214 réponses à ce sujet

[DarkOrgasm]

How long does it take to kill an Atlas, Geth Prime, and Banshee on Platinum with your test setups?

[Eckswhyzed]

While I'm on my phone: we think the Typhoon's ROF is tied to framerate:

Destroyer: 650RPM x 2 x 1.35 devastator mode x 1.075 difficulty game speed modifier = 1886 RPM, truncated to 1800 RPM.

GI: 650RPM x 2 x 1.15 HM x 1.075 game speed = 1607 RPM rounded down to 1200 RPM

...is what we have observed. Note that all the Destroyer shots have been registering damage.

[Golvellius]

Who said it had armor penetration?
You always have to mod it with that and either the stability or damage booster.
I prefer damage booster and put stability on gear.

[MikeSlackenerny]

Eckswhyzed wrote...

While I'm on my phone: we think the Typhoon's ROF is tied to framerate:

Destroyer: 650RPM x 2 x 1.35 devastator mode x 1.075 difficulty game speed modifier = 1886 RPM, truncated to 1800 RPM.

GI: 650RPM x 2 x 1.15 HM x 1.075 game speed = 1607 RPM rounded down to 1200 RPM

...is what we have observed. Note that all the Destroyer shots have been registering damage.

This is interesting, as it'd mean the stated RPM is refering to actual "shot" per min, not the nominal "round" per min. Since you mentioned this I dug a little bit and found this:

social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/343/index/13726258/7

It seems that Gamemako couldn't be sure about whether 650 refers to "shot" per min or "round" per min at the time he wrote that. He also suggested the theory of what two-ammo shop could mean in terms of applying weapon bonus. The more I learn about this the more I think about why did Bioware do this two-ammo thing anyway?

If you have any update please let me know. I think this issue is quite significant since as I said in an earlier post on this thread it could mean the DPS becoming halved of what it is if the weapon is not shooting two ammos per shot.

Modifié par MikeSlackenerny, 22 août 2012 - 12:58 .

[peddroelm]

MikeSlackenerny wrote...

If you have any update please let me know. I think this issue is quite significant since as I said in an earlier post on this thread it could mean the DPS becoming halved than if the weapon is not shooting two ammo.

Accumulated  damage per clip is affected by how many ammo per shot the weapon uses ... (effective clip size)

DPS ( damage per second while the weapon has ammo to fire)  - Depends on  Damage per shot and weapon ROF (ammo clip size, or number or ammo used per shot irrelevant )

Modifié par peddroelmz, 22 août 2012 - 01:09 .

[ryoldschool]

Thanks for this thread, I'll try the AP mod now. Please note that before the 2nd nerf the typhoon 4 worked very well without an AP mod.

[MikeSlackenerny]

I had a look at Gamemako's video and noticed he/she emptied the entire clip in roughly 7s on a devastator class. Judging from this, it would point to 650 referring to shot per min.

Now the Typhoon's a lot more respectable at least on paper.

Modifié par MikeSlackenerny, 22 août 2012 - 01:12 .

[GGW KillerTiger]

The Typhoon got over nerfed. I mean it's an ultra-rare weapon that now feels like it's only as strong as a rare weapon so they either need to buff it slightly, remove the ramp up and have it fire full RoF and damage at all times, or change the rarity to Rare.

[MikeSlackenerny]

peddroelmz wrote...

MikeSlackenerny wrote...

If you have any update please let me know. I think this issue is quite significant since as I said in an earlier post on this thread it could mean the DPS becoming halved than if the weapon is not shooting two ammo.

Accumulated  damage per clip is affected by how many ammo per shot the weapon uses ... (effective clip size)

DPS ( damage per second while the weapon has ammo to fire)  - Depends on  Damage per shot and weapon ROF (ammo clip size, or number or ammo used per shot irrelevant )

It all depends on if the RoF refers to round per min or shot per min. In the video the magazine size is 214 which if emptied in 7s I can say its RoF is 1800 rounds per min, not 650. Thankfully, the Typhoon is shooting at 650 shots per min.

Modifié par MikeSlackenerny, 22 août 2012 - 01:21 .

