[MOD] Miscellaneous OOZ Combat Tweaks

[BlackRain]

I never once see the Fulmekron go anywhere close to 100k or more where the Taranis is sometimes doing more than 200k damage

[Sparky Sparkycorp]

Thanks for the data!

I've pasted it into an Excel spreadsheet and done some basic stats at the following link. Feel free to check/change around locally as needed.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0ByP1Gu ... sp=sharing

Initial thoughts:
Big drop in attack strength when Fulmekron attacks Taranis. Taranis moving to rear of Fulmekron, or speed reduction, I guess. If JETs have a higher chance of nuking surface elements than other weapons, the Taranis can manoeuvre to use them more often and zap suface elements at a higher rate.

A Fulmekron attacking a Taranis tends to do more down than up damage but a Taranis has down-ward angled JETs I would have imagined it would try to use from above.

Attacking Taranis DOs have relatively lower numbers of stars.

No account taken for loss of attack strength over time (loss of elements and/or outmanoeuvring) so for example, a Fulmekron could live longer with fewer surface elements.

High proportion of Back-facing attacks from Taranis surprising. Moving away to keep range? What facings can their JETs achieve?* Astrobees counted as rear? DO Drones have a 'facing'?* Taranis pad is at front.

Not sure what NumDR represents.

-------------
Edit: *If not known, could test by stripping all other surface elements.

[w.evans]

Real quick before I head out:

Attacking Taranis DOs have relatively lower numbers of stars.

Fulmekron crew skill artificially increased. Made all pirates be clones of each other, and have five stars. So all SS and HV Fulmekrons in that example are running MICT.

High proportion of Back-facing attacks from Taranis surprising. Moving away to keep range?

Probably because non-MICT ships don't maneouver in combat OOZ.

What facings can their JETs achieve?*

Dunno

Astrobees counted as rear?

I think irrespective of quadrant, but not sure. If irrespective of quadrant, there should be discrete steps increases/decreases in attack strength (raw) coinciding with the number of astrobee launchers, and number of submunitions in the swarm.

DO Drones have a 'facing'?* Taranis pad is at front.

Nope.

Not sure what NumDR represents.

number of combat drones

[w.evans]

Just got back and did a quick run. Dropped the secondary damage parameter all the way down to 1/30 of turret and primary damage on the off chance that it will affect missile turrets, and that the Taranis damage spikes come from missile turrets, but found it still spike up to, and sometimes stay at or close to, 142,784.422 (raw). Fulmekron damage still at around 36,000 - 40,000 for the most part.

Another thing I noticed: I'm not getting any dps quadrant info on the Taranis, although there are MICT pirate Fulmekrons engaging Taranis OOZ. Since the dps quadrant info is tied to the MICT movement script, it should register whenever a MICT ship maneouvers against (actively attacks) a ship. Since there isn't any Taranis data, none of those Fulmekrons are actively attacking Taranis.

[Marvin Martian]

the problem might be the move.plunder script of the pirates, because it's only search for Cargoships with any ware except fuelcells in it

[w.evans]

Yup. Also realized that I wasn't getting Arawn data either, and that most of the Fulmekron data was coming from pirates that my ships were engaging. Thought that this was why Taranis were overpowering Fulmekrons, but changed the pirates back to pirate Taranis, and I think I found the problem:

Code: Select all

HV Marauder Fulmekron   Right: 51280            Left: 28880 Front: 0    Back: 0     Up: 185420  Down: 185420
SS Marauder Taranis     Right: 41260            Left: 41260 Front: 0    Back: 0     Up: 862800  Down: 109480

Taranis Up dps is 862,800. This is larger than the Fulmekron's dps from all quadrants combined. That number divided by 10 looks about right, don't you think?

Updated the quadrant dps survey data.

[Sparky Sparkycorp]

Such a high UP damage on a Taranis seems odd compared to IZ.

The drone bay and Astrobee launchers are on the top surface but the JET turrets point more slightly downwards IZ. Maybe missile turrets have an UP rating then.

