Pikeman Archive
Thread: Long Vibro Axe vs Vibro Lance
Fremen_Feyadkin
Sat Feb 19, 2005 9:00 am
#14
That VL is useful for one thing only: battle droids and super battle droids. I have a 1200+ LVA and its totally worthless in pvp against composite armor and novice medic (which just about everyone has). Dots are the only way to go in pvp, except when the other person is unarmored.
Akieo wrote:
Most pikeman I see use LVA's... my question is, will a Vibro Lance still be good in PvP? My stats are:
Vibro Lance
168-720 3.9[w/pup]
(I am speedcapped)
I notice LVA's deal out kinetic damage and VL's deal out electricty damage.. would I not have the upperhand?
I also notice that LVA's are medium armor piercing, and VL's are just light... is this a big difference?
annelid0
Sat Feb 19, 2005 9:21 am
#15
furrycat wrote:
Because it's you annelid0 I will test this again tonight.
Glad you're testing it for yourself too. If something has changed in the way AP works I'd definitely like to know about it.
Kaukiji
Sat Feb 19, 2005 10:31 am
#16
no annelid0 ur right about the AP, i have no idea what furrycat was writing after my post, btw, and also....who cares?
i personally prefer the LVA, but honestly now, even w/ a 1k max LVA, im not out damaging anything when tehy wear armor, just buy some DOTs if ur gonna PvP, if ur PvE than i would prob get an LVA if i were you
(also LVAs tend to run w/ higher dmg than VLs so if u just test how its gonna work if both have teh same dmg, thats kinda dumb)
LVA from blue frogs are around 350 max
VL from blue frogs are around ~270 max
(yes that IS just a guess, but i believe its pretty accurate)
i personally prefer the LVA, but honestly now, even w/ a 1k max LVA, im not out damaging anything when tehy wear armor, just buy some DOTs if ur gonna PvP, if ur PvE than i would prob get an LVA if i were you
(also LVAs tend to run w/ higher dmg than VLs so if u just test how its gonna work if both have teh same dmg, thats kinda dumb)
LVA from blue frogs are around 350 max
VL from blue frogs are around ~270 max
(yes that IS just a guess, but i believe its pretty accurate)
furrycat
Sat Feb 19, 2005 11:00 am
#17
You suggested that someone wearing stun armour would take more damage from a player using an AP1 Jawa than one using an AP0 stun baton. Which is logical and correct and all very well. And also not what was under discussion.
As for who cares, that would be the person who claimed that AP > AR imparts a damage bonus. I have done a controlled test that shows this not be the case but I am prepared to do a retest because I respect the judgment of annelid0 who disagrees.
Join me on TC-Gorath later and we will put this issue to rest.
As for who cares, that would be the person who claimed that AP > AR imparts a damage bonus. I have done a controlled test that shows this not be the case but I am prepared to do a retest because I respect the judgment of annelid0 who disagrees.
Join me on TC-Gorath later and we will put this issue to rest.
Kaukiji
Sat Feb 19, 2005 2:21 pm
#18
read the last part of my post furrycat, im in total aggreement that it may be like that, but what i am getting down to in the end of the post is that if you are gonna get an LVA or a VL, its more worth it to get a LVA cuz they tend to have higher dmg than a VL.
VacaXXX
Sat Feb 19, 2005 2:57 pm
#19
I go straight LVA, 'cause thats the highest damage thing i have, my VL is crafted and speed sliced cause im too lazy to buy another..........
furrycat
Sat Feb 19, 2005 8:00 pm
#20
I've collected some data which I will analyse tomorrow.
I'm thinking that if AP > AR imparts a bonus there would be two possible ways this would manifest itself.
a) The raw damage done with the weapon would increase.
I will be testing this by taking the mean value listed in the combat spam when beating on a guy wearing no armour and then beating on him in composite. If the hypothesis is true the second mean would be higher.
b) The armour would mitigate less than its listed resist.
I think this is more likely to be true since it is consistent with armour mitigating more when AP < AR. To test the hypothesis I will be comparing the raw damage and mitigated value from the combat spam with the floaty numbers, then calculating the percentage mitigation from armour and comparing it with the listed resist. In fact this is what I did with my previous results, which suggested the hypothesis is false.
