Vehicle Balance

[someone]

First off I want to preface this post by saying that I think both factions are very capable in capable hands, and that any strengths and weaknesses are ultimately leveled out with player experience. Also there's a tl;dr at the bottom.

As it stands right now the vehicle balance is pretty ridiculous, and I believe the problem is how easy it is to do well with GDI vehicles. Meds and Mammoths have great firepower, and Meds and Orcas have great mobility. MRLS's have lock-on capabilities that guarantee hits outside of cover while Artillery needs to account for the distance and speed of their opponents. The result is, with the exception of the Mammoth tank's sluggishness, ALL GDI vehicles are move, point, and click to win. And this fact alone does lead to wins.

Now before you jump to conclusions, no, I'm not saying Nod can't put up a fight. I'm saying Nod puts up a fight less often, because the effective use of their vehicles requires more teamwork and more specific circumstances.

A perfect example of this is the stealth tank, as it's not even really a tank, and more akin to a stealth transport with damage capabilities. Pop out of stealth to attack ANYTHING and your stealth tank is put at a huge risk. Mammoths and Med tanks can pop you like a balloon and even infantry can put up a good fight until you shift-drive away from them, since you can't run anyone over when you've been detected, and firing your missiles is like rolling a pair of dice. As a stealth tank you are not something to be feared, you're a mosquito to be swatted away. Now put that same stank in the middle of a well-executed stank rush, and GDI is probably looking at a new dead building on their hands. How? What changed? Nothing, Nod just used teamwork and surprised the enemy. But when a stank attacks you on your own, isn't it still surprising? Now why is the $900 tank struggling to do anything?

It's the same situation for most of Nod's vehicles. Light tanks just don't get anything done. They don't have the damage, and their speed and low profile design is still easily shelled by tanks and locked on to by MRLS's and Mammoths. Light tanks are also all around outclassed by Med tanks, in 1:1 situations.

Apaches can't duck out of sniper fire easily, so their firepower is often nullified. They also have to deal with MRLS's firing at them from miles away, requiring them again to duck into cover. Same goes for Mammoths with rocket pods. Orcas are quick and responsive, and can more easily deal with sniper fire. But they still have to deal with missil- oh wait, no, NONE of Nod's ground vehicles can respond to Orca harrassment. Stanks can, but we've already been over how weak stanks are on their own, and their range is very short. Orcas are fast, they can fire and then outrange the stank's missiles if they need to.

Artillery is Orca food.

Also, Artillery in beta 4 will see even slower Artillery shells, so you'll need to get even better at adjusting for distance and leading your shots.

So, we have stealth tanks, light tanks, Apaches, and Artillery, all with glaring weaknesses. More weaknesses than GDI vehicles have that fulfill the same role. Now, what is the Med tank's weakness? Can you even think of one? It can kill light tanks. It can kill Artillery. It can kill stealth tanks. It can kill flame tanks. It's perfectly capable of handling infantry. And every other GDI vehicle can keep Apaches away from it.

So here's my point. GDI's armor is flat-out too good and too well-rounded. No, this isn't because it's just GDI's thing, how they're depicted in the C&C games. It's because your average joe Ren X player can pop into a tank or even an Orca and he won't run into any costly problems. That same guy in any of Nod's vehicles will find himself short one vehicle when he inevitably runs into the wrong situation. Multiply that difference over the course of a game, and you've got a serious problem.

tl;dr GDI stumbles into good teamwork and synergy by virtue of their design, and Nod takes the underdog thing too literally. It makes for frustrating games.

[someone]

Also, I just want to add that I purposefully avoided making any suggestions about changes. I understand that I'm just one person, and I have great respect for all the guys working on the game, and I want to leave my perspective and nothing more.

[DoctorB0NG]

Arties and lights with techies are just as effective as most of GDI's vehicles. Add in flames hiding around corners and baby, you've got a stew going.

No matter what team I'm on, I usually yell at the the team to get vehicles and if they do, we usually win. I think the issue in Ren X is the same as the issue in original: too many solo SBH noobs.

[someone]

Arties and lights with techies are just as effective as most of GDI's vehicles. Add in flames hiding around corners and baby, you've got a stew going.

