&#×%$& ing garbage mobile version of the forums ate my painstakingly written reply. God I hate mobile.
Anyway. Reply 2.0
So I found the vid. Apparently my adblocker browser wasn't letting the embedded vid display. My first impression is that it all seems legit, within the constraints of the shooting range.
Correct me if I get anything wrong here:
- W&H 2pc had a high hit of 543k at 5 stacks of strained.
- Fox's had a high of 555k also at 5 sacks of strained.
- Sawyers at full stacks had over 600k high.
What I noticed was that the invulnerable target did not have armor to let the 2pc W&H take advantage of it's brand bonus. Meaning it likely would have performed better against an armored target.
Also, do we know if the shooting range targets count as out of cover?
Anyway, as far as I can tell it seems to me that in terms of potential damage, Sawyers is the clear winner here. However, due to RNG and the rate of crit, I think that the point about long-term absolute damage output needing a much larger sample size to correctly compare is valid as well.
Sawyers won't have as much crit as either of the other two, and in the field you won't always be able to maintain full stacks. Then again, W&H won't always be against armored targets, and Fox's wont always hit targets OOC.
So I wonder all of this will wash out over the long term.
I'll try to get some good footage of various tests myself. I don't have the exact same gear as you, but I should be able to come close.
I'd considered that too, so I ran the next three tests using an invulnerable elite which is armoured. Same outcome though in that in the build shown in the video(which I think ought to be perfectly clear to a vet) Fox's performs the worst. Sawyer's were way out in front but I don't use them because I play that guy run and gun. I have Sawyer's in my M1A build though as I personally think they make more sense in that build and they certainly get more damage -- not always a goal I'm aiming for.Originally Posted by Sircowdog1 Go to original post
We know the range is unreliable and has hit detection issues, we know that this also occurs in-game and we know of many many bugs that affect damage etc etc. That's why I only let the math speak to a degree rather than letting it be final.
Wouldn't using Fox's have better results against Chungas and Dogs? Or did we determine that those actually don't count as OOC?Originally Posted by RichardOshea Go to original post
Really though, I think my initial instincts of it coming down to personal playstyle were correct, as long as the rest of the build is optimized.
What i mean is just because it says you have 60% CHC & 200% CHD does not mean because you have that it will give you a 100% correct calculation, give or take it maybe 10-20k out in the real game, like i said this game is heavy on stats and there is going to be room for error.Originally Posted by CategoryTheory Go to original post
Oh and trust me, i have played the game long enough to not misinterpret a shot doing no damage, as for evidence i gave up long ago doing that as it got me nowhere, i didn't do it as evidence for people on this forum, why should i? they ain't going to fix things and neither did Ubi....things get fixed when it effects players by the 1,000's or it's a exploit.
Couple of videos i made and to this day now it still happens:
Please don't mention the hold to move out of cover option in game settings, that's an option not a fix.
Back in the day when you could pretty much spam Blinder Firefly (before the nerf) i was running a full skill build based around Blinder Firefly, so i was using that skill about 95% of my time whilst playing, the other 5% was shooting a bullet to trigger a talent so my Dps was minimal with my weapon but yet i done the most kills.....not sure what part ain't sinking in.
I guess you'd need to bring the specialisation into consideration too -- LLP is not the only reason to use technician. So you'd gain, or not, that additional damage to dogs. I'm unsure of a chunga's class too but I could test that easily enough in the open world as you often find a lone chunga out and about. It was a long while ago now but I think I'm correct in saying that the devs went on record stating that they did not want Fox's Prayer to be a universal BiS and rebalanced it with that in mind. From that alone I think we can say they are not universal BiS.Originally Posted by Sircowdog1 Go to original post
I couldn't agree more with that statement. Wear what you want, play how you want and afford others the same courtesy.Originally Posted by Sircowdog1 Go to original post
Well, lets keep the discussion to figuring out if the DOOC works on them first before discussing build options.Originally Posted by RichardOshea Go to original post
I was thinking more along the lines of building to shore up your weaknesses. If you have problems with rushers, as CategoryTheory has mentioned, then spec for DOOC. If you like sitting back in a more secure position and fighting at mid to long range, then Sawyers. If you like run-n-gun, then use W&H.Originally Posted by RichardOshea Go to original post
The name of the game appears to me to be specializing in different areas of effectiveness, and not "One gearing to rule them all".