Statistics were collected on TC-Gorath prodding the same guy with a lance, vibro lance and LVA. Raw damage, mitigated damage and floaty damage were recorded in a timestamped chat log. I don't think there is much more we could collect so if anyone sees a flaw in my reasoning for methods a) and b) or has an alternative methodology to run the numbers by, shout out.
But now, sleep.
I'm thinking that if AP > AR imparts a bonus there would be two possible ways this would manifest itself.
a) The raw damage done with the weapon would increase.
I will be testing this by taking the mean value listed in the combat spam when beating on a guy wearing no armour and then beating on him in composite. If the hypothesis is true the second mean would be higher.
b) The armour would mitigate less than its listed resist.
I think this is more likely to be true since it is consistent with armour mitigating more when AP < AR. To test the hypothesis I will be comparing the raw damage and mitigated value from the combat spam with the floaty numbers, then calculating the percentage mitigation from armour and comparing it with the listed resist. In fact this is what I did with my previous results, which suggested the hypothesis is false.
Statistics were collected on TC-Gorath prodding the same guy with a lance, vibro lance and LVA. Raw damage, mitigated damage and floaty damage were recorded in a timestamped chat log. I don't think there is much more we could collect so if anyone sees a flaw in my reasoning for methods a) and b) or has an alternative methodology to run the numbers by, shout out.
But now, sleep.
annelid0
Sat Feb 19, 2005 9:47 pm
#21
I guarantee that a) would just waste your time. The combat spam simply doesn't include the AP bonus, only the floating damage numbers do*. In fact, one of the simplest ways to observe the damage bonus in effect is to just attack a mob with a low resistance and observe that the floating number is actually higher than the combat spam number. B should be fine, and seems to me like a pretty clever way of examining the data.
furrycat wrote:
I've collected some data which I will analyse tomorrow.
I'm thinking that if AP > AR imparts a bonus there would be two possible ways this would manifest itself.
a) The raw damage done with the weapon would increase.
I will be testing this by taking the mean value listed in the combat spam when beating on a guy wearing no armour and then beating on him in composite. If the hypothesis is true the second mean would be higher.
b) The armour would mitigate less than its listed resist.
I think this is more likely to be true since it is consistent with armour mitigating more when AP < AR. To test the hypothesis I will be comparing the raw damage and mitigated value from the combat spam with the floaty numbers, then calculating the percentage mitigation from armour and comparing it with the listed resist. In fact this is what I did with my previous results, which suggested the hypothesis is false.
Statistics were collected on TC-Gorath prodding the same guy with a lance, vibro lance and LVA. Raw damage, mitigated damage and floaty damage were recorded in a timestamped chat log. I don't think there is much more we could collect so if anyone sees a flaw in my reasoning for methods a) and b) or has an alternative methodology to run the numbers by, shout out.
But now, sleep.
* I'm not 100% sure this is true in PvP activity, where I have my suspicions that the order of calculations prior to display in the combat spam differs from PvE.
annelid0
Sun Feb 20, 2005 12:44 am
#22
For what it's worth, I did a quick test tonight attacking swamp humbabas (AP0, 10% kinetic resists).
The highest damage I got floating over their heads on autoattack was 1498. I was using an LVA with 142-573 damage,
573 * 1.86 (standard damage mod) = 1065
* 1.25 (AP1) = 1332
* 1.25 (AP2) = 1664
* .90 (10% resist) = 1497
PvP tests to come later...
The highest damage I got floating over their heads on autoattack was 1498. I was using an LVA with 142-573 damage,
573 * 1.86 (standard damage mod) = 1065
* 1.25 (AP1) = 1332
* 1.25 (AP2) = 1664
* .90 (10% resist) = 1497
PvP tests to come later...
annelid0
Sun Feb 20, 2005 1:54 am
#23
furrycat wrote:
Results of last test are here: resists.csv
Retest will include full description of what the fields mean (though they are not hard to figure out).
