yeah, I love how the A-91 says being a bulpulp "prevents the A-91 from mounting either a bipod or a foregrip." and what do you get for 30 kills? a foregrip. The f2000 has its own proprietary grenade launcher (so it can't use the m320, though do the russian rifles switch to using a GP-30 when you attach it? if so, dice was just lazy, as the f2000 in bc2 had the gl). The only one that physically can't mount anything securely is the kh2002 (unless you do something stupid and mount it to the side or top rails, which is technically possible, but definitely not recommended).
also, you misquoted me, that was actually kathinka's post (that I quoted).
yeah, I love how the A-91 says being a bulpulp "prevents the A-91 from mounting either a bipod or a foregrip." and what do you get for 30 kills? a foregrip. The f2000 has its own proprietary grenade launcher (so it can't use the m320, though do the russian rifles switch to using a GP-30 when you attach it? if so, dice was just lazy, as the f2000 in bc2 had the gl). The only one that physically can't mount anything securely is the kh2002 (unless you do something stupid and mount it to the side or top rails, which is technically possible, but definitely not recommended).
also, you misquoted me, that was actually kathinka's post (that I quoted).
Thanks for pointing out the misquote; it's been fixed.
yeah, could have sworn I saw somewhere (thought it was world.guns.ru) that they made a version without a grenade launcher, but I must have been mistaken. Though I highly doubt you could use the grenade launcher with an attached suppressor (don't know the exact dimensions, but the grenade launcher appears to be mounted very close to the barrel, grenades would most likely hit the suppressor), and they sure as hell weren't gonna give engineers a grenade launcher in addition to the standard rocket launcher. So that change was probably balance related.
Re: Chart: Damage values of all weapons at dif ran « Reply #93 on Nov 9, 2011, 5:04pm »
Could anyone explain why in the calculations for TTK he's subtracting one from the # of shots to kill someone before dividing it by (RPM/60)?
E.g. For the F200, at 1m, if 25 dmg/shot is correct, that's 4 rounds to kill, divide by (850/60) e.g. 14 1/6 shots per second, to get .282. Instead he's dividing 3 by this amount to reach .212.
Re: Chart: Damage values of all weapons at dif ran « Reply #94 on Nov 9, 2011, 5:22pm »
900 RPM, really? It was only 800 in BC2, and I can't possibly imagine any AR going faster than the F2000. I bet it's 800; which would be interesting, considering that would make it an M16A3 clone.
Could anyone explain why in the calculations for TTK he's subtracting one from the # of shots to kill someone before dividing it by (RPM/60)?
E.g. For the F200, at 1m, if 25 dmg/shot is correct, that's 4 rounds to kill, divide by (850/60) e.g. 14 1/6 shots per second, to get .282. Instead he's dividing 3 by this amount to reach .212.
I know that's how you figure out TTK for Call of Duty because of the nature of hitscan. The very moment you click to fire (or hit right trigger on a console), the game scans to see if you are on target. The first shot is, essentially, instant and has no lag time in an optimal situation. There is no travel time and the tracers you see in game are simply representations of bullets. Using a 900 RPM (60 seconds/900 RPM = .067 sec between shots) weapon that kills in 4 bullet using hitscan, it would look like this:
0 seconds = click to fire and first bullet hits .067 seconds = 2nd shot hits .134 seconds = 3rd shot hits .201 seconds = 4th shot hits, dead
As for Battlefield, I don't know why he's doing it since most (or all) of the bullets in it are actual projectiles and not hitscans. It seems to me like he would be using hitscan calculations to determine projectile kill time which doesn't really work.
And if you knew all the info about hitscan already, sorry, you can ignore it
900 RPM, really? It was only 800 in BC2, and I can't possibly imagine any AR going faster than the F2000. I bet it's 800; which would be interesting, considering that would make it an M16A3 clone.
Well, the people testing it were emptying a clip with it in 2 seconds flat. That equates out to 900 rpm, or 15 rounds/sec.
800 rpm would've been giving them 2.25
750, aka M416, would've been giving them 2.4, and they were getting 2.41 I believe? So even if their level of inaccuracy was off by the same .01s, that's still ~900 rpm.
Well, the people testing it were emptying a clip with it in 2 seconds flat. That equates out to 900 rpm, or 15 rounds/sec.
800 rpm would've been giving them 2.25
750, aka M416, would've been giving them 2.4, and they were getting 2.41 I believe? So even if their level of inaccuracy was off by the same .01s, that's still ~900 rpm.
I just find it weird that they'd just go and change the RoF of a weapon they've used before. And if it really is true, I'll never use the F2000 again. Also, why would the F2000 have the underbarrel limitation then? I just assumed it was because it was the most dominant AR in raw killing power, so it was a balance move. With the AEK being better and having underbarrel access, the F2000 has no purpose.
