121 replies to this topic

[Panimu]

trrprrprr, on 24 April 2013 - 06:08 AM, said:

PS: I while i was typing few more replies where made and i have now a question, how there can be so big change in a single missile damage?

Don't forget to either look at missles fired and damage or missiles hit, accuracy and damage. The average damage done with a missile has to take into account the proportion of missiles that miss. That chap above had a below average accuracy by the way,

Also some of the missiles fired will be pre-nerf and some post-nerf.

Edited by Panimu, 24 April 2013 - 06:19 AM.

[trrprrprr]

Oh right...lol
My brain is very good at math

[MrVop]

tayhimself, on 24 April 2013 - 05:47 AM, said:

This is wrong. You can't fire 36,910 times in 155 matches. You need to divide 36,910 by 20 and then again by the number of racks (let's say 4). Don't denigrate people when you can't read the data yourself.
That said I don't use LRMs, because they're pretty bad. I don't think they're terrible though, and a flight time decrease (planned) would be a big step in the right direction. It would also be a huge pain for pop-tarts so the LRMs as a sniper suppressor might actually work. Although I reckon that you would need tag + artemis + target decay to suppress snipers.

Or maybe I really boat them to get data for the results?
Maybe the game counts split launch (IE i fire LRM 20 but it takes three pushes through the tubes) as fire? But those are actual number.
Heres the LRM 5 for comparison.
LRM 5 135 14,650 3,666 25.02% 12:15:28
3,443
so's

3443/3666 = .939 Damage, per LRM 5
or .939/5 = .187 damage per missile
so 180*.187 = 33 damage per ton.

I mean these numbers look slightly better... But go ahead and try to justify them.

If you dont trust my numbers go use your own. simple as that.

I've yet to see someone reply to me with their own numbers showing me how "usefull" LRM's are as suport weapons.

The whole argument to me isn't even damage though, its the fact that getting Hits to supress with LRM's is simply to hard to be useful. They can not be counted on.

Edited by MrVop, 24 April 2013 - 08:29 AM.

[MrVop]

zzzz

Panimu, on 24 April 2013 - 06:18 AM, said:

Don't forget to either look at missles fired and damage or missiles hit, accuracy and damage. The average damage done with a missile has to take into account the proportion of missiles that miss. That chap above had a below average accuracy by the way,

Also some of the missiles fired will be pre-nerf and some post-nerf.

Accuracy matters not as we are only looking at HIT to DMG dealt. As in a miss is not part of the equation at all.

[Warchanter]

42 games: 6974 hits producing 6520 damage (this was for LRM 15)...

6520/6974 = (approx) 0.935 dmg per hit... at my acc of 41% would be 6.15 hits/rack of 15 for 5.75 dmg/rack...

So 5.75 dmg per rack... if had 4 racks would be.... 23 dmg for 60 missiles fired?
And yes these are Artemis'ed by the way...

5.75 dmg per shot with 7 ton launcher = (approx) 0.821 dmg/ton/shot (weapon), and...

180 shots/ton @ my accuracy of approx 41% = 73.8 hits/ton @ .935 dmg/hit = 69 dmg ton.

As opposed to say, my good friend Cañón Automático Diez (AC10) with whom I have danced to the tune of 9933 dmg for 1009 hits which for some reason works out to 9.844/hit... and for which 15 shots/ton at my acc of 66.16% would get me 9.924 hits/ton @9.844/hit or 97.692 dmg/ton.

What all this means I don't really know, but it was fun to push the buttons on the calculator...

Math corrections N**zis, have at it...

Edited by Warchanter, 24 April 2013 - 09:23 AM.

[Panimu]

MrVop, on 24 April 2013 - 08:31 AM, said:

zzzz
Accuracy matters not as we are only looking at HIT to DMG dealt. As in a miss is not part of the equation at all.