[ExpiredLifetime]

xcrunr1647 wrote...

jrod512ATX wrote...

Yeah I was under the assumption it had "built-in" armor piercing ability. But the only thing I ever bothered trying it on was a Guardian.

Armor piercing and armor negation are not the same thing.

Armor piercing allows you to punch through objects, such as some pieces of cover and Guardian shields, whereas armor negation reduces the damage penalty that the armor does to each shot, like so:

(These are random numbers used for simplicity as an example, not take from anything in-game)

Let's say my Widow does 1000 damage per shot. A Brute with armor that reduces weapon damage by 75% is only going to take 250 damage per shot.

However, if you equip the piercing mod, you then "ignore 65% of an armored target's defenses" iirc...which would mean that its armor would reduce your weapon's damage by only 10%, taking 900 damage per shot.

Make sense?

That's why I chuckle when people call me a noob for using the piercing mod on my Widow..."it has innate piercing ability bro, use ammo mod!!1!"...I then proceed to chuckle and wreck everything with my SI. To the best of my knowledge, the Widow has only innate piercing, not negation...and if it does, I believe it must stack with the negation from the piercing mod, because I definitely do more damage when I have it equipped.

Uh, armor is a flat 50 damage reduction on Gold and Platinum.
On extremely hard hitting weapons, you're better off skipping the piercing mod. If you do 3000 damage with a single shot, you only lose 50 of it to armor.
With a piercing mod, you lose 17.5 damage.
Is the extra 32.5 damage really worth having roughly half the ammo?

[Frostmanus]

OK, sorry to post this here, but if i have Typhoon X equipped with the level 5 assault rifle and level 3 assault rifle amp gear along with armor piercing module V, extended magazine and Armor ammo IV, would that be more effective than using incindiary ammo IV or even warp ammo IV. Can you get me the link to "memoriser" application, which records the values?

Thanks,

[Tonymac]

kmmd60 wrote...

Thank you for a good proof. That's explain why many players consider the typhoon to be a "bad" gun. Piercing without armor reduction, BW got us fooled again.

pre-nerf it did not matter - it would eat bosses for breakfast,

Now people are struggling to find good in the gun.  They waste their time.  The gun nis not good - in fact, it is not worth having at all.

[corlist]

DarkOrgasm wrote...

How long does it take to kill an Atlas, Geth Prime, and Banshee on Platinum with your test setups?

*edit* I have forgot to include devastator mode magazine bonus to the calculation and I can't be bothered to include it ATM. Just reduce some time from the final results

I have no idea if the ROF of the Typhoon is increased continuously over 2 seconds or if the max ROF is even 650. The tests do not encompass that.

Based on someone called Veramocor (http://social.biowar.../index/13317727), I can provide the following values.

N7 Destroyer Typhoon I
Typhoon I
Barrel V (25%)
Thermal V
Devastator Mode (40%)
Passives (27.5%)
AR Rail III (30%)
AR Gear V (15%)
---
ROF (35%)
---
AP Ammo III (30% base, 70% armor reduction)

1.75 seconds for first 12 ammo used
7.753 seconds for remaining 168 ammo used
1.33 seconds for reload cancel

Damage per cool shot (armor)
(55.5 * 0.3) + (((55.5 * (1 + 0.25 + 0.3 + 0.275 + 0.3 + 0.15)) - (50 * (1 - 0.7))) * 1.5) = 166.89375

Damage per cool shot (shields/barriers)
(((55.5 * (1 + 0.25 + 0.3 + 0.275 + 0.3 + 0.15)) * 1.5) = 189.39375 (rounded up to 190)

Damage per hot shot (armor)
(55.5 * 1.5 * 0.3) + (((55.5 * 1.5 * (1 + 0.25 + 0.3 + 0.275 + 0.3 + 0.15)) - (50 * (1 - 0.7))) * 1.5) = 286.5656

Damage per hot shot (shields/barriers)
(((55.5 * 1.5 * (1 + 0.25 + 0.3 + 0.275 + 0.3 + 0.15)) * 1.5) = 284.090625 (rounded up to 285)

