Please upgrade your browser for the best possible experience.

Chrome Firefox Internet Explorer
×

Nerf Mercenaries


Dr_Kid's Avatar


Dr_Kid
01.26.2013 , 02:47 AM | #121
The longer the test, the greater the disparity will be. That's why my test is ideal. Two button rotation.
Ion Pulse, Hammershot, Ion Pulse, Hammershot, Ion Pulse, Hammershot, and repeat.
Count the number of Ion Pulses until you're unable to use another Ion Pulse. Repeat two more times to account for lag.

Bounty Hunter
Flame burst, Rapid shots, Flame burst, Rapid shots, Flame burst, Rapid shots.
Count number of Flamebursts until you're unable to activate it again. Repeat twice more to account for lag.

Compare the results.

FREDDOSPWN's Avatar


FREDDOSPWN
01.26.2013 , 02:51 AM | #122
Quote: Originally Posted by PerinnAybara View Post
Actually now that I think about it, you guys are basically saying that Mercenaries get 100 heat while powertechs get 96 heat. 12*8. If they don't have any rounding it's true. If they do, then it's not.
In essence, yes. However, that is only relevant in burn phases. The main issues are:

1) Higher maximum regeneration zone.
2) Rounding not occurring.

Both of these issues create the problem. Issue 2) is prevalent in long fights, 1) is prevalent in short fights. If you combine the two? A noticeable advantage to the Bounty Hunter.

Since the tooltips are simplified for player use, we are lead to believe rounding does not occur. However, our tests are indicative that there is no rounding.

tacito's Avatar


tacito
01.26.2013 , 03:22 AM | #123
Quote: Originally Posted by Dr_Kid View Post
The longer the test, the greater the disparity will be. That's why my test is ideal. Two button rotation.
Ion Pulse, Hammershot, Ion Pulse, Hammershot, Ion Pulse, Hammershot, and repeat.
Count the number of Ion Pulses until you're unable to use another Ion Pulse. Repeat two more times to account for lag.

Bounty Hunter
Flame burst, Rapid shots, Flame burst, Rapid shots, Flame burst, Rapid shots.
Count number of Flamebursts until you're unable to activate it again. Repeat twice more to account for lag.

Compare the results.
Out of curiousity I did that, on a vanguard and powertech. Ion Pulse -> Hammer Shots vs. Flame Burst -> Rapid Shots. Until overheated/out of ammo.

Did 4 runs on the vanguard: 31, 29, 32 and 34 Ion Pulse before out of ammo.

Only did 2 runs on the powertech, because the difference is so overwhelming: 50 and 60 Flame bursts, and I wasn't even out of the maximum heat dissipation tier. Just stopped because it got so very boring.

So, while I don't actively play neither powertech nor vanguard most of the time, this changed my mind. When I first read the thread, my first thought was "People will whine about anything", but I now see this as a real concern, and want to state my support for fixing this. Not that it matters, but anyway.

yoomazir's Avatar


yoomazir
01.26.2013 , 03:26 AM | #124
I just want to have the same dmg of a commando, nerf commandos!

Macroeconomics's Avatar


Macroeconomics
01.27.2013 , 02:46 AM | #125
Quote: Originally Posted by Dr_Kid View Post
Here's where the 66.66% figure comes from.
Flameburst + Rapid shots is 3 seconds (5 Heat Regen a second)
Flameburst uses 16 Heat, and gains 15 heat (5 heat regen for 3 seconds). Net Loss: 1 Heat.

Ion Pulse uses 16.666% Ammo, and gains 15% Ammo. Net Loss 1.6666 Ammo
Vanguards lose 66.66% more Ammo for every Ion Pulse (assuming the filler is included)

Go Test it yourself for once and you'll see the results. Any random lag is going to affect both characters equally. Want to reduce randomness? Run multiple tests, average the results.
First off, by adding rapid shots you are simply subtracting from the numerator of a fraction (heat loss/time) thus making your ratio of those fractions (vanguard/merc) absurdly high. It simply doesn't help your cause when you inject math distortions like that and then trumpet the result, "Vanguards use 66.6% more resources than Mercs" which fails everyone's basic understanding of the matter. It's like claiming that wine has 10x the alcohol content of beer - if you first extract a fixed amount of alcohol from each fluid.