Are those damage numbers occuring every time interval for each quadrant or is the UP value one of the mentioned spikes?

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

Edit: Please could you record quadrant info for a drone-equipped Balor? It has symmetrical turret placement so if drone bay counted UP or DOWN, it would probably be apparent.

[w.evans]

Nothing to do with the spikes. The dps quadrant information is output when the ship is polled, regardless of what it's doing. The spikes result from the internal OOZ combat function (get_attackstrength and apply_attackstrength functions) which isn't involved in this code that looks up dps data. Looks like it takes damaged turrets into account.

Could be due to Astrobees. Will be looking for Arawns in my next run to compare. Right now, though, looks like a wrong decimal point on that up dps.

[w.evans]

Got the Arawn and the Balor.

Code: Select all

                        RIGHT       LEFT        FRONT       BACK        UP          DOWN
HV Marauder Fulmekron   51280       28880       0           0           185420      185420
SS Marauder Taranis     41260       41260       0           0           862800      109480
SS Marauder Arawn       53400       53400       8400        25200       216560      606000
HV Marauder Balor       0           0           0           0           5600        5600

updated the quadrant dps survey data.

Arawn down dps is also high, but even that isn't higher than the Taranis' up dps.

[Sparky Sparkycorp]

Thanks for the Balor.

Off the top of my head, I cannot remember where the 5 V Crusher turrets on the Arawn are located.

From the survey, I was surprised to see the L-R variation for the Lyramekron, Lyranea and Fulmekron as I had thought they were pretty symmetrical. Is the data based on a variety of in-game results so variation in surface element survival can be expected?

[w.evans]

Is the data based on a variety of in-game results so variation in surface element survival can be expected?

Yup, collected a number of samples per ship type, and removed all but those with the highest values, and checked to make sure that those exact values occur multiple times on the log; so am pretty sure that those are undamaged dps specs, but am not absolutely sure.

[w.evans]

Ok, here's my proposed solution.

Took a look at the astrobee launcher turrets mounted on the Taranis. It launches 8 submunitions, each submunition doing 4,000 damage points. Total per launcher is 32,000 damage. In comparison, a V Launcher turret does 12,000 damage per turret, per tick, if it hits.

In working with the Balor's torps before, I know that, while adding missiles per swarm acts as a multiplier to dps OOZ, adding missiles per salvo does not alter dps OOZ. So:

modified damage per submunition to 500 from 4,000
And changed it to fire 8 groups of 8 submunitions per salvo IZ.

This will have the effect of dropping the Taranis' dps from the quadrant where Astrobee Launcher turrets are present, while maintaining its dps IZ:

Code: Select all

                        RIGHT       LEFT        FRONT       BACK        UP          DOWN
SS Marauder Taranis     41260       41260       0           0           862800      109480
SS Taranis (New)        41260       41260       0           0           190800      109480

HV Marauder Fulmekron   51280       28880       0           0           185420      185420
SS Marauder Arawn       53400       53400       8400        25200       216560      606000
HV Marauder Sucellus    45800       45800       0           0           103160      21360
HV Marauder Balor       0           0           0           0           5600        5600

Comments?

.......
edit: been thinking about this, and I think that, even with the changed astrobee turret, the balancing element that is not present here is the usage of ammo. If ammo were used, then the dps would be warranted, and limited by availability of ammo. But it isn't, so ships that use missiles in general are rather OP at the moment, thus putting the -mekron ships at a disadvantage OOZ.

However, even if ammo were a thing, astrobee turrets are way too powerful, I think. I suspect that it was intended that swarm numbers act as a divisor to damage -- have overall damage done by a turret or launcher be divided among the submunitions of its projectile. However, it acts as a multiplier.

As such, I consider this more a work-around than a fix. Will likely have to reverse this when Ego remembers the oversight, if it does prove to be an oversight. Will probably publish this as an additional supp to make it optional.