No matter what team I'm on, I usually yell at the the team to get vehicles and if they do, we usually win. I think the issue in Ren X is the same as the issue in original: too many solo SBH noobs.

I think that's true. Flames feel pretty good to me and it looks like the devs have been paying a lot of attention to them anyway, which is really awesome to see. They definitely make a great stopping force and synergize well with Nod's tanks (any of them) even if they are still used pretty situationally.

I made my first post after getting out of a game on Whiteout where GDI was down a Power Plant, and we were near vehicle cap with a majority of Artillery on the hill, a few stealth tanks patrolling our entrance and the side routes, and a flame tank at the entrance. After a little while of this, all of our Artillery died to Orcas and MRLS's, and GDI just pumped armor into all 3 vehicle paths and started shelling us. It was totally overwhelming and it felt like there was no way to break down even one of the flanks, we went from no HoN to dead in no time. Could be that they organized a wave like that intentionally, though, it was just crazy to lose to vehicles with no PP backing.

[HaTe]

Did you play the original Renegade? Were the complaints existent there, or is this simply a Renegade X problem in your mind, because of the different mechanics and different firing for some vehicles?

I'm asking as someone who has played a ton of Renegade but haven't had the chance to fully dive into Renegade X yet. Your arguments would be shot down for the original, so I'm just asking what the main difference(s) are, in your opinion?

[someone]

Did you play the original Renegade? Were the complaints existent there, or is this simply a Renegade X problem in your mind, because of the different mechanics and different firing for some vehicles?

I'm asking as someone who has played a ton of Renegade but haven't had the chance to fully dive into Renegade X yet. Your arguments would be shot down for the original, so I'm just asking what the main difference(s) are, in your opinion?

It's hard to say. I played the original Ren a very long time ago, and not nearly as much as I play Ren X now, so my experience with the games is probably the opposite of yours. I can't go into specifics, but I would say the major differences are obviously things like airstrikes and sprinting, and the general fluidity of gameplay didn't feel familiar to me when I first started playing Ren X. Vehicle handling and battles are really tightly executed, to the point that some meta gaming is needed to swing a fight.

For example, in Ren X, if I'm in a light tank up against a med tank at a distance where there's some travel time with the shells, I need to fully time my movement to his shots. Move while he's reloading, stop when he fires. He leads the shot and misses. Move while he's reloading, change direction when he fires. Stop. Move in a random direction when he fires. In the original Ren I felt a light tank's speed and size alone was its strength, and the scenario I just wrote wasn't necessary, but again this is just my limited perspective.

And things like the airstrike obviously caused a huge shift in grouping and holding positions. Artillery and MRLS's feel very fragile in Ren X and I don't see them holding the line like I remember them in Ren.

Do you have any thoughts on the matter?

[HaTe]

Normally Nod vehicles are the stronger one in Renegade (statistically and experience speaking). That's almost solely because of how OP the Nod arty with one technician is though. On bigger maps (or maps with 3 or more vehicle exits/entrances to a base), the stank tends to dominate via a simple 5+ stank rush. While the medium tank is a great combination of speed, firepower, and armor, it simply cannot do much against a tech'd arty. The only real (consistent) way to kill a tech'd arty is with multiple meds or multiple havocs. Light tanks are basically a distraction to meds against the long-range artillery, and work well in that role as they are able to deal slight damage while being very elusive.

The experienced player can self-rep his own arty mid battle and even kill a full life medium tank by doing this. I am not sure if that's possible in RenX or not though. MRLS's in the original had no rotating turret and their missiles only locked onto a target about half the time. Artillery shells didn't drop at all in the original neither. Orca and apache rockets fired one at a time before reloading (with a quick reload).

Overall, so long as a technician was available to repair Nod, their tanks normally reigned supreme. However, if it was just solely tank vs tank, GDI usually has a slight advantage. As far as RenX goes, I know that some vehicles have different firing than they did in the original, and that could affect quite a bit. Beta 4 also sees to it that vehicle mechanics act a bit different and more as you would expect, according to the changelog. It very well just may be a case of people not knowing the strategies or how to play the game fully yet, which gives GDI vehicles the advantage most of the time?

It seems we need someone who has experienced both games competitively to weigh-in on this too, perhaps.