Secondly random lag doesn't affect both characters equally. It affects the mean (average) performance of each character equally. That is a statistics distinction which you may not be aware of. But your testing methodology is specifically vulnerable to random white noise, for reasons which I will try to explain. The basic segment of your test (FlameBurst + Rapid Shots) has almost NO measurable heat usage (1 unit). Over those two GCDs, your timing loss can easily be 0.2 seconds, which causes heat dissipation of - yes, 1 unit! Thus a common level of variance can completely disguise the very metric you are attempting to measure. That is why a test consisting of basic segments with a higher measurable heat usage, such as I used, are inherently more accurate.

Yes, you could get more accuracy by running the tests repeatedly. But using your methodology you might literally need to do it hundreds of times because the variance is so high relative to the mean of the metric you are measuring. Good luck with that.

Quote: Originally Posted by FREDDOSPWN View Post
If you do not think what Holmes did is a valid test, suggest one so that we can prove we are correct.
Sometimes, no matter how hard both people try, it is not possible for the person taking the other side of an issue from you to prove that you are correct.

Zakmonster's Avatar


Zakmonster
01.27.2013 , 04:52 AM | #126
Quote: Originally Posted by -Holmes View Post
Hello.

Thanks for providing solid and clear evidence of the disparity.

Goodbye.

yoomazir's Avatar


yoomazir
01.27.2013 , 08:29 AM | #127
Could I also have those non flashy commando attacks on my merc? Cuz when I do DFA I am easely targeted, same goeswith my tracer missiles.

Thx in advance TC.

FREDDOSPWN's Avatar


FREDDOSPWN
01.27.2013 , 09:14 AM | #128
Quote: Originally Posted by yoomazir View Post
Could I also have those non flashy commando attacks on my merc? Cuz when I do DFA I am easely targeted, same goeswith my tracer missiles.

Thx in advance TC.
Those issues have no mechanical impact whatsoever. The problems you are describing can have a range of causes:
1) Bad positioning.
2) More players playing Empire, resulting in more Mercenaries than Commandos (people are more familiar with their animations).
3) The Republic having better PvPers on your server.

Once again, this is a player related - not a game mechanics - issue.

Also, please try and include something on-topic (heat vs ammo) if you continue to post.

yoomazir's Avatar


yoomazir
01.27.2013 , 09:55 AM | #129
Quote: Originally Posted by FREDDOSPWN View Post
Those issues have no mechanical impact whatsoever.
Visual effects are important to spot a target, either you are trolling or you are blind, but anyway: nerf commandos.

FREDDOSPWN's Avatar


FREDDOSPWN
01.28.2013 , 05:19 AM | #130
Quote: Originally Posted by Macroeconomics View Post
First off, by adding rapid shots you are simply subtracting from the numerator of a fraction (heat loss/time) thus making your ratio of those fractions (vanguard/merc) absurdly high. It simply doesn't help your cause when you inject math distortions like that and then trumpet the result, "Vanguards use 66.6% more resources than Mercs" which fails everyone's basic understanding of the matter. It's like claiming that wine has 10x the alcohol content of beer - if you first extract a fixed amount of alcohol from each fluid.

Secondly random lag doesn't affect both characters equally. It affects the mean (average) performance of each character equally. That is a statistics distinction which you may not be aware of. But your testing methodology is specifically vulnerable to random white noise, for reasons which I will try to explain. The basic segment of your test (FlameBurst + Rapid Shots) has almost NO measurable heat usage (1 unit). Over those two GCDs, your timing loss can easily be 0.2 seconds, which causes heat dissipation of - yes, 1 unit! Thus a common level of variance can completely disguise the very metric you are attempting to measure. That is why a test consisting of basic segments with a higher measurable heat usage, such as I used, are inherently more accurate.

Yes, you could get more accuracy by running the tests repeatedly. But using your methodology you might literally need to do it hundreds of times because the variance is so high relative to the mean of the metric you are measuring. Good luck with that.



Sometimes, no matter how hard both people try, it is not possible for the person taking the other side of an issue from you to prove that you are correct.
I did a manual run-through of the situation to eliminate any white noise. I put it in spoiler tags to save space (there may be errors). The assumptions I made:
0-39 high heat regeneration, 40 - 79 medium regeneration, 80 - 100 low regeneration.
12 - 8 high regeneration, 8 - 3 medium regeneration, 3 - 0 low regeneration.

Spoiler


As you can see, the Trooper gets 19 rotations. The Bounty Hunter gets 33.
33 > 19.
I'll assume the difference in values (from the real-world tests) is due to the white noise. There is still a substantial difference though. Feel free to point out anything that is inconsistent.