Talk:Fighter Stats
From PlanetsWiki
Concerning beam:
Hull Damage = ((Power*(parts modifier/100))*(Rnd*0.25+1.25))*(100/hullmass+50) + 5
Is it true and desired that any ship regardless of its size should be destroyed by 20 beam hits(assuming or armor and shields)? Or is it a missprint in the formula?
Beam Accuracy wouldn´t it be nicer to write it this way? (Fighter Accuracy)*(100-target's_evasive_rating + fighter's_attack_rating)/100
Missiles: Is hull damage from missiles the same as for Beams? Greetings--Sebastian 00:34, 3 Aug 2005 (CEST)
I haven't run the calculations, but I don't believe that Hull Damage from fighters destroys the ship at 100. The code caps the total damage to the ship at 5000. I don't know if that is the destruction point, or just to allow overflow. I don't have access to the Ship code.
There are other things that modify the Accuracy, I was going to list each on a line.
I haven't listed all of the Parts damage yet. There is a different total for Hull, Engine, HyperDrive, System, Life and Shield Generator and Weapons. They each have their own formula and Beam and Missle have seperate formula lists. Some of them are identical I think, but they are calculated and tracked seperately.
I'll try and get more data in, It is still far from complete. (Amaranthine)
I know you have not finished yet. I yust want to prevent that there´s some missunderstood that will result in faulse bug reports. I don´t want to hurry you up.
Another question I do have (I think this could be something you will mention later anyway): You write about reduced fire rate of Beams and Missiles at certains ranges and when AFC is on. Till now I thought fighters fire when they are in range and have enough energy(meaning unlimeted fire rate). By reading this I think that is not correct...perhaps I´ll just wait if the answer comes;o)
BTW: Sandcaster thing seems to be missing something, too. Cause a Fighter mit 0 Exposed system can still be shoot down only by SC.But I´ll wait again:) (Sebastian)
I thought that fighters fired whenever they were within range and had enough energy to do so as well. Above and beyond the restrictions I've listed so far, there is a final inner statement imposing yet another 5% chance of actually firing for both beams and missiles. I'll add that to the list.
The Sand Caster information I've mostly gleaned from webpages and notes, not Code (yet). So I very well could have missed something.
Also: With a hit to a ship's Soft Spot causing 500-2500 Hull Damage, I think its safe to say that the "Destruction Point" is 5000. (Amaranthine)
On Soft spot: Means that if Exposed system >= 20 every hit is a BOOM ? Looks like a suicide attack of a lot of fighters to me.. Are you sure ? (Sun)
Good catch! Yes, that is what it means though. For those fighters with such a large Soft Spot, Armor is useless against other Fighters and possibly Sand Casters (edit: Soft Spot does NOT apply to Sand Caster shots). Armor will still reduce fatalities from Point Defense. (Amaranthine)
I did some sims about exposed systems.What I got was: The numbers of hits to destroy a wing vary VERY MUCH. It goes from 8 hits to destroy the wing to 2000 hits(was a 2000 T1 Robot wing vs. 20000 T1 Rebel wing) I don´t have changed the wing size. Is there anything in the code that can explain this?
Also some thoughts of recharge rate: What you wrote does mean Fighters in little wings that have at best a low generator power do get a huge generator power boost(e.g.low numbered crystal wings) and their recharge rate is almost independend of their generator power. Thus using cheap fighters with big battery in many low numbered wings have a huge advantage over using the same number of fightes in one wing.(Same for fighters with high generator power but the effect is decreasing for higher generator power) This is also true for the T3 energy when using only one T3 in a otherwise pure and big T1 wing.
Question about fighters fire at base: For Incoming fire is the number or the power of beams relevant when calculating the incoming fire. Could you please specify this. I do think you mean the number. When meanig this you could say that you need in average (3/0,05)=60 to have half the time a change to destroy one Ioncannon or AA-gun.
Hmm perhaps I should not think so loung. My enemies might be listening:o) (Sebastian)
Doing a quick sim to compare fighter softspot. 2000 Fed T1 (soft spot 60) and 2000 Aczanny T2 (soft spot 2) need about the same numbers of hit from a SC(differs less than 10%). If you compare Fed T1 to Aczanny T1 the Aczanny T1 need far less hit to get destroyed(about 1/3 what the Fed T1) need although it has only a soft spot of 2. I assume there´s also a relationship to armor. I thought I read some day something about it. But I don´t remember any more. (Sebastian)
Reading the new target stuff (speaking only of beams for simlicity): As I understand it there´s a 5% chance that the fighter is able to lock his weapons on the enemy when the enemy is more than 100km away. In the loop there´s also a If-block that says 5% of fighters have a change to fire. And that is always the case. I think that If makes no sense, as there´s a loop that makes the fighter fiering until the batteries is empty. As I assume that happened in one Tick the 5% firing of the fighters just lenghten the loop. If a fighter is nor firing no energy is used so the loop is executed one more time for each fighter that is not shooting. Or do I get this wrong? Might you consider using "END" to mark loop end and If ends? that would make it more readable and understandable.(Sebastian) (some typo changes for better reading, no offence meant (Sun)) Hey, I linke my typos (Sebastian;o)
The first 5% (>100km) applies to the entire Fighter Type group. The other 5% applies to each individual Fighter within the group. The fighters do not continuously fire until the batteries are empty. During each attack, each fighter gets a single 5% chance to fire unless their energy runs out. I reworded some of it to try and make it clearer that the # of fighters is the main limit.
Does the code check for high guard like "if hg = 1" or "if hg > 0"? It is possible to have more than one in a wing, so I want to make sure that the combat will reflect that properly. Thank you, Magik
4 points:
- What happens with the Modifier if "Multiplied by ((100-target's_evasive_rating + fighter's_attack_rating)/100)" at the Beam vs Ships and Missile vs Ship if it is less then 0. Can happen for Aczanny ships (with their engine-evasive-Bonus) or maybe Fed ships with ET and maybe others to, that the target's_evasive_rating > 100 + fighter's_attack_rating, then the result is -x/100. What do then happen, special as it is a multiplier and the whole term get to be minus. If such a thing happens, then the Holo Decoys higher the hit probability? Mysterious for me. So do the fighter never hit or do such an high evasive not help against fighter fire?
- As we are at the Aczanny, at which point of the Accuracy formulas do the Aczanny ECM work? Like Holo Decoys at the end, or before.
- Miss a section about the sensor profiles of fighters, special with the new rules to it (host 21x). And maybe some notes how it works.
- With the new sensor profile for fighters, how is it with the Birdmen Figher, as they have the Special "Cloaked Fighters. Birdmen Fighters are more difficult to detect then normal fighters." And miss this under Racial Modifiers.
JoSch
from Space_Combat_-_Fighter_Wings:
If Aczanny ECM Jammer active: rOdds reduced by 15 Evasion Modifier = (100 – target’s evasive mod + fighter’s attack mod) / 100 Minimum of 0.1
(both in Beam vs. Ship and Missile vs. Ship)
Sensor profile: Sensor Profile should be updated, too.
Birdman fighters: see Sensor Profile
Jochen 15:41, 12 December 2007 (CET)
Thanks for the infos.
What do the reduced mean, *0,85 or -15. Saw often the "reduced" meant as % but as I understand "reduced by 15" it means -15 normally.
If I understand it right, more Ship Evasive as (100 + Fighter's attack mod -10) don't help the ship to avoid incoming fire from wings. Then IMHO that should be mentioned here too at the Fighter Stats page if there are written things like the above formulas which are so "misleading".
JoSch