[SFJake]

I'd be up for stealth tank buffs if nothing else. Anti-air buffs seems almost mandatory. Nod has no anti-air vehicle. Maybe even an increase in damage against vehicles. They are already so vulnerable to everything.

And someone please change how they control, they slide way too much, the sprint on them is broken, and the pattern of their missiles is just... odd. It should be much more reliable.<

The med tank is still worse than the light tank to me. Its just better when both are completely out in the open. Light Tanks can abuse cover more than med tanks.

And the artillery beats the crap out of the MRLs. I've dealt with so many MRLs who simply couldn't hit me more often than 1 every 30 missiles. Its easier to abuse than some people know.

And remember a key advantage of Nod: They don't have to deal with stealth. I can get out of my vehicle with Nod with less care (though still need to watch for snipers) while with GDI, leaving absolutely ANYWHERE seems like a risk you cannot take. I guess after beta 4 you can always make sure you plant 4 remotes on the vehicle but thats still not ideal.

Edited March 17, 2015 by Guest

[someone]

Even with a techie, I wouldn't call Arties OP in X, nor MRLS's for that matter. They're much too fragile to hold an area for long, and they take a dangerous amount of time to kill GDI armor. Most of the time Arties are forced back behind cover to repair temporarily, as a couple Mammy shells/rockets or a full MRLS volley is often enough to warrant doing so. A good APC driver can kill an Arty/MRLS + an advanced engineer who knows to get in the vehicle to avoid getting run over.

Tank shells and missiles do a significant amount of splash damage to nearby light vehicles, and this goes for repairing techies, too. The only way a techie is completely safe is when they're far behind a corner and using the range of the repair gun to keep away from the splash damage. Hotties on the other hand can sit flush against the back of a Mammoth and take no splash damage from any direct hits to the tank, and they have so much health with repairs that flame tanks and coordinated stank rushes on them can fail easily. Mammies are crazy good at taking ground. You spend a lot of time in the Arty's barrel-view shooting the very tip/corner of a Mammy's treads, because he can kill you so quickly if you linger out in the open.

A single Havoc can also kill an Arty pretty easily. If you're out of cover and something has knocked your health down some, his ramjet can burst down techie repairs, even with some reloading on his part. An airstrike will destroy any Arties/MRLS's that don't move out of it. In beta 4, railguns will be able to 4 shot light armor vehicles. Orcas and Apaches both have missile volleys on long reloads and secondary MGs/cannons that are very damaging to light vehicles, and infantry is Nod's only answer to Orcas. On maps like Lakeside, Arties simply can't make it across the map. It isn't even a question.

[someone]

I'd be up for stealth tank buffs if nothing else. Anti-air buffs seems almost mandatory. Nod has no anti-air vehicle. Maybe even an increase in damage against vehicles. They are already so vulnerable to everything.

And someone please change how they control, they slide way too much, the sprint on them is broken, and the pattern of their missiles is just... odd. It should be much more reliable.<

The med tank is still worse than the light tank to me. Its just better when both are completely out in the open. Light Tanks can abuse cover more than med tanks.

And the artillery beats the crap out of the MRLs. I've dealt with so many MRLs who simply couldn't hit me more often than 1 every 30 missiles. Its easier to abuse than some people know.

True, Nod's vehicles are a bit more suited to abusing cover. We might see this change in beta 4, MRLS's are getting a missile speed increase, and I actually agree with that.

And it would be pretty cool to see stealth tank missiles tightened up or given more range. Their damage is actually really good when you get a few good, direct hits.

[yosh56]

Quoted from a topic I made months ago about how Artillery and Techs are actually WAAAAY more cost-effective than MEDS/Hotties until a certain number of Meds is achieved. The only Nod vehicle I see needing to be looked at is probably the Stank...but then again I get decent mileage out of them using them as hit-and-run. They just suck against infantry (unless you're a bot).

------------

A Medium tank does about 64 damage to armour, takes about 1.5 seconds to reload between shots, and has a fairly sturdy 800 HP of heavy armour. Solid unit.

Nod's Artillery does +-92 damage to armour, takes about the same time (if not the same) as a Med to reload between shots, and has 400hp of Light armour.

