking for a Gaderiffi Baton and a Vibroblade. I'll get with you on TC about it. Thank you =)
I have a vibro blade that excedes your VB in damage, has the same eveyrthing else once sliced for damage. For this reason I feel you have not included the Vibro Motor Enhancement. Perhaps you should, as those components swing vibro blades from bad to very very good. Since HAM is the limiting factor in combat currently, its the biggest concern.
Also remeber that medics can heal HAM. Even if oyu are doing slightly less damage per second, a significantly less amount of HAM damage makes it easier for medics to "save" you in time. Players should take this into account when choosing a weapon. It is for these reasons I use a Vibro Blade.
Raph, you are indeed a tremendous nerd. Perhaps you will become Queen of the Nerds. Congratulations
Few random comments. First, I think your weaponsmith is somewhat limited in the quality of his advanced vibro units (presumably due to resources on the server). Also, many other weapons can be made with adv. or plain vibro units.
For AR comparisons, I don't think you needed to include AR3, since no melee weapons exceed AR2, therefore they're all going to get their efficiency whacked by 50% when encountering AR3 armor.
For HAM costs, I personally like to only consider whichever ham cost is the HIGHEST for an individual weapon, since that tends to drive incapacitation.
Also, I like the concept of "HAM per second" (HPS?). Because a slower weapon will drain HAM at a slower rate than a faster weapon. The really tricky part of this is it's dependent on character speed and what particular special move is being used. However, it is still a useful concept, and within weapons of one class you can use a DPS/HPS ratio to compare efficient over long-term special moving spamming.