No one's clear what you're looking at )

You quoted me out of context. I was helping another post understand some of the numbers. To be honest damage per missile matters less than damage per rack.

[MrVop]

Panimu, on 24 April 2013 - 08:49 AM, said:

No one's clear what you're looking at )

You quoted me out of context. I was helping another post understand some of the numbers. To be honest damage per missile matters less than damage per rack.

Sorry for being confusing. You mentioned that my data was not a good sample because of my sub par accuracy. But the only numbers we looked at were hits to dmg dealt. So my accuracy didn't matter, Sure half the salvo could have hit the building while the other half hit the mech, but that should definitley count toward the data as that's part of the weapon mechanic.
And yes per launcher data is more conclusive and important then per missile. I was just simply showing that to justify the **** poor return on per ton of ammo when using a large launcher to supress (as everyone seems to think that is the weapons intention).

[Panimu]

MrVop, on 24 April 2013 - 09:31 AM, said:

You mentioned that my data was not a good sample because of my sub par accuracy.

You really need to read my reply that quotes your post about stats. Your maths had a serious flaw that didn't relate to accuracy.

http://mwomercs.com/...ost__p__2286366

Edited by Panimu, 24 April 2013 - 09:40 AM.

[MrVop]

Warchanter, on 24 April 2013 - 08:40 AM, said:

42 games: 6974 hits producing 6520 damage (this was for LRM 15)...

6520/6974 = (approx) 0.935 dmg per hit... at my acc of 41% would be 6.15 hits/rack of 15 for 5.75 dmg/rack...

So 5.75 dmg per rack... if had 4 racks would be.... 23 dmg for 60 missiles fired?
And yes these are Artemis'ed by the way...

5.75 dmg per shot with 7 ton launcher = (approx) 0.821 dmg/ton/shot (weapon), and...

180 shots/ton @ my accuracy of approx 41% = 73.8 hits/ton @ .935 dmg/hit = 69 dmg ton.

As opposed to say, my good friend Cañón Automático Diez (AC10) with whom I have danced to the tune of 9933 dmg for 1009 hits which for some reason works out to 9.844/hit... and for which 15 shots/ton at my acc of 66.16% would get me 9.924 hits/ton @9.844/hit or 97.692 dmg/ton.

What all this means I don't really know, but it was fun to push the buttons on the calculator...

Math corrections N**zis, have at it...

You're pretty close, until the per launcher break down and accuracy. The accuracy doesnt matter if you're doing your math per hit. so 0.935/15 = .062 per missile damage. Hence 180 * .062 = 11.2 dmg per ton.
that .935 is your per rack damage. Yes... less then one damage per LRM15 hit...

[Panimu]

MrVop, on 24 April 2013 - 09:40 AM, said:

You're pretty close, until the per launcher break down and accuracy. The accuracy doesnt matter if you're doing your math per hit. so 0.935/15 = .062 per missile damage. Hence 180 * .062 = 11.2 dmg per ton.
that .935 is your per rack damage. Yes... less then one damage per LRM15 hit...

It's 0.935 multiplied by 15, not divided by 15.

0.935 is per missile, so an LRM15 does that 15 times.

This is the same flaw as your original post, and hence why you need to read my reply )

[MrVop]

Panimu, on 24 April 2013 - 09:45 AM, said:

It's 0.935 multiplied by 15, not divided by 15.

0.935 is per missile, so an LRM15 does that 15 times.

This is the same flaw as your original post, and hence why you need to read my reply )

And you know this how?
According to your math that is .9 damage a missile, as apposed to the stated .7 the missiles suposed to do right now. Are they doing more dmg then intended? Your argument is not making sence to me.

Edited by MrVop, 24 April 2013 - 09:50 AM.

[Panimu]

MrVop, on 24 April 2013 - 09:46 AM, said:

And you know this how?
According to your math that is .9 damage a missile, as apposed to the stated .7 the missiles suposed to do right now. Are they doing more dmg then intended? Your argument is not making sence to me.