Head-up, with no cover, and perfect accuracy this is how a 1v1 fight ends Med vs. Arty.

Fight lasts about 8-10 seconds.

Artillery goes down first.

Med is left alive with ~150hp

High-damage or not, the Artillery basically proved itself able to force the Med into a state that is barely even a threat to Nod anymore, and the player did it by spending 350 less credits than the guy who bought the Med. Cost-effectiveness is okay, but at least the Med wins right?

Alright, let's look at Tech-Med vs. Tech-Arty

Advanced repair-gun heals Light and Heavy armour at 40dps, meaning that in the time it takes for both the Med and Arty to reload they can heal 56 damage. See the problem already? Good.

Factoring in the repair gun and the reload time between shots, an Artillery does about 36 real damage per hit vs. a Med/Hoty. On the flip side, a Med does about 8 damage per hit against a Tech-Arty. Let's put the price into perspective before I even blow this rediculous confrontation out of the water.

Med+Hotwire = $1150

Arty+Tech= $800

Surprise surprise, the Artillery wins head-up.

At only 8 real damage per shot, the Med tank needs 50 shots to kill an Artillery with a Technician behind it.

At about 36 real damage a shot, an Arty only needs ~23 hits to kill a Med. As a bonus, the Artillery comes out with over half of its health intact.

In lower-pop games, Tech+Arty can literally be unstoppable if they get positioned right. Higher population evens it out ASSUMING GDI has a competent team, but even then Nod can win out with Light tanks (which are better once they get in areas where they can use terrain to their advantage) and Flame tanks to just control corners.

The balance is... not really all that far off. GDI is supposed to be better in the vehicle department, and they are but not really by all that much.

[HaTe]

As far as your math goes, I don't know the exact damage calculations for Renegade X (even the ones in the chart created somewhere around here are partially estimates), but in Renegade the damage per shot against a tech'd arty from a medium tank was 2. 2 damage per 1.5 seconds. For the record, DPS isn't an FPS term and doesn't work in a game like this. You also state that the damage over 1 second for a strong repair gun is -40, yet claim that over 1.5 seconds (the RoF for a med/arty), the damage is -56. It would be -60. The damage of a medium tank in Renegade against any tank is 62, but it may be 64 in RenX if that's what you say. Either way, that would mean 4 damage over 1.5 seconds instead of 8 (even moreso proving the point).

I had written this out a couple years back now (this is assuming 100% accuracy):

Original Renegade:

Mobile Artillery: 92 damage to every vehicle per successful shot. 1.5 second reload time (1.5 second RoF). 400 HP.

MRLS: 234 damage to every vehicle per clip (39 per shot). ~2 seconds RoF per clip. Clip size = 6. 3 second reload time. 400 HP.

It takes the Arty 5 shots total to kill an MRLS. That's 6 seconds total to kill the MRLS

It takes the MRLS 11 shots to kill an Arty. Meaning just under 7 seconds (closer to 6.6) to kill the Arty.

The Artillery barely wins that comparison.

Just to save my self a bit of time here now, I'm going to just tell you the time it takes for each tank to kill an opposing tank, rather then write out the calculations (now that you know how it is done).

A med tank will kill a light tank in 15 seconds.

A light tank will kill a med tank in 24 seconds.

Med tank easily wins.

A medium tank will kill a flame tank in 19.5 seconds.

A flame tank will kill a med tank in 10 seconds.

Easy win for the flame tank, as long as it starts off right next to the med tank and never misses from either side of the turret.

A mammoth tank will kill a stealth tank in 6 seconds with it's rockets.

A stealth tank will kill a mammoth tank in 21 seconds.

Easy win for the mammoth tank, as expected.

A mammoth tank will kill a flame tank in 11 seconds with it's rockets.

A flame tank will kill a mammoth tank in 15 seconds.

The mammoth tank wins this round too, as expected.

Note that none of these are 100% exact, but a close round.

