Cyonan wrote...
Turns out the Typhoon is a liar and it doesn't shoot at 650 RPM(It's also not bugged as you thought), making its' DPS not as high.
I acknowledge about a month ago with corlist's tests that my damage testing was flawed (stupid Atlas canopy), and I reiterated that in the thread about 2 weeks ago when it popped up again. That is, unless you're talking about the ROF being bugged, in which case I'd like to hear how the gun is supposed to work -- my testing suggested that it was bugged and locked at 600/900, and that is the assumption I used for my calculations. If you have new data on the ROF, feel free to let me know.
Cyonan wrote...
PPR also pulls a higher DPS once charged, and the clip lasts significantly longer than the Talon's, meaning your burst DPS holds for much longer before it turns into sustained DPS because of reload times.
Your average burst damage is technically increasing for the duration of fire. For all times less than firing 100% of the clip, your DPS is less. It takes the entire clip to reach max average DPS. Considering that is largely irrelevant no matter how you slice it.
Cyonan wrote...
Of course those are accountable, but I wasn't talking about gun mechanics. Since I love World of Warcraft example so much...
Gods, I haven't touched WoW since 2005.
Cyonan wrote...
Every so often, before they changed the class, somebody would come along and "discover" a DPS rotation for Warriors that in theory had considerably higher DPS than what was currently widely being used in-game. Every single time when they went to test this in-game, they discovered it was a considerable DPS loss, despite what the math said. Basically, theorycrafting numbers isn't bulletproof, and will never trump in-game experience(Kind of like my signature now says).
*sigh*
Yeah, theorycrafting isn't perfect. But there's something you've neglected in a spectacular way: the ways in which theorycrafting fall short have predictable causes (generally built into the assumptions made in the theorycrafting, such as 100% accuracy) and easily-verifiable outcomes.
One cause would be bugs or inobvious mechanics, like the Typhoon. It should fire at 650RPM, no? Yet, the reality is that it fires at only 600RPM or 900RPM. This is a perturbation that is not borne out in initial calculations because it isn't immediately apparent that the function is nonstandard. I would imagine your WoW example falls into the same category: assumptions were made about the downtime between attacks that was not correct. Or perhaps an assumption was made that the player could accomplish a feat that is unreasonable. That would be equivalent to questioning assumptions about, say, reload-canceling or hitting 100% headshots. In some cases, like reload canceling, the deviation is very small and generally negligible -- less than or equal to 1 tenth of a second after practice. In other cases, like headshots, the deviation is obviously vast.
The main problem with theorycrafted numbers is not that they do not reflect ingame performance. They do so perfectly in the absence of bugs or player error. The problem is in failing to understand the actual meaning of the numbers and the assumptions that go into them. You can't snipe a Phantom from across the map with a Piranha, but the DPS isn't going to tell you that because of the assumption of 100% accuracy. You can kill many opponents in one headshot with a Javelin, but that won't show up because of the assumption of no headshots. You can reasonably estimate weapon accuracy and headshot percentage, but they will vary according to player skill. That's why we typically don't bother and just estimate it.
So what's missing? Are you getting 100% headshots with the Typhoon and none with the Talon? Are you sniping with the Hurricane these days? What is the reason that you want to claim a deviation from theory here?
Cyonan wrote...
Sustained DPS numbers only hold up if you can have sustained fire on the target. Unless you're playing a Krogan Vanguard, good luck with that one on Gold/Platinum.
Holawd.
Cyonan wrote...
Why do you think that the Claymore was the best gun for speed running prior to the Piranha showing up? It wasn't that it had the best sustained DPS, because it didn't.
Incorrect; it did have the highest sustained DPS. It was the first weapon with over 800 sustained DPS including reload cancels. Nothing else could do that at all until the Harrier and Reegar showed up. The Reegar requires too much running up to opponents and charging the gun to be good for speed runs, and the Harrier has made its way into quite a few speedruns.
Cyonan wrote...
The Arc Pistol's charge can be used on the first shot(which you'll already have charged prior to seeing the enemy), and then the rest just unloaded. The Arc Pistol's effective range also annhilates the Talon's.
That adds nothing to sustained (since you can't reload and start with a charged round) and 16.67% to maximum burst DPS, though you're taking artistic liberty with the meaning of the stat at that point (it becomes meaningless when you can't apply it except in odd circumstances where you start with a fully-loaded, charged weapon). Not going to nearly catch you up against shields and barriers, of course.
Cyonan wrote...
How nice of you to calculate the Hurricane using not reload cancelled numbers but the Talon using reload cancelled numbers.
Derp, forgot to add the RC'd reload duration on my spreadsheet. Mah b.
905/1041 are the RC'd numbers compared to Talon's 1044/1146 against shields and 696/764 vs health/armor. Conclusion doesn't change: Talon for shields, Hurricane for health/armor.
Cyonan wrote...
My Javelin X 1 shots any unit with a head on Gold, meaning time to kill is 0.25 seconds(provided I don't miss), from any range. Against an Atlas I'm also going to do more damage thanks to the piercing bug.
Show me how my Talon X can do the same or better.
You clearly missed the point. Let's see if I can be more clear:
ZOMG, teh typhoon are more damage armor, i no now nevar gonna use taylon111!11eleven
It's not relevant, and I don't care.
Retour en haut