I don't even recall if I pointed that out. I have pointed out the NON-crit difference at least three times now, and you refuse to address it.Originally Posted by RichardOshea Go to original post
You also continue to refuse to give a full account of your build. (Just write the darn thing down and post it here; you have examples of how to do this earlier in the thread.)
You really look like you're hiding something here.
Not really, no. You've done a few experiments with confounding factors and refused to analyze what's going on, and why you're getting different results from what you would be getting in any of the builds I've described. The most likely cause is just that your builds are not the ones I've described, differing in some important way. You refuse to investigate what that difference is. You refuse to calculate, using the easy methods I've shown you at least twice in detail, what the build you think you have should be producing. You refuse even to fully describe your build. This is not analysis; this is just mucking about trying to avoid real analysis.I've done a sizeable amount of analysing this.
Well, I'm no longer totally clear on what videos people are watching here (which is why I prefer just to write things down), but at least one observer of one of your videos seems to see that Fox is not the worst:Originally Posted by RichardOshea Go to original post
Is not 555k better than 543k? The results listed above are in the general range of what I'd expect to see, and the sort of thing my calculations produce.Originally Posted by Sircowdog1 Go to original post
What's the advantage of W&H for run-n-gun if it does less damage, per above? I would think that in run-n-gun you'd be seeing more enemies OOC (because you're pushing them to move around) so it wouldn't be better damage against targets in cover, would it?Originally Posted by Sircowdog1 Go to original post
I can't comment on CHC; I've not felt it worthwhile to record a lot of video and analyze it hit by hit to determine what it really is in-game compared to the nominal value.Originally Posted by Riflemania Go to original post
But CHD? I've many times calculated what the damage from a crit should be for a given CHD and compared it to the firing range, and I've never found any disagreement there. I see no reason that this would ever be 10-20k out, since it's a very straightfoward calculation involving clear figures and no RNG. Do you have any examples where you've seen a difference and carefully confirmed that it really does differ from what the build is calculated to produce? (It's easy to make errors here by missing something in the build that the computer didn't miss.)
As for your other comments, I have no idea how you were getting kills by blinding but not shooting enemies, or what either that or turrets have to do with calculating the damage done by a build with and without Fox's Prayer. If your point is that there is wonkyness in the game, sure, there is. That does not mean that everything in the game is wonky. I am looking at what is pretty clearly one of the non-wonky things: nobody has yet shown me in-game results that don't match my calculations. (Noting here that my calculations do not produce a valid result if you leave out parts of the build.)
Then you're not paying close enough attention as I have already stated why, and that your assertion about strained was correct and how I have gone on to repeat the tests in multiple formats yada yada yada. The build is in the video and you get to see all of its uncomplicated aspects easily enough so your criticism here is weaksauce. Look at the damned video it's all there in front of your eyes.Originally Posted by CategoryTheory Go to original post
You are wrong, so get over it already.
Ah, I see what you were getting at now. Sure you deploy whatever methods you find successful to deal with whatever it is causing you issues. I find that tends to change from map to map and even moment to moment though so I usually build with four guidelines in mind: Firepower, Mobilty, Survivability and Useability. There's a shotty in all my loadouts and there always has been since day one and that's my rusher solution (Sweet Dreams is great for that until it's an Elite but 1.5m pump pump does the trick anyway).Originally Posted by Sircowdog1 Go to original post
One gear to rule them allyeah I'd call nonsense on anyone who claimed that. I'll generally switch loadouts at least three times throughout a mission simply because some builds work better than others in the same environment. I try to be flexible throughout a mission and if whatever the group composition is isn't working I can switch around until it does start working. Legendaries would probably be the only exception to that as I'll pick a role and stick to it for those.
*edit except that AR guy. He's the only one without a shotty because he doesn't need it really as it's able to one clip a named elite in heroic.