How Beam Dissipation Works

Admiral Sparky · February 13, 2004, 03:08

At point blank range, and at a distance of up to 3 squares, a normal mount beam weapon will do damage equal to the second of its two numbers (I still have to figure out what the first number does). Thus, a Laser Cannon would do 4 damage, and a Death Ray will do 100. The first three squares beyond that, and every subsequent 3 squares, will steal 10% of the beam's damage, except for the last 3 squares (range 22-24), which will only take 1/2 as much (5%). Thus, a normal mount beam weapon has a maximum range of 24 squares, at which it does 35% of its maximum damage.

Heavy Mount weapons lose the same amount of damage, but they lose it every 6 squares instead of every 3, and they get the first 9 squares "free" instead of the first 3. Also, the exact number of damage points lost is the same as that of a Normal mount weapon - which, since HV weapons do 50% more damage, only amounts to 6.67% of their total damage, not 10%. Thus, while the manual says that HV weapons lose damage at half the speed of normal weapons, they actually lose damage only 1/3 as quickly. At their maximum range of 51 squares (!), they will do 56.67% of their normal maximum damage.

Point Defense weapons are wierd. They will do full damage at point-blank range; however, they no not get any squares "free". At a range of 1-3 squares, they lose 10% of the damage of a normal mount weapon, which equals 20% of their own damage. The three squares after that cost them 20% of the damage of a normal weapon, which equals 40% of their own damage! So while the manual says they have double the damage dissipation penalty, they actually have 4x the dissipation. This, plus the loss from the first three squares, leaves them at only 40% capacity. The three squares after that cost them another 40% - in other words, everything. However, since their range is not yet expired, each weapon is required to do a minimum of 1 damage. The next three squares cost them nothing (since they cannot go below one); and after that, they expire, giving them a range of 12 squares. So at a range of 7 to 12 squares, ten PD Laser Cannons will do the same amount of damage as ten PD Particle Beams!

A HV weapon costs twice as much space but only does 50% more damage than a normal weapon at close range (and on the ship design screen); at a range of 10 to 12 squares, however, it will be doing twice as much damage, not counting the bonus effectiveness against shields, which is why in most cases HV weapons are really more cost-effective than normal ones despite the numbers you see on the ship design screen.

One last note: For some reason, whenever guns are firing from the right side of the map to the left, or from the top of the map to the bottom, they are treated as if their target is two squares farther away than it really is. This could be an attempt to "balance" the game so that the guy who goes first has a slight disadvantage to compensate...

Sovereign · February 13, 2004, 12:08

So what is your opinion on best mounts?

Should we use more Standard mounts, Heavy mounts, or Point Defense mounts?

vmxa1 · February 13, 2004, 13:21

Depends on where you are in the game. Early you can get some use from Hv as you may be able to shoot from distance and not have to engage with in their range.

Later the ships will be able to close quickly and Hv will not be needed or useful.

PD is the same. Early they have uses, later it is mostly a waste.

Admiral Sparky · February 13, 2004, 14:59

I go HV all the way and just keep a ten-square distance.

Brutalisk · February 13, 2004, 15:42

Sparky, you left one thing out.

Computer Accuracy vs Ship's Evasion.

I noticed that the higher your accuracy the more damage your beams tend to do... Test that and see for yourself

Admiral Sparky · February 13, 2004, 16:40

This post is about how quickly beam weapons lose damage due to range. It has nothing to do with how they lose damage due to "grazing" shots.

Brutalisk · February 13, 2004, 19:29

You didn't pick up on what I said. Accuracy improves the dmg caused... despite the dissipation due to range.

vmxa1 · February 13, 2004, 21:13

Quote:

Originally posted by Admiral Sparky
I go HV all the way and just keep a ten-square distance.

That is fine and I often do the same. It is just that later designs of AI ships will close and you have no real need of Hv and can pack more gun wiht normal mounts.
Sometimes I am too lasy to switch. It is not critical.

Admiral Sparky · February 14, 2004, 16:11

Quote:

Originally posted by Brutalisk
You didn't pick up on what I said. Accuracy improves the dmg caused... despite the dissipation due to range.

Umm... no. A normal mount death ray will not do more than 100 damage at point-blank range no matter how good your accuracy is, and at a range of 24 squares, it will not do more than 35 damge, no matter how good your accuracy is.

And yes, I have tested this, so STFU

Brutalisk · February 15, 2004, 03:21

ok, once dissipation is calculated then, accuracy vs evasion comes into play. In your tests have you noticed "lower" dmg than the one expected or simply hit-or-miss ?

Sovereign · February 15, 2004, 10:35

I've never used Heavy Mounts in MOO2 the past few weeks.

Guess I gotta give the Heavy Mounts a try.

One question though, slightly off topic.

I wonder, how much can a technology be miniaturized? And is there a "cap" or maximum amount a technolgy can be mini'ed?

For example: I want ultra-micro disruptors. So I research 5 techology levels above it. My dirsrupters get miniatured. But I'm not sure how many more technology levels I have to research to reach the maximum minizaturion level for the disrupters (if there is a max mini level).