I just find it weird that they'd just go and change the RoF of a weapon they've used before. And if it really is true, I'll never use the F2000 again. Also, why would the F2000 have the underbarrel limitation then? I just assumed it was because it was the most dominant AR in raw killing power, so it was a balance move. With the AEK being better and having underbarrel access, the F2000 has no purpose.
It's not the only weapon; the first that comes to mind is the M416, which used to be 700 rpm as opposed to the 750 it is now.
Well, the people testing it were emptying a clip with it in 2 seconds flat. That equates out to 900 rpm, or 15 rounds/sec.
800 rpm would've been giving them 2.25
750, aka M416, would've been giving them 2.4, and they were getting 2.41 I believe? So even if their level of inaccuracy was off by the same .01s, that's still ~900 rpm.
I just find it weird that they'd just go and change the RoF of a weapon they've used before. And if it really is true, I'll never use the F2000 again. Also, why would the F2000 have the underbarrel limitation then? I just assumed it was because it was the most dominant AR in raw killing power, so it was a balance move. With the AEK being better and having underbarrel access, the F2000 has no purpose.
It's really not that strange; gun stats change all the time from game to game, that's normal. Look at the FAMAS in MW2/black ops, for example, or the G3 in just about every game ever.
Plus, the AEK's real rpm is 900, so it makes complete sense that they would change it from BC2, as they seem to be taking the highly realistic route this time around. If anything, be surprised that they arbitrarily changed its fire rate to something else in BC2, not that they've corrected now.
Also, while I agree that I won't be using the F2k anymore, I wasn't using the AK-74, M16 or M416 either even before I knew this. Since dpr is constant between guns in-class, ttk is king and most guns will have no purpose after you unlock a faster one. That's just kind of how it goes.
Plus, I never use the nade launcher. If I wanted to blow doo-doo up instead of heal people, I'd play an engineer, add the SCAR and be better at everything.
Plus, I never use the nade launcher. If I wanted to blow doo-doo up instead of heal people, I'd play an engineer, add the SCAR and be better at everything.
Exactly. I'll never understand the tube fascination, aside from smoke of course. Rockets are much better, and are actually useful versus vehicles. If you really want to throw away your medkit for explosives, you might as well be an Engi.
And I don't pay attention to TTK much, since they always assume perfect accuracy at every range, which is impossible. However in the case of the AEK, it has barely any recoil at all, so it can actually meet its TTK better than any other AR. The M16 is the best for a while, but the AEK is still a straight upgrade. The AK74 may as well not exist. I like to use AK weapons for aesthetics, but with the AEK around, I think the AK74 will be the very last gun I ever max out. Unless I'm imagining things, it seems like the F2000 has more recoil than in Beta. I remember never having to burst it at all, but now it seems like the AEK is the true laser AR.
In the end, it still all comes down to who sees who first. If you're a stealthy, flanking player, it really doesn't matter what gun you use. Although after my experiences tonight, I'll say that the MP7 is the exception to that rule. That thing is just one big disappointment and a huge handicap. Unless it also gets 40 rounds when extended, I'd rather have the PP2K any day.
Re: Chart: Damage values of all weapons at dif ran « Reply #102 on Nov 11, 2011, 11:51am »
I'll try to post the TTK times for weapon classes without the current equation that's being used. Even if they did use the hitscan method in BF3 (e.g. instant shot as soon as trigger is pulled, hence the -1 to hits to kill) this metric seems less realistic as it assumes you're 100% accurate from trigger pull to kill.
Was posing this question to a group of clanmates who also have a fondness for number crunching:
What do you think of calculating TTK, but incorporating weapon accuracy levels into the equation. E.g., if you just happen to have 5% higher accuracy with a particular weapon within a weapon class, this would mean that (on average, assuming 30 round clip), you're landing an extra 1.5 bullets per clip into an individual. In other words, incorporating an individual's preference or "feel" for a weapon into the equation. Or perhaps, based on personal analysis, you could come up with a feasible range on the # of bullets or % of clip it takes on average to down a player at various ranges. Obviously the latter option wouldn't be feasible unless you took the time to do this sort of testing yourself over a prolonged sample size, but I just want to start walking towards possible solutions that incorporate individual skill with a particular weapon rather than optimal scenarios like current TTK measurements.
It's not perfect by any stretch of the word, but any metric that might attempt to reflect individual preference and ability to use a certain weapon to the point of noticeable changes in accuracy / handling would be great. I need to mull this over in my head while I think of the best way to go about this.