---

Gold armor sustained DPS
4 cool shots
166.89375 * 4 = 684.225

88 hot shots
286.5656 * 88 = 25,217.7728

total damage per clip = 25,901.9978
Avg sustained DPS per clip = 2,391.027 * 1.35 (DM ROF) * 1.075 (timescale)
3,469.977 (an approximation at best)

Gold shields/barriers sustained DPS

4 cool shots
190 * 4 = 760

88 hot shots
285 * 88 = 25,080

total damage per clip = 25,840
Avg sustained DPS per clip = 2,385.304 * 1.35 (DM ROF) * 1.075 (timescale)
3,461.672 (an approximation at best)

---
*Note that all these are ESTIMATE values, feel free to provide better calculations

Targets (Platinum)
Atlas
armor 27422
27422 / 3,469.977 = 7.902 sec to deplete
shields 27422
27422 / 3,461.672 = 7.921 sec to deplete
Time to kill: 15.823 sec

Banshee
armor 21937
21937 / 3,469.977 = 6.322 sec to deplete
barriers 13162
13162 / 3,461.672 = 3.802 sec to deplete
Time to kill: 10.124 sec

Geth Prime
armor 21937
21937 / 3,469.977 = 6.322 sec to deplete
shields 15356
15356 / 3,461.672 = 4.436 sec to deplete
Time to kill: 10.758 sec

based on Typhoon I

Modifié par corlist, 22 août 2012 - 02:17 .

[Gamemako]

I don't disagree about armor negation or cool shots -- they appear to be about correct according to my testing -- but your assignment of "correct" function to heated shots is not consistent with data. That is, it is getting more damage than expected no matter how you calculate it. You can round every number up and still find that more damage was dealt than expected.

//EDIT: To clarify, my testing suggests that enemy armor damage reduction is GREATER against the Typhoon than against other weapons, meaning that either some bunus is applied to enemy DR or the multipliers are post-DR.

I'll reproduce my notes from the MQE test I ran recently. Ran a test with a 0% character as well, but haven't run the numbers yet.

MQE
5% class bonus
NO OTHER GEAR
AT ALL
Typhoon III

Start from regen (35% of shields)
no ramp-up shots
unbuffed shots to break: 68
rem: 4900
per-shot: 72.058823529411764705882352941176
expected: 1.05*1.5*46.866666666666666666666666666667 = 73.815
slightly below expected, but very possible

from regen again, full-auto shooting
assume first 4 shots act as expected
first 4 damage: 295.26
rem: 4604.74
remaining in clip at break: 22
double-cost shots to break: 37
per-shot damage: 124.45243243243243243243243243243
expected: 73.815*1.5 = 110.7225

NOPE.

going back to initial run
2 clips left him at 2 bars
last clip breaks at 76 left in clip

assume first 4 work as expected x3: 885.78
rem: 13114.22
shots delivered: 106
damage per shot: 123.72

consistent with above
inconsistent with expected

On per-ammo basis, damage is half that, which precludes a 1.5x anything.

base ratio (per-shot basis, first test): 2.6398293029871977240398292842117
base ratio (per-shot basis, regen test): 2.6554573065241628541770789281457

1.5*1.05*1.5 = 2.3625
1.5*1.05*(1.5+1.05) = 2.44125
(1.5*1.05*1.5)^1.05 = 2.4662687954870727991579282750879
1.5*1.5*1.05*1.05 = 2.480625

I have a dozen of these. No clear answer emerges. The damage for hot shots involves more than simply the base modifiers (1.5x ramp-up, 1.5x protection, additive).

Modifié par Gamemako, 22 août 2012 - 02:44 .

[corlist]

With regards to that, I have no answer as those tests are done on shields. I did several 4c + 88h shots against an altas and received vastly different total damage results many many times.

When I did the tests against armor (of a ravager) the results were always consistent with the calculations.

Many factors could come into play, weak points, 2x atlas piecing bugs or even distance. Until we have concrete and detailed testing of all of these factors, whatever we can do is just guesswork.

[TMB903]

Thanks for taking the time to research and post this OP...I only periodically use the Typhoon for fun now

[Pedactor]

Great thread.

