Shipwright Archive
Thread: Weapon Assembly: Messed up or is it just me???
Page 1 of 1
Rolassk
Mon Nov 08, 2004 7:45 pm
#1
I noticed this a few days ago, when you assemble a weapon (blaster,ion or disruptor) the min and max assembly always has the same %. Even though the weapon schematics state: Minimum Damage: OQ 50%, PE 50% and Maximum Damage: CD 50%, OQ 50%. I decided to test this result further and discovered a few more suprises...
First the weapon schematics list they draw from the following stats...
Armor Effectiveness: OQ 50%, PE 50%
First the weapon schematics list they draw from the following stats...
Armor Effectiveness: OQ 50%, PE 50%
Armor Points: OQ 33%, UT 66%
Maximum Damage: CD 50%, OQ 50%
Minimum Damage: OQ 50%, PE 50%
Energy Maintenance: CD 50%, OQ 50%
Energy Per Shot: OQ 50%, PE 50%
Firing Rate: CD 50%,OQ 50%
Hitpoints: CD 50%, OQ 50%
Mass: OQ 100%
Shield Effectiveness: OQ 50%, PE 50%
Test #1 (Random Resources Chosen)
Steel -CD: 640, OQ: 565, UT: 981 = 603 weight (CD 50%, OQ 50%) & 834 weight (OQ 33%, UT 66%)
Radioactive-OQ: 910, PE: 714 = 812 weight (OQ 50%, PE 50%)
Inert Gas -OQ: 800 = 800 weight
Carbon Ore -OQ: 303, UT: 517 = 441 weight (OQ 33%, UT 66%)
Combined OQ 33%, UT 66% rating is(834+441) / 2 = 638
Combined OQ 33%, UT 66% rating is(834+441) / 2 = 638
Combined OQ rating is (565+910+800+303) / 4 = 645
Assembled Result
Armor Eff 17% / AP 18% / Max 17% / Min 17% /Energy 15% / E PerShot 15% / HP 18% /Mass 18% / Refire 17% / Shield Eff 17%
Based on the weightings:
1. Armor Eff, Min Dmg, E PerShot, and Shield Eff should have had the same % and at the same time the highest % (812 weight (OQ 50%, PE 50%). None of these weapon stats had the highest assembly and E PerShot was even lower at 15%
2. Min and Max should have different percentage (Min supposed rating of 812 vs Max supposed rating of 603)
2. Min and Max should have different percentage (Min supposed rating of 812 vs Max supposed rating of 603)
3. Armor Points, Hitpoints and Mass supposedly draw from different statistics, but all assembled at the same 18% (however, too difficult to tell a problem is evident as their weights were very similar at 638, 603 and 645 respectively)
Test #2 (lowest quality resources I had, except for radioactive whichwas kept intentionally)
Steel -CD: 160, OQ: 296, UT:543 =228 weight (CD 50%, OQ 50%) &456 weight (OQ 33%, UT 66%)
Test #2 (lowest quality resources I had, except for radioactive whichwas kept intentionally)
Steel -CD: 160, OQ: 296, UT:543 =228 weight (CD 50%, OQ 50%) &456 weight (OQ 33%, UT 66%)
Radioactive-OQ: 910, PE: 714 = 812 weight (OQ 50%, PE 50%)
Inert Gas -OQ:125 =125 weight
Carbon Ore -OQ: 303, UT: 517 = 441 weight (OQ 33%, UT 66%)
Combined OQ 33%, UT 66% rating is(456+441) / 2 = 449
Test #3 (same as #2, but with an exceptional OQ low CD/UT Steel used to test point 3)
Steel -CD: 20, OQ: 995, UT: 426 = 508 weight (CD 50, OQ 50%) & 610 weight (OQ 33%, UT 66%)
Combined OQ rating is (296+910+125+303) / 4 = 409
Assembled Result
Armor Eff 13% / AP 10% / Max 13% / Min 13% /Energy 5% / E PerShot 5% / HP 10% /Mass 10% / Refire 13% / Shield Eff 13%
1. This time Armor Eff, Min Dmg and Shield Eff had the highest rating (as I figured 'should' happen). E PerShot however, assembled at the lowest % though supposedly it is drawing from the same OQ 50%, PE 50%
2. Same as test#1 both min and max are at 13% (Min supposed rating of 812 vs Max supposed rating of 228)
3. AP, HP and Mass again assembled the same, this time 10%.
Test #3 (same as #2, but with an exceptional OQ low CD/UT Steel used to test point 3)
Steel -CD: 20, OQ: 995, UT: 426 = 508 weight (CD 50, OQ 50%) & 610 weight (OQ 33%, UT 66%)
Combined OQ 33%, UT 66% rating is(610+441) / 2 = 525
Combined OQ rating is (995+910+125+303) / 4 = 583
The assembled result was the same for AP, HP and Mass (11%).
With these three tests I have come to the rough conclusion that weapon schematics look at the following stats (And if true it means weapons are easier to make due to less variance).
*Red indicates different from actual schematics
OQ 50, PE 50%
*Red indicates different from actual schematics
OQ 50, PE 50%
Armor Effectiveness
Maximum Damage
Minimum Damage
Firing Rate
Shield Effectiveness
CD 50%, OQ 50%
Energy Maintenance
Energy Per Shot
OQ 33%, UT 66%
Armor Points
Hitpoints
Mass
It does actually make more sense this way - Everything to do with firepower draws from OQ and Potential Energy - Energy Requirements draw from OQ and Conductivity- Durability (plus the assumption the lightest strongest material is the best to use) draws its stats from OQ and Unit Toughness
If someone else wouldn't mind doing some testing to backup my findings or prove otherwise I'd like to see your results.
Message Edited by Rolassk on 11-08-2004 09:49 PM
*Kettemoor
Eriwulf
Sat Nov 13, 2004 11:08 pm
#4
Too many numbers hurts my brain. 
But i have the same findings as you, too bad I fed my harvesters most of my highest PE radioactive by mistake. 
Page 1 of 1