Edit: TTK (Without the -1 modifier) x (1/Accuracy)
So for example, let's say the TTK is 1s for Weapon A assuming 15% accuracy and the TTK for Weapon B is .75s and 10% accuracy.
Weapon A: 1s x (1/.15) = 6.6666667s Weapon B: .75s x (1/.10) = 7.5s
TTK that implies weapon accuracy of 100%, so if your accuracy is in fact only 10%, the TTK should be multiplied by (1/.1), or 10 to account for your individual ability to use said weapon.
Once again it's far from perfect, and accuracy levels don't take into account the wide myriad of circumstances which decrease accuracy (purposely suppressing, spraying in CQC, etc.). If only there were a way to find accuracy while ADS
Re: Chart: Damage values of all weapons at dif ran « Reply #103 on Nov 11, 2011, 12:05pm »
There is no non-arbitrary mathematical way to measure how "accurate" a weapon is. TTK is a solid metric, taken from facts such as ROF and damage. It alone is not a good measure of the effectiveness of a weapon as it doesn't take into account recoil, mag size, and a variety of other factors. However, there is no way to "improve" TTK with any kind of measurement of "accuracy" or "feel" for a weapon simply because everyone's feel for a weapon is completely unique. Just because one weapon is statistically superior to another does not mean that a player will necessarily perform better with it and it's this player diversity that simply can not be modeled or abstracted in any meaningful way.
Better to leave TTK as it is and try to find things like recoil measurements or other solid factual metrics. Then let the players decide which weapon they want to use based on those. There simply isn't a way to take all the variables of a weapon, combat situation, and player population, mash it all together into one number, and say this gun is better than that gun because it's number is bigger.
Re: Chart: Damage values of all weapons at dif ran « Reply #104 on Nov 11, 2011, 12:13pm »
Of course there's no way to give a definitive answer as to the best weapon for every player, I should have elaborated a bit more and stated that we were throwing these ideas around with the purpose of attempting to persuade certain individuals that TTK alone wasn't a meaningful measure of a gun's use in EVERY player's hands.
Even recoil measurements wouldn't do everyone good (although I'll be using those along with spread to make my own personal decisions when the hard data comes our way), as there will always be outlying players that seem to do better with certain higher-recoil weapons despite almost exactly similar characteristics otherwise.
The only reason we came up with the measurement we did was to "attempt" to factor in some form of measurable "ability" (feel/fondness/whatever floats your boat) for a particular weapon. In other words decorating the concept of "this weapon could be statistically superior in every way, but if you can't shoot your own toe with it if you tried, use a different weapon."
Re: Chart: Damage values of all weapons at dif ran « Reply #105 on Nov 11, 2011, 2:10pm »
Actually I like incorporating accuracy along with fire rate and damage. Maybe you could set a filter so a user can select if they want to see the adjusted TTK or raw TTK.
IMO using both could give you some more insight on the weapons, e.g. "this weapon has a high TTK but why do I do terrible with it?"
I may have missed it but how are you determining accuracy? Does that include recoil and type of fire, e.g. burst firing or singe shot?
I may have missed it but how are you determining accuracy? Does that include recoil and type of fire, e.g. burst firing or singe shot?
Well that's just it, until we have actual hard stats relating to recoil / spread it would be difficult to do. For now I can only rely on an individual's accuracy to date with a weapon (assuming they have at MINIMUM a couple hundred kills), as how well an individual fares with a particular weapon could be based on a multitude of factors (ROF, Caliber for initial kick, spread, attachments, to name just a few of an untold number of variables), with certain factors contributing more to their benefit (or detriment), depending on the player. Until we get the actual bona fide numbers, I'm not sure how else to do it. Suggestions are always welcome.
Thus, while one could never say with absolute certainty what a player should be using, at the very least one might be able to analyze how a single player fares with, say, a particular ROF while keeping caliber / weapon class constant, or perhaps spread (praying for stats) and how it relates to their accuracy (or ability to effectively control it), and make an educated guess (strong emphasis on guess) as to what would suit them the best.
Of course, there are some cases where the decision might already be made for you, where the differences in effectiveness are clear (significantly higher accuracy, kills per minute, HK% above all other weapons within a class, assuming once again there's a decent number of kills with each weapon being compared).
Joined: May 2011 Gender: Male Posts: 73 Location: Australia
Re: Chart: Damage values of all weapons at dif ran « Reply #107 on Nov 11, 2011, 9:19pm »
This is mildly off topic but I didn't think it was worth a new thread. From demize99's twitter, regarding flash suppressors:
Quote:
demizee99: A single shot will still be accurate, fast shots will have less accuracy.