I know what how? That if you work out damage per missile then LRM15 does that x15? Logic? But this is where accuracy comes in, when working out rack damage,, because not 100% hit over time.

Anyway, the difference in damage per missile comes because some of people's statistics comes from pre-nerf.

What you could do is record your LRM stats, play 20 games then record how your stats changed from previous and re-do the math. I'd do that myself perhaps but I'm away from home at the moment and can't play.

[MrVop]

Panimu, on 24 April 2013 - 09:58 AM, said:

I know what how? That if you work out damage per missile then LRM15 does that x15? Logic? But this is where accuracy comes in, when working out rack damage,, because not 100% hit over time.

Anyway, the difference in damage per missile comes because some of people's statistics comes from pre-nerf.

What you could do is record your LRM stats, play 20 games then record how your stats changed from previous and re-do the math. I'd do that myself perhaps but I'm away from home at the moment and can't play.

There are over 50 games on my LRM 20's post nerf... Not kidding, I went out there and slaped those things everywhere. With your math LRM weapons are great and usefull, my math seems to confirm their sory state. It would be awesome if PGI would come in here and tell us exactly how that stat is collected and to be read, right now neither one of us has a compelling argument. I think the hit is for the whole rack, You think its per missile, My math seems to show that LRM's are doing very little damage (as most players in game will confirm) Your math says they should still melt armor... I dunno man.

[Warchanter]

.93 seems to be a consistent # so far. The thing about LRM's is that it's not a 1 shot deal... you hit with an AC10, you do 10 (theoretically)... if you miss you miss... With an LRM15 (let's say) sometimes you are going to hit with 15, sometimes with a lot less... I don't know where the .7 is coming from in the mechlab... but at any rate if you want to balance LRM damage then I think you need to talk in terms of ranges... an AC10 hits for 10, not for somewhere between 3 and 10... so I think you need to look at what an acceptable RANGE of damage is for an LRM to do.

So for an LRM 15 let's say, what is an acceptable dmg number if 100% hit? If you settle on a per hit dmg # of 1.5 let's say, then you're getting 22.5 pts dmg out of a full LRM 15 rack. If you take the hit% down to 40%, that turns into 9 pts of damage. At a straight 1.0 of dmg/hit, you'd be looking at 6 pts of damage at 40% accuracy for a rack of 15, so from 6-15 pts of damage.

So I think it's just a matter of maybe looking at an average accuracy across the player base and adjusting the damage per hit to something that is viable for less than 100% accuracy... the obvious logic being that probably no one is ever going to make it through a single match with 100% LRM accuracy... let alone AMS and ECM counters...

Edited by Warchanter, 24 April 2013 - 10:13 AM.

[Panimu]

MrVop, on 24 April 2013 - 10:01 AM, said:

There are over 50 games on my LRM 20's post nerf... Not kidding, I went out there and slaped those things everywhere. With your math LRM weapons are great and usefull, my math seems to confirm their sory state.

I haven't done any math. I've just pointed out the flaws in yours. Your stats DO indicate a damage of 1.8 per missile. The flaw in that is the stats were collected pre-nerf as well as post. You need post-nerf only stats to contribute anything useful here.

MrVop, on 24 April 2013 - 10:01 AM, said:

It would be awesome if PGI would come in here and tell us exactly how that stat is collected and to be read, right now neither one of us has a compelling argument. I think the hit is for the whole rack, You think its per missile, My math seems to show that LRM's are doing very little damage (as most players in game will confirm) Your math says they should still melt armor... I dunno man.

I thought the fact you need 26 tons of ammo to backup your shots-fired (not hit) stat if it was racks fired and not missiles would pretty easily show it is missiles, not racks.

[MrVop]

Panimu, on 24 April 2013 - 10:09 AM, said:

I haven't done any math. I've just pointed out the flaws in yours. Your stats DO indicate a damage of 1.8 per missile. The flaw in that is the stats were collected pre-nerf as well as post. You need post-nerf only stats to contribute anything useful here.