Again, that's solely for original Renegade. If anyone posts an updated exact damage calculations chart (I think SFJake had made one, but damages/rof/velocity, etc. changes per beta update) then I can write out the exact calculations. It's something that I wish the developers here would release eventually. (Something like this excel document, along with the warhead and shield name types: http://blackintel.org/files/blackintel.weaponinfo.xls)

[xanthar4242]

A minor change that might make all the difference in the balance of meds and lights specifically, is directional armor. If meds and lights could take reduced damage from the front and increased damage from behind, I could see that resolving some balance issues. It would make the maneuverability of the light tank a greater asset versus the med. It would increase the survivability of the med heads up against arty. It would have the knock on effect of making stanks more effective against meds and in ambush situations. Most importantly, it would reward good driving and positioning.

However, I just don't know how or even if such a change could be implemented.

Edit: spelling

[HaTe]

It was considered early on, but got a ton of negative feedback. In the end, it would just turn the game into something that it is not and provide too many gameplay challenges and exploits that aren't really nessecary for a *possible* problem like this. I say possible because as of now these are just opinions and I'm yet to test it out fully myself even.

[xanthar4242]

I say possible because as of now these are just opinions and I'm yet to test it out fully myself even.

Definitely agree with that. I think one of the best things about how vehicles work now is how hard it is to do much by oneself. The biggest problem with any major vehicle change, such as the one I brought up, is risking breaking that mechanic.

I've seen a few threads about med vs arty and the general impression of stanks and lights as underpowered. Perhaps the slowing of the artillery shell will give med drivers a better opportunity to close the gap without taking maximum damage.

That leaves stanks and lights. Perhaps lights and stanks could be a touch faster to help get them out of trouble. But, I'm not totally convinced that is the correct answer to a possible non problem.

Edit: punctuation.

[yosh56]

I start out saying in that old post that they are at roughly 1.5 rate of fire. Actual is ~1.4 which is what I did calculations on. Probably should have corrected that at least when I quoted.

Also, DPS works fine in a game that literally has explicit numbers for damage. The ADv. repair gun heals 40 damage a second, I don't care what calcs are used for RPGs and what not. It's pretty self explanatory.

And yes, Meds do 64 damage per shot. SFJake's damage chart is still relevant in beta 3 as far as vehicles go EXCEPT for the Mammoth Tank. I never built it all into a damage chart, but I did check damages myself to make sure they were still correct.

[RypeL]

one thing is that we definatly should make stank rockets less random. so thats comming.

[HaTe]

Its not self explanatory though. There's reload times/RoF that have to be factored in. So the "DPS" of weapons changes drastically depending on the second you're referring to. The only weapons you can accurately measure DPS for are the non-reloading weapons. So it's essentially pointless to use a measurement that can only be used for a few weapons in the game, when every weapon can just use the same measurement. That's why you have to state damage over _____ seconds instead of "DPS," because that number changes per designated time.

Plus you can only accurately calculate it for a direct hit. Splash is calculated server side (at least in the original) and is based on its own separate calculation entirely. Since splash is also measured in a direct hit (but consistently measurable), the actual real damage can differ. Say, for instance, the server thinks I hit a direct hit on a vehicle, but my client sees that shot miss. I would do direct splash damage and no direct impact damage. This is why you sometimes see "ghost damage" or damage that isn't quite as much as it should be. Its either the client or the server that didn't register as a direct impact hit.

Reload time for a med/arty was 1.5 in the original, and I'm assuming they followed that example for this game (since the 1.4 is just a manually done estimate).

Tl;Dr DPS isn't a term used for this game for a reason.

one thing is that we definatly should make stank rockets less random. so thats comming.

Great to know that we are being listened to, thank you.

[someone]

one thing is that we definatly should make stank rockets less random. so thats comming.

Awesome news! And I really appreciate that you guys have a presence here on the forums. Thank you.

Since my last post I've been experimenting a bit more with Nod's stealth units. Initially I think I was trying to place more of a mainstay role on the stealth tank. It's actually very good for finishing off enemy vehicles when they go behind cover to repair like I mentioned before, and then it's quite easy to get out alive. It's also great for recon/keeping hotties away, so I'm pretty satisfied with it as a "defensive support" kind of thing. Still trying to figure out how to take down Orcas though.

Also, SBH's with EMP grenades are a terrifying thing to behold.

