The formulas seem right to me.
In the case of a peregrine, it says you need 1400 burst to cap it. Any number over that 1400 is going to report as negative, but it doesn't matter because of the hardcap.
Or am I way off base?
Printable View
The formulas seem right to me.
In the case of a peregrine, it says you need 1400 burst to cap it. Any number over that 1400 is going to report as negative, but it doesn't matter because of the hardcap.
Or am I way off base?
Well, what we do is that if we see a negative number we consider it as capped.
It's just not correct..
I might have to do a rewrite considering all the new stuff that has come in the patches recently. Not too sure if I have the original that Tepa sent me for easier editing, but that doesn't mean it's not too hard to just copy and reformat everything all nice and neat.
I added weapons earlier this year. Forgot to stick the neutrino flash in, though.
I'm waiting on the rebalance to do updates beyond just weapons, but if you want to make changes I'll be glad to put them up.
Well, if nothing core has changed too much, aside from a few items, then yeah, the re-write can wait.
Btw, Spart....good to see u back.
Envy of the Xan
When paired with a Rhat'ata Gun, this is the top PvM DD gun for soldiers. The gun is capable of burst and full auto attacks, though the burst refresh only hits 11s at 2425 full auto skill - no small feat for many soldiers. While not a bad PvP weapon, your attack rating will be far lower than an assault rifle soldier and you should not build a PvP character around it.
Request to have the bolded part removed. I, as well as many soldiers, can attest to how untrue this is.
Changed the second half of the bolded part.
Also, once rebalance hits, not being to FA and AS may make the Envy have very limited appeal in PvP.
You can force any of these formulas to spit out a negative number if you want. However, any number lower than the hardcap always equals the hardcap.
well, I didn't really go into the numbers, its just that when I was looking at this guide, and then I went to AOFroob to see the discussion behind the formula you posted, I just noticed that the formula that accomplice posted was different with a + instead of a -(as seen in the guide).
Not saying which formula is more correct or whether negative numbers are more correct than positive numbers, just saying that if the guide is going to quote Accomplice's formulae, might as well make it an accurate quote.
From Accomplice's post on AOFroob
----------------
R = burst recharge
a = weapon attack speed
r = weapon recharge speed
C = weapon burst cycle
b = player burst skill
R = floor((20 x r) + (C / 100) - (b / 25) + a)
cap = round(8 + a)
capskill = floor(((20 x r) + (C / 100) - 8) * 25)
----------------
You're reading the formula wrong.
Again, as it's written in Tepamina's guide, you'd have a formula of
Burst Skill = floor(((20 x 1.2) - (4000 / 100) - 8) *25)
Solving this:
Lemme remind you that this formula is for ascertaining how much Burst is required to cap at 9 seconds, not the current Burst recharge timer. According to the formula in Tep's guide, the correct amount of Burst to cap a Peregrine is -600, which is horribly wrong.Code:((20 x 1.2) - 40 - 8) * 25
........(24 - 40 - 8) * 25
..................-24 * 25
.....................-600
With the formula edited correctly, you get:
1400 Burst to cap it. :)Code:((20 x 1.2) + 40 - 8) * 25
........(24 + 40 - 8) * 25
...................56 * 25
......................1400
Okay, I got you now. I'll fix it.
Two minor things, regarding IP, that aren't completely accurate.
The guide implies that neither abilities or map-nav can be reset. While that is true for individual resets, it isn't true for full IPR.
I was doing some calcs with Weapon Specials and ran into an anomaly with the Fling Shot Recharge Times so hunted around for further references and came across your guide, which is great btw.
I found all of the Fling Shot 'numbers' that are floating around calculate a recharge time of 7 secs, this includes the ones in this guide, whereas the cap is 6 secs.
Yes, I waffle. :D
QL200 BigBurger - 1.3 Attack
Skill needed to cap:
Skill = [ (Wep Attack time x 16) - 7 ] x 100
Skill = [ (1.3 x 16) - 7 ] x 100
Skill = 1380
Skill = (1600 x Wep Attack Time) - 700
Skill = (1600 x 1.3) - 700
Skill = 1380
Calc Recharge - 1380 skill for 6 second cycle ...so we believe :p
RechargeTime = (Attack x 16) - FlingSkill / 100
RechargeTime = (1.3 x 16) - 1380 / 100
RechargeTime = 7.0
...and
QL300 Pew'her - 1.2 Attack
Skill needed to cap:
Skill = [ (Wep Attack time x 16) - 7 ] x 100
Skill = [ (1.3 x 16) - 7 ] x 100
Skill = 1220
Skill = (1600 x Wep Attack Time) - 700
Skill = (1600 x 1.3) - 700
Skill = 1220
Calc Recharge - 1220 skill for 6 second cycle ...so we believe :p
RechargeTime = (Attack x 16) - FlingSkill / 100
RechargeTime = (1.2 x 16) - 1220 / 100
RechargeTime = 7.0
Over the years the Soldier forums seemed to of pumped out the most info about Weapon Specials so was wondering what you thought about this? :D
Well I've always thought that fling shot cap was 6s + weapon attack time. So if calcs always count towards 7s, they might be a bit off, up and down.
it is 6 seconds + weap attack speed. Since AO doesn't make it where it benefits you from having a slower weapon, it is always assumed that you'll be running with a 1 (or a bit higher, but never 2+) s attack speed weapon.
So in effect we should be expressing it as...
XXXX FS skill for 7 second cycle
...with the +Attack accounted for as we do with FA / Burst
XXXX FA skill for 11 second cycle
XXXX Burst skill for 9 second cycle
Meaning that all the people who think they have a 6 sec Fling are....wrong? :p ...because its already accepted (maybe) that min fling cap is 6 sec + min 1 (from attack speed).
If the saying '6 sec fling' is correct (coz the +Attack is ignored) then wouldn't that mean FA would be 10 secs and Burst 8 secs? ...to maintain consistency.
I know theres terms / formulae are almost 'set in stone', but somewhere something isn't being expressed correctly or clearly...or so I believe. :D
Yes, you are correct in that Stig in that we should probably express it that way, though if people want to experiment with weapons that aren't the standard 1s Attk, or if AO suddenly goes backwards and slower weapon speeds mean much more powerful weapons, then it would be best to keep it at the hard cap + attack speed. IF one of the profs wouldn't mind rewriting the specials so that they are uniform in either assumed caps (7/9/11) or expressed as cap + attack speed, it would be appreciated.