This is interesting data. I'll be curious to see what sort of results you get tonight.
I'm going to attempt to do a couple retests on this myself with different methodologies to see if I can figure out what's going on here.
furrycat
Mon Feb 21, 2005 6:33 am
#24
PvP results are in.
We are testing the hypothesis h0 that damage is increased by 25% for each level that AP > AR and that it is reduced by 50% for each level that AP < AR.
Tests were performed with lance (AP0), vibro lance (AP1) and long vibro axe (AP2) against an individual wearing composite armour (AR1) with 85% resists across the board.
Here are what the columns mean in the linked spreadsheet.
Time: Timestamp for the row.
Raw damage: Damage listed in combat spam.
Mitigated: Amount of damage prevented by armour, according to combat spam.
Floaty: Damage number floating above character's head for the attack.
Raw - mit: Calculation of raw damage minus mitigated damage. Expected to match floaty value.
Error: Margin of error for above calculation.
Resist: Armour's listed resist.
AP: AP level of the weapon used.
% mit: Percentage of raw damage that was mitigated by armour.
h0 bonus: Damage bonus (or penalty) applied to raw value if h0 is true.
h0 damage: Calculated damage value according to the above.
h0 floaty: Expected floaty value if h0 is true. Should match listed floaty number in this case.
h0 mit: Expected amount of damage mitigated by armour if h0 is true. Calculated by subtracting h0 floaty from raw damage.
h0 %: Expected damage mitigation from armour if h0< is true.
Error: Margin of error between h0 % and % mit.
At the bottom of the spreadsheet the maximum values of the two error columns is listed.
There follows a series of blank lines to give nerdy people a chance to draw their own conclusions without seeing the results.
Results
Maximum h0 error was 2.3%.
Conclusions
We may draw the following conclusions.
furrycat was wrong and everyone else was right.
25% damage bonus is indeed in effect in PvP. My previous test must have been flawed. You may flame me.
We are testing the hypothesis h0 that damage is increased by 25% for each level that AP > AR and that it is reduced by 50% for each level that AP < AR.
Tests were performed with lance (AP0), vibro lance (AP1) and long vibro axe (AP2) against an individual wearing composite armour (AR1) with 85% resists across the board.
Here are what the columns mean in the linked spreadsheet.
Time: Timestamp for the row.
Raw damage: Damage listed in combat spam.
Mitigated: Amount of damage prevented by armour, according to combat spam.
Floaty: Damage number floating above character's head for the attack.
Raw - mit: Calculation of raw damage minus mitigated damage. Expected to match floaty value.
Error: Margin of error for above calculation.
Resist: Armour's listed resist.
AP: AP level of the weapon used.
% mit: Percentage of raw damage that was mitigated by armour.
h0 bonus: Damage bonus (or penalty) applied to raw value if h0 is true.
h0 damage: Calculated damage value according to the above.
h0 floaty: Expected floaty value if h0 is true. Should match listed floaty number in this case.
h0 mit: Expected amount of damage mitigated by armour if h0 is true. Calculated by subtracting h0 floaty from raw damage.
h0 %: Expected damage mitigation from armour if h0< is true.
Error: Margin of error between h0 % and % mit.
At the bottom of the spreadsheet the maximum values of the two error columns is listed.
There follows a series of blank lines to give nerdy people a chance to draw their own conclusions without seeing the results.
Results
Maximum h0 error was 2.3%.
Conclusions
We may draw the following conclusions.
furrycat was wrong and everyone else was right.
25% damage bonus is indeed in effect in PvP. My previous test must have been flawed. You may flame me.
annelid0
Tue Feb 22, 2005 5:09 pm
#26
furrycat wrote:
25% damage bonus is indeed in effect in PvP. My previous test must have been flawed. You may flame me.
Man, if you get flamed for objectively examining things and graciously admitting when you prove yourself wrong you've been talking to the wrong people (or just spending too much time in the forums).
Nicely done experiment. I wish every disagreement in these forums got such thorough testing (even though seeing all those single-digit floaty numbers made me sad). And yeah, I'm a nerd who didn't scroll down until I read the spreadsheet, so thanks.