[yosh56]

Its not self explanatory though. There's reload times/RoF that have to be factored in. So the "DPS" of weapons changes drastically depending on the second you're referring to. The only weapons you can accurately measure DPS for are the non-reloading weapons. So it's essentially pointless to use a measurement that can only be used for a few weapons in the game, when every weapon can just use the same measurement. That's why you have to state damage over _____ seconds instead of "DPS," because that number changes per designated time.

Plus you can only accurately calculate it for a direct hit. Splash is calculated server side (at least in the original) and is based on its own separate calculation entirely. Since splash is also measured in a direct hit (but consistently measurable), the actual real damage can differ. Say, for instance, the server thinks I hit a direct hit on a vehicle, but my client sees that shot miss. I would do direct splash damage and no direct impact damage. This is why you sometimes see "ghost damage" or damage that isn't quite as much as it should be. Its either the client or the server that didn't register as a direct impact hit.

Reload time for a med/arty was 1.5 in the original, and I'm assuming they followed that example for this game (since the 1.4 is just a manually done estimate).

Tl;Dr DPS isn't a term used for this game for a reason.

one thing is that we definatly should make stank rockets less random. so thats comming.

Great to know that we are being listened to, thank you.

You're aware that the ONLY thing I used DPS for was for the repair gun, correct? It's not splash, it's 100% consistent, and never reloads. DPS works totally fine for something like that, and I'd rarely see a point in bringing it up for things like single-fire weapons. The only other weapons I ever bring up DPS with are the Volt rifle, chain-guns, and fast-firing weapons that aren't even close to being done with their magazine by the time a second is up.

On another note, SFJake's damage chart actually calculated theoretical and 'true' DPS for weapons. I've never cared much for DPS to begin with, unless it was for the weapons like I mentioned above. E.G, like the fact that DPS vs. DPS, Patch out-damages a Technician, but I usually also make it obvious that Patch has to reload after awhile where as a Technician does not. It's still a useful statistic to know if you run into a vehicle being repaired at like 5% health, as YES you can kill that even if there's a Tech on it.

TL:DR: I don't do tl;dr.... I mean look at that monstrosity of a guide I wrote =\

-------

Also, did we ever consider giving the Stank an ALT-fire specifically for aircraft so that Nod did have an answer (albeit a more expensive answer) to aircraft in vehicle form? Like a pair of rockets that were slightly faster and did more damage vs aircraft (or light vehicles). Could sort of re-balance it by taking away lock-on capability from the primary rockets.

[HaTe]

You're aware that the ONLY thing I used DPS for was for the repair gun, correct? It's not splash, it's 100% consistent, and never reloads. DPS works totally fine for something like that, and I'd rarely see a point in bringing it up for things like single-fire weapons. The only other weapons I ever bring up DPS with are the Volt rifle, chain-guns, and fast-firing weapons that aren't even close to being done with their magazine by the time a second is up.

I am aware. My point was that you can use "Damage over ___ seconds" to calculate the damage properly for direct hits for EVERY weapon in Renegade. Whereas you can only use DPS to calculate non-reloading weapons (of which there is only about 4 in the game). For damage per second, you have to take into account the time that the weapon is being used. If it's 5 seconds, then you need to take the damage at 5 seconds and divide it by 5. It's it's 2 seconds, you need to do the same. With reloading though, this makes the DPS vary drastically based on how much time you're factoring into the calculation.

On another note, SFJake's damage chart actually calculated theoretical and 'true' DPS for weapons.

I'm aware of that as well as the flaws in it. The only way to accurately calculate "true DPS" in an FPS like this is to take the damage over each individual second (damage after 1 second, damage after 2 seconds, damage after 3 seconds, all the way up to around 30), state it, and then divide it by the number of seconds total (which isn't a necessary statistic if you already have the damage for each individual second).

It's still a useful statistic to know if you run into a vehicle being repaired at like 5% health

Sure, it is useful if you're comparing weapons that don't need to reload over the designated time period that you're factoring in. The "damage over ___ seconds" is just as useful without the need to divide by the seconds too, and can take into consideration the reload if need be. That's all I'm saying.