BioWare, this gun is terrible now. The PPR is better against bosses and Revenant is arguably as good on a Destroyer and better against mooks.

[corlist]

EvanKester wrote...

Hmm, so what does that "max damage reduction" value mean? It's 0.5f, if that helps. That's what everybody thought was innate piercing.

Could it be related to the apparent penalty for firing at range?

Perhaps so, I guess it's time for long distance shot testing. I doubt there will be any conclusive results, however.

[peddroelm]

Gamemako wrote...

I don't disagree about armor negation or cool shots -- they appear to be about correct according to my testing -- but your assignment of "correct" function to heated shots is not consistent with data. That is, it is getting more damage than expected no matter how you calculate it. You can round every number up and still find that more damage was dealt than expected.
...
.

Stop trying to make sense of your tests vs Shields .. Don't know what is involved in their rounding shields&barriers to integer values after each applied damage effect but it causes  Automatic weapons TO NOT DO CONSISTANT REPETABLE DAMAGE VS SHIELDS or BARRIERS  suitable for testing and reverse engineering ...

Repeat a test ten times in SIMILAR CODITIONS - HP LEFT ON TARGET WILL NOT BE THE SAME ... 
This makes test data vs shields for automatic weapons or DOT effect mostly useless for reverse engineering purposes .. There is random involved ... Not a typhoon issue .. All multiple shot weapons & DOT effects are affected by it ...

-------
Damage vs Health & Armor is not rounded (touched) in any way  ...Run a test 100 times - 100 times the same result down to 8+ decimals... This is stuff we can work with  .. Making them ideal for reverse engineering purposes .. If you have any such test results (vs armor) - applying corlist here derived formula should explain them perfectly ..



 

[NuclearTech76]

corlist wrote...

With regards to that, I have no answer as those tests are done on shields. I did several 4c + 88h shots against an altas and received vastly different total damage results many many times.

When I did the tests against armor (of a ravager) the results were always consistent with the calculations.

Many factors could come into play, weak points, 2x atlas piecing bugs or even distance. Until we have concrete and detailed testing of all of these factors, whatever we can do is just guesswork.

Weapons like the Javelin and Widow used to deal double damage if shot through the cockpit, could be the typhoon still has this effect? IDK, just a thought.

[corlist]

NuclearTech76 wrote...

corlist wrote...

With regards to that, I have no answer as those tests are done on shields. I did several 4c + 88h shots against an altas and received vastly different total damage results many many times.

When I did the tests against armor (of a ravager) the results were always consistent with the calculations.

Many factors could come into play, weak points, 2x atlas piecing bugs or even distance. Until we have concrete and detailed testing of all of these factors, whatever we can do is just guesswork.

Weapons like the Javelin and Widow used to deal double damage if shot through the cockpit, could be the typhoon still has this effect? IDK, just a thought.

The Typhoon only has a 0.25m penetration, which is much less than anything which can be offered by a piercing mod. It is nonetheless a hitscan weapon - if the Typhoon can do 2x damage on piercing an Atlas's canopy, any other hitscan weapon should be able to do 1.4x - 1.6x damage with a piercing mod.

[Gamemako]

peddro: I have found consistent results against shields. Regardless, I have been re-running armor numbers:

With AP mod, 1.225x additive, Turian Sentinel:

9 bars of armor: 11646
ammo to kill: 200
total shots: 104
unbuffed: 8
buffed: 96
expected unbuffed per-shot: 86.1175 - 10.5 = 75.6175
expected unbuffed total: 604.94
expected buffed per-shot: 129.17625-10.5 = 118.67625
expected buffed total: 11392.92
expected total: 11997.86

A little high but very possible, right? Now,

No AP mod, 1.275x multi, N7 Destroyer

armor DR:

19 unbuffed
102 buffed
expected unbuffed: 89.6325 - 30 = 59.6325
expected buffed: 134.44875 - 30 = 104.44875
total expected: 11786.79
full Atlas armor: 12940
difference: 1153.21
per-hit DR decrease: 11.305980392156862745098039215686

No AP mod, 1.425x additive, N7 Destroyer, Devastator Mode:

5x unbuffed @ 100.1775 - 30 = 70.1775
91x buffed @ 150.26625 - 30 = 120.26625
total: 11295.11625
Also too little to kill.
difference: 1644.88375
per-hit difference: 17.134205729166666666666666666667

Not consistent with hypothesis. This is what I've been dealing with over and over.