So flash suppressors wouldn't have any detrimental effect on single fire, and you'd still be able to count one one-hit minimum on auto. That's nice. I'd always been a bit scared of using them because I like my bullets to go where I point. I thought that was worth knowing.
EDIT: Also, continuing to stalk his twitter, there's some useful information on there until we get hard stats. On burst fire, after someone complained that recoil was higher in burst mode:
Quote:
demizee99: But accuracy is higher and firing is more controled, meaning it's still more effective, just takes more skill.
So burst fire must have less spread than full-auto.
As for Battlefield, I don't know why he's doing it since most (or all) of the bullets in it are actual projectiles and not hitscans.
They are technically hitscan, it's just a delayed hitscan (the delay being determined by the distance the ray travels and its assigned velocity) with a gravity constant used to bend the ray.
hope not, artificially decreasing accuracy beyond the potent blinding effect would be lame. this vid from that thread provides counter-evidence, though: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N3-ELwW8sNs
Regarding the buck/flechette/frag round values in the damage chart: What exactly do these numbers mean? 100 damage per pellet is hardly believable neither is 100 damage per round. The frag round values seem to suggest that there's just an extra 0 because 35 damage sounds plausible, but this can not be the case for buck/flechette... From what i could test a single buck shot pellet (870MCS) does ~8.5 damage at long range (tested at 25/40 meters). I have also yet to see a case where a frag headshot was not lethal.
Maybe skitrel could clarify the meaning of the shotgun numbers since they are a pain to figure out without having a partner and an empty server.
Looks like no bro saw this post. I am interested in it as well, the answer that is. Why is flechette 110 and buck is 100? etc.
Regarding the buck/flechette/frag round values in the damage chart: What exactly do these numbers mean? 100 damage per pellet is hardly believable neither is 100 damage per round. The frag round values seem to suggest that there's just an extra 0 because 35 damage sounds plausible, but this can not be the case for buck/flechette... From what i could test a single buck shot pellet (870MCS) does ~8.5 damage at long range (tested at 25/40 meters). I have also yet to see a case where a frag headshot was not lethal.
Maybe skitrel could clarify the meaning of the shotgun numbers since they are a pain to figure out without having a partner and an empty server.
Looks like no bro saw this post. I am interested in it as well, the answer that is. Why is flechette 110 and buck is 100? etc.
That's my biggest problem with the chart out there. It just seems like a bunch of guestimation. Obviously there's no way that each pellet does the stated damage, and I highly doubt 100 is the sum of every pellet. There has to be some overage with the pellets, because a 100% accurate shotgun shot is extremely situational. Also, I find it very hard to believe that flechette would outdamage buckshot. If it did, and assuming flechette doesn't have some hidden weakness we don't know about, buckshot would be completely obsolete.
Shotguns are also something I'm very interested in right now. I want to know how the 870 slug compares to a bolt sniper, and just how terrible slugs are on the other shotguns. And the tooltip that claims that slugs aren't completely accurate at range worries me. I've made several slug kills at decent range, but never anything sniper worthy, so I'm not sure if it's true. I could understand a slug having additional drop, but random deviation would really upset me. And if frag round headshots really are OHKs, then that piques my interest considerably; especially considering that slugs are only OHKs with headshots at range anyway.
![[Home]](http://images.proboards.com/menu/home.gif "[Home]")
![[New Topics]](http://images.proboards.com/menu/topics.png "[New Topics]")
![[Help]](http://images.proboards.com/menu/help.gif "[Help]")
![[Search]](http://images.proboards.com/menu/search.gif "[Search]")
![[Login]](http://images.proboards.com/menu/login.gif "[Login]")
![[Register]](http://images.proboards.com/menu/register.gif "[Register]")
![[Search This Thread]](http://images.proboards.com/search2.gif "[Search This Thread]")
![[Share Topic]](http://images.proboards.com/new/buttons/share.png "[Share Topic]")
![[Print]](http://images.proboards.com/buttons/print.gif "[Print]")
Author
Logged![[avatar]](http://i32.photobucket.com/albums/d35/KKilme/emblem100.png "[avatar]")
![[avatar]](http://i.imgur.com/HC5uf.png "[avatar]")
![[avatar]](http://i.imgur.com/coRNc.png "[avatar]")
![[avatar]](http://img840.imageshack.us/img840/7906/symth100x100.png "[avatar]")
![[homepage]](http://images.proboards.com/buttons/www_sm.gif "[homepage]")
![[image]](http://sigs.enjin.com/sig-bf3/5ec39a947c292650.png "[image]")
![[avatar]](http://img33.imageshack.us/img33/8229/lanternaverdecopygrey.png "[avatar]")
![[avatar]](http://panthercs.ibeatyou.com/23370_pet_1218006263.jpg "[avatar]")