[yosh56]

I am aware. My point was that you can use "Damage over ___ seconds" to calculate the damage properly for direct hits for EVERY weapon in Renegade. Whereas you can only use DPS to calculate non-reloading weapons (of which there is only about 4 in the game). For damage per second, you have to take into account the time that the weapon is being used. If it's 5 seconds, then you need to take the damage at 5 seconds and divide it by 5. It's it's 2 seconds, you need to do the same. With reloading though, this makes the DPS vary drastically based on how much time you're factoring into the calculation.

When you go for very long-term periods of firing then maybe damage over X seconds is useful, but considering most of the time you are only going to be firing for a short amount of time (e.g <10 seconds) with anything other than the repair gun it becomes a moot point. Actually, this whole discussion is a moot point because it has nothing to do with the topic. I'm still using DPS, as I'm fairly certain anyone who reads it is smart enough to determine that the weapon reloads at some point. It'd be like not using 'round per second' because you didn't factor in reloading. Either way the weapon still spits out X rounds per second for whatever magazine it's on.

Done with topic-hijacking.

[HaTe]

I'll just leave this here:

You can argue that the PIC does 80 DPS, because in the first second her "DPS" would be 80. In the second second, however, the damage dealt is also 80. Meaning that for the second second, the "DPS" is 40 (80/2). At 2.99 seconds, the "DPS" would be ~27 (80/3). Then at the 3 second mark, the DPS would be ~53 (160 damage dealt / 3 seconds).

[yosh56]

I'll just leave this here:

You can argue that the PIC does 80 DPS, because in the first second her "DPS" would be 80. In the second second, however, the damage dealt is also 80. Meaning that for the second second, the "DPS" is 40 (80/2). At 2.99 seconds, the "DPS" would be ~27 (80/3). Then at the 3 second mark, the DPS would be ~53 (160 damage dealt / 3 seconds).

The PIC is a burst-fire weapon that can only fire once every 3 seconds... there's virtually no reason to ever consider what its supposed 'dps' is over looking at what you'd actually want to know, which is its TTK vs. [instet object] here.

Also, Stanks.

[HaTe]

Exactly, which is why the dps in that chart, and 95% of dps calculations for this game, are irrelevant. The problem is that some people don't realize it and try to justify their points using that, when it's irrelevant and overall inaccurate (though I can see that you get that point, at least now).

[yosh56]

Exactly, which is why the dps in that chart, and 95% of dps calculations for this game, are irrelevant. The problem is that some people don't realize it and try to justify their points using that, when it's irrelevant and overall inaccurate (though I can see that you get that point, at least now).

DPS calcs for every rapid-fire weapon is relevant... and there are a lot of those.

The Volt-Rifle, LCG, Laser Rifle, Autorifle, Chaingun, TacRifle, Machine Pistol, Carbine, Repair Gun, APC's minigun, Orca/Apache's guns, Chinook's guns, Humvee+Buggy's guns.

Yeah... they're useful for a lot of things if you get my drift.

[HaTe]

Not the reloadable ones if the time you're factoring in is over the time it takes for any of those weapons take to empty one clip. Which, when you're firing against vehicles or buildings (2/3 of the shield types), is always. So your argument is that you can use DPs for a handful of weapons against infantry only. My argument is that you can use one simpler calculation to calculate all weapons in renegade. Which is the better measurement?

[yosh56]

Looking for how much damage you can do how fast, vs. looking for TTK are two totally separate measurements in my book. Hell, an APC/Buggy can kill a building, but the amount of time it takes isn't really a relevant thing to know for all practical intents and purposes. In terms of practicality, knowing the DPS of an LCG doesn't overpower a repair gun's DPS is far more helpful of a statistic than ever knowing how much its theoretical DPS is over the course of 30 seconds. Knowing that while you're firing with Patch at a Tech'd Arty you're COMPLETELY negating the repair gun is a practical piece of information.

So no, it's not only useful for infantry situations.

[HaTe]

I'm not talking about TTk. Talking about damage over ____ seconds.

Ttk is useful for its own purposes ofc, but damage over ____ seconds is what measures everything (your patch and tech'd arty would be included in this measurement).

I plan on making a chart at some point that explores the damage over _____ seconds (up to 30) to each armor type at some point in the near future. That chart would truly be able to explore the real damage, and allow people to realistically compare weapons.