Thanks in advance!

vmxa1 · February 15, 2004, 14:36

I know a few devices are capped at som point, but I cannot recall the levels. I think it is future tech level 4, but I am not sure.

Whoha · February 15, 2004, 19:13

5 techs above gives you a 60% reduction in size. future tech 3 is needed for disruptors to be 5 space(15 when heavy,af).

and thats the cap, fully modded lasers are 14 space at this tech level.

bakalov · February 16, 2004, 03:43

Yep, max. minituarization is 60%. Stellar converters cannot go below 200, and their original size is 500.

Admiral Sparky, good research on the range dissipation

Brutalisk, if you want, you can post similar research on the range-to-hit penalties.

Admiral Sparky · February 19, 2004, 16:35

Actually, Miniaturization rates depend on the system. While Stellar converters and Gyro Destabilizers cannot take up less than 40% of their original space, beam weapons and missile racks can go as low as 25%. I think Shields are also 25%, but I'm not sure. I haven't studied bomb or torpedo miniaturization rates, but I'd expect them to be consistent with those of missiles and beams, while systems like the Achilles probably go more the route of Gyros and Stellar Converters.

Quote:

Originally posted by Brutalisk
ok, once dissipation is calculated then, accuracy vs evasion comes into play. In your tests have you noticed "lower" dmg than the one expected or simply hit-or-miss ?

I have the test ships ludicrously high BOCV and the lowest possible BDCV so that I was only testing the beams' dissipation and not their accuracy. Let me put it this way: at a range of 51 squares, they were still hitting each other 100% of the time

Sovereign · February 19, 2004, 17:07

BOCV and BDCV?

What does these ancroymns stand for? I'm at a loss.

I've just played one game, and got my techs in ALL fields to Future tech 30.

With technology that high, I think most laser / projectile weapons should take 1 or 2 space max.

Converters and Black Hole generators and whatever else should be mini'ed to at least 10% their original size with such ultra-advanced tech.

Any way to mod this?

bakalov · February 20, 2004, 03:12

Those stand for ships' offence and defence ...

Sovereign · February 20, 2004, 11:14

I know what the O and D stands for...

but what does B, C, and V stand for?

Iasius · February 20, 2004, 11:55

The B stands for beam. I'm not sure what the C and V stand for, but I'd guess something like calculation value or so.
Beam Defense Calculation Value = BDCV

Does anyone know for sure?

Sovereign · February 20, 2004, 12:15

Ahhh that makes sense, Iasius.

Much thanks!

I'm trying to learn all the MOO2 words and terms you Poly'ers use here.

Admiral Sparky · February 21, 2004, 09:11

It's actually "combat value," or so I heard somewhere...

The Mad Monk · March 5, 2004, 06:38

I know that at a certain level of miniaturiztion, it is possible to squeeze augmented engines, time warp facilitator, and a stellar converter in a battleship hull with room to spare.

Croesus · March 30, 2004, 15:41

With that information on PD, Is PD worth it over having normal mount weapons? It would seem that PD would only be good if you are at 0 range and they are shooting missiles since PD can fire when it isn't your turn.

vmxa1 · March 30, 2004, 15:53

Well I tend to use PD for space that will not hold an additonal beam. After I go to phasors and then disrupters, I tend to not bother with PD any more. I will have strong enough ships to not be concerned about missiles.

bakalov · March 31, 2004, 02:27

Due to their small damage the PDs are easily blocked by shields. You cannot use them against ships (usually). Heavy and PD are specialized mounts while Normal is universal but not very effective.

P-K · April 1, 2004, 05:29

Most classic battleships has 1 hvy cannon and 80% of normal cannons plus some few pds. All on 360. This is a very good design. Ship can defend from missles and attak as well. Very flexible desing. So normal mounted weapons are really usefull and better then hvy or pd. I use pd ships only when i know for sure i will have to defend from mass number of missles. For hvy it can be safely used when no missles are used in fights.
Not only damage counts in fights, but strategy of survivial. To specialized ships are like animals who eat only one kind of food. When food is gone they die.

PK

siron · July 21, 2004, 07:10

"For some reason, whenever guns are firing from the right side of the map to the left, or from the top of the map to the bottom, they are treated as if their target is two squares farther away than it really is."

Sparky, what version have u used for ur tests? I tried to verify ur results. But in (english) 1.31 [ftp://ftp.infogrames.net/patches/moo2/ - the patch at bottom] there is no such bias.

Maybe some older version without the ship initiative rule?

vmxa1 · July 21, 2004, 14:11

Initiative is selectable, so even with 1.31 you can turn it off.

siron · July 21, 2004, 15:21

i know....but ship ini was introduced in 1.31...and the whole battle was therefore probably rebalanced...that is what i meant....

(and btw i tested in 1.31 with and without ship ini....and there is in both cases no such bias in my version)

Brutalisk · July 21, 2004, 16:37

HVs are necessary in order to REACH enemy ships
Normal mounts are excellent for shooting down missiles and ensuring that if too many enemy missiles are targeting one of your ships, your other beam ships cna contribut at shooting those missiles down
PDs get extra penalties for range and should only be used for a 1-3 square range. Anything greater than that really wastes them...