Modifié par Gamemako, 22 août 2012 - 03:51 .

[CmnDwnWrkn]

peddroelmz wrote...

MikeSlackenerny wrote...

And the Revenant you can use on a lot more classes since its weight is much more manageable.

Clearly they don't intendt to make 1 gun best for all clases ... Ideally each weapon should have at least a small niche of applications (class - gameplay style combination) ...  If Typhoon was >>> Revenant (for example) in all imaginable situations then what would be revenants reason to exist as a weapon ?

The Revenant's reason for existence would be that it's a rare weapon, and thus much, much easier to unlock and level-up than Ultra-Rares.  Ultra-Rare weapons SHOULD be better than similar rare weapons.  I don't agree with this notion that Ultra-Rare weapons should be balanced to be on par with Rare weapons.  What is the incentive to unlock Ultra-Rares in that case?

[corlist]

Gamemako wrote...

peddro: I have found consistent results against shields. Regardless, I have been re-running armor numbers:

With AP mod, 1.225x additive, Turian Sentinel:

9 bars of armor: 11646
ammo to kill: 200
total shots: 104
unbuffed: 8
buffed: 96
expected unbuffed per-shot: 86.1175 - 10.5 = 75.6175
expected unbuffed total: 604.94
expected buffed per-shot: 129.17625-10.5 = 118.67625
expected buffed total: 11392.92
expected total: 11997.86

A little high but very possible, right? Now,

No AP mod, 1.275x multi, N7 Destroyer

armor DR:

19 unbuffed
102 buffed
expected unbuffed: 89.6325 - 30 = 59.6325
expected buffed: 134.44875 - 30 = 104.44875
total expected: 11786.79
full Atlas armor: 12940
difference: 1153.21
per-hit DR decrease: 11.305980392156862745098039215686

No AP mod, 1.425x additive, N7 Destroyer, Devastator Mode:

5x unbuffed @ 100.1775 - 30 = 70.1775
91x buffed @ 150.26625 - 30 = 120.26625
total: 11295.11625
Also too little to kill.
difference: 1644.88375
per-hit difference: 17.134205729166666666666666666667

Not consistent with hypothesis. This is what I've been dealing with over and over.

Your theory is that the armor DR is applied after the protection damage bonus. That would have been inconsistent with single unbuffed shots against armor.

From OP
Observed cool shot damage
5400 - 5376.549805 = 23.450195

Calculation
(45.6333 - 30) * 1.5 = 23.44995

[peddroelm]

corlist wrote...
Your theory is that the armor DR is applied after the protection damage bonus. That would have been inconsistent with single unbuffed shots against armor.

From OP
Observed cool shot damage
5400 - 5376.549805 = 23.450195

Calculation
(45.6333 - 30) * 1.5 = 23.44995

He claims your formula doesn't work .. But he's not appyling it ..
Also not sure he takes into account the fact that the typhoon eats 2 ammo per hot shot ...


Test I
Assuming Typhoon II 46.8666 base damage 
Assuming AP mod V 65% armor piercing
Assuming 22.5% WD from passive
Assuming Silver difficulty  (30 Armor DR)


expected unbuffed per-shot: ((46.8666 * 1.22500) - (30 * (1 - 0.65))) * 1.5 = 70.3673  


Conclusion you did not apply corlists shown weapon damage formula corectly ...
moving on 

expected buffed per-shot: ((46.8666 * 1.5 * 1.22500) - (30 * (1 - 0.65))) * 1.5 = 113.4260

Again you didn't seem to apply the weapon damage formula corectly ...


Here I'm abit confused - You knew that the Typhoon eats 2 ammo per hot shot ..So total clip damage calculation should be ..

(70.3673 * 8) + (113.42600 * (96 / 2)) = 6007.3864 

Modifié par peddroelmz, 22 août 2012 - 04:13 .