[Scoob]

Sounds good. Can an enquire why the Left/Right discrepancy on the Fulmekron? Had the ship lost turrets previously?

Scoob.

[w.evans]

Sounds good. Can an enquire why the Left/Right discrepancy on the Fulmekron? Had the ship lost turrets previously?

Don't know. This was from having the game spawn lots of Fulmekrons (turned all HV and SS capships to Fulmekrons) and polling every single one, and they all have that discrepancy. Possible that they all tend to get hit at one side before the other, but doubtful that they all sustained the exact same damage to surface elements.

[Sparky Sparkycorp]

Perhaps what we've considered as central rather than L/R gets applied preferentially one side in some cases. Not had chance to do the maths but it sounds a bit like a salvo of Astrobees, that would launch infrequently IZ, could be being counted more frequently OOZ.

[w.evans]

25.August 2015 - initial release of MOCT_supp4

Changes Astrobees such that OOZ dps is dropped by a factor of 8, but 8 times the projectiles are launched IZ. IZ dps, assuming all projectiles hit, is unchanged.
Same change to the Skunk's Astrobees.

.......
That's right, a side-effect of this is that the Skunk Astrobees are now further divided into 64 submunitions, each doing a fraction of the damage that they used to. Total damage done per salvo is not changed. Might adversely affect fps when astrobees are fired. Please report if so.

In the event that it does cause fps hiccups, however, please do bear in mind that my only recourse will be to remove the file changing the Skunk's Astrobees, and the Skunk's Astrobees will be visually and functionally different from those mounted on capital ships.

[UniTrader]

regarding the Assymetry of the Fulmekron: could it be that all sub-systems of a Ship Element are grouped under the same Quadrant as the parent? because the center Sections of the Fulmekron are aligned slightly to the right (about 10m, which is nothing you can notice in space) and so all weapons mounted there are counted towards the right quadrant even though some are actually on the left?

weapon systems affected by this would be:
4* turret_medium_pe
24* turret_small_mg
4* turret_medium_lb

which are all counted to the right but actually are on both left and right

[w.evans]

Perhaps what we've considered as central rather than L/R gets applied preferentially one side in some cases. Not had chance to do the maths but it sounds a bit like a salvo of Astrobees, that would launch infrequently IZ, could be being counted more frequently OOZ.

Possible. Haven't had the time to sit down and really do the numbers either, so been working with large patterns. Would appreciate any insight you could bring to the problem.

Particularly perplexing is the uneven dps on the -mekron ships. As you know, I'm still not all that familiar with them, but my brief jaunt with Scoob's toys made it appear like they do have more-or-less even right and left turret placements. From adjustment of astrobees affecting dps polled, and resulting OOZ numbers, it looks like the quadrant dps numbers are entirely based on actual weapon numbers. Could simply be that, while turrets are more-or-less evenly distributed among the two forks of the Fulmekron, more of the turrets on the left fork are on the left side of the fork, while more of the turrets on the right side are on the top and bottom of the fork. Not sure, though.

About central quadrant, still not sure how that's handled actually. Uni pointed out pretty early on that it's odd that some ships were reporting CCC: that is, both top and down, both left and right, and both front and back -- which is impossible. Could be that the quadrant polling is measured from a certain distance from the hull, and that when it's within that distance, no valid quadrant information is calculated. Like I said though, not sure how it's treated in that case.

edit: sorry Uni, missed your post. Possible. If so, I think would require playing with the ship macro to explore further. More your and BlackRain's department.

[Sparky Sparkycorp]

linoafett, linoafett, linoafett

[w.evans]

25.August 2015 - Miscellaneous OOZ Combat Tweaks updated to v0.24

- All damage from primary integrated weapons, integrated missile launchers and turrets set to 30% of vanilla.
- maxsize parameter set to 50. All ships bigger than 50 meters will be treated as being 50 meters big for OOZ combat calculations.
- effect of crew skill (both bonus and penalty) on OOZ combat increased.
- effect of relative speed (penalty only) on OOZ combat increased.