I thought the fact you need 26 tons of ammo to backup your shots-fired (not hit) stat if it was racks fired and not missiles would pretty easily show it is missiles, not racks.

in that case i fired my LRM 20's what? an average of 15 times per match?
11.9 average of a single rack fire per match to be exact... I assure you that is not accurate.

Edited by MrVop, 24 April 2013 - 10:14 AM.

[Warchanter]

MrVop, on 24 April 2013 - 10:11 AM, said:

in that case i fired my LRM 20's what? an average of 15 times per match?

as an average, yeah probably... you have a couple matches where you get through the whole thing, you have a couple where you're dead within a few minutes, etc... it's not an AC2... 600 missiles/match seems plausible to me anyway...

Edited by Warchanter, 24 April 2013 - 10:16 AM.

[Panimu]

Well I may as well do my own stats for completeness. Based on LRM20 alone:

Matches - 236
Fired - 148,005
Hit - 44,681
Accuracy - 30.19%
Damage - 46,210


Calc 1
If I fire 148,005 times in 236 matches this means I fire an average of 627 times in a match.
a) If this is 627 rack fires I would need to carry an average of 69 tons of ammo (627 / 9)
b) If this is 627 missile fires I would need to carry an average of 3.5 tons of ammo (627 / 180)

I feel this proves shots fired and hit is by missile, not rack

Calc 2
If I hit 44,681 times doing 46,210 damage than the average damage per missile is 1.03
Further this means
a) An LRM20 does a maximum of 20.6 damage (1.03 * 20)
b) An LRM20 does an average of 6.22 damage (20.6 * 0.3019%) taking into account my personal accuracy

These results are meaningless for damage as they have been taken from stats over too long a period. i.e. LRM damage has been modified in the time frame of these stats.

Enjoy.. ?

Edited by Panimu, 24 April 2013 - 10:19 AM.

[MrVop]

Panimu, on 24 April 2013 - 10:18 AM, said:

Well I may as well do my own stats for completeness. Based on LRM20 alone:

Matches - 236
Fired - 148,005
Hit - 44,681
Accuracy - 30.19%
Damage - 46,210


Calc 1
If I fire 148,005 times in 236 matches this means I fire an average of 627 times in a match.
a) If this is 627 rack fires I would need to carry an average of 69 tons of ammo (627 / 9)
If this is 627 missile fires I would need to carry an average of 3.5 tons of ammo (627 / 180)

I feel this proves shots fired and hit is by missile, not rack

Calc 2
If I hit 44,681 times doing 46,210 damage than the average damage per missile is 1.03
Further this means
a) An LRM20 does a maximum of 20.6 damage (1.03 * 20)
An LRM20 does an average of 6.22 damage (20.6 * 0.3019%) taking into account my personal accuracy

These results are meaningless for damage as they have been taken from stats over too long a period. i.e. LRM damage has been modified in the time frame of these stats.

Enjoy.. ?

Sure man. Sure. The stat isnt reporting as Either one of us thinks it does, Personally... When I LRM boat I supress everyone, Meaning I fireat everything to make them duck (bad accuracy becaues of it) But the HIT stats is self explanatory, HIT to DMG dealt... Im done with this Untill PGI explains to me exactly how their data is colected for LRM weapons, Because running my calculations MY WAY through the rest of the weapons (not including LBX) seems to work just peachy.

Edited by MrVop, 24 April 2013 - 10:25 AM.

[FrostCollar]

Warchanter, on 24 April 2013 - 10:05 AM, said:

I don't know where the .7 is coming from in the mechlab...

IIRC PGI said that the missile fix made LRMs deal .7 damage to the component they hit and capped splash at something like .3 damage. That's consistent with the damage per missile of around 1 that people keep reporting.