test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

What consoles say they do vs. what they actually do

SystemSystem Member, NoReporting Posts: 178,019 Arc User
edited September 2014 in The Academy
It is an unfortunate but easily demonstrated fact that consoles in Star Trek Online often perform in ways that bear only a passing resemblance to what they claim to do in their descriptive tool-tips.

I will be discussing three different categories of consoles in this post: energy weapon damage boosting consoles, projectile weapon damage boosting consoles, and RCS accelerators.

Long story short, for those who don't want to read it all:
All three of these console types will give you less of a boost than what you would expect from their listed stats, and it has absolutely nothing to do with diminishing returns.

Energy Weapon consoles

Energy weapon damage consoles state in their description that they boost your damage by a certain percentage. This, I'm sorry to say, is simply false.

A +26% damage console will not increase your weapon damage by 26%. Not 26% of your modified value, not 26% of your weapon's base damage, not 26% of any number that is any way relevant to you or your ship.

What it will increase your damage by is 26 points, when your weapon is set to 50 power.

This holds true for all lower power consoles as well. The listed "percentage" is actually the flat numerical boost to damage that that console will give you at weapon power 50.

Like the base damage of the weapon, this is then modified by adjustments to your weapon power. At 100 power, energy weapons do double the damage of their base value. Accordingly, at 100 power, a +26% console is worth approximately 52 extra damage. There may be a variance of 1, due to behind-the-scenes rounding of numbers.

At 125 power, the power cap, energy weapons and their consoles do 150% of their listed values. So the greatest increase in damage that you can ever gain from a single energy damage console is approximately 65 damage,

Note that as the math behind these consoles never checks the base damage of your weapon, that the increase will be the same for all weapons of the correct damage type, regardless of their base damage. A Mk X, Mk XI, and Mk XII weapon will all have their damage increased by the same amount.

There are no diminishing returns on these consoles. A second console of equal value will increase your damage by the exact same amount as the first (allowing for rounding, which may lead to single point discrepancies). The same holds true for third and fourth consoles.

Projectile Weapon consoles

While discussing the above findings in Earth Spacedock, someone asked about projectile weapon consoles. As power levels don't play a role in their damage, they clearly cannot be using the same mechanism as the energy weapon consoles. Another player said they'd check, and returned to say that projectile weapon consoles worked as they claim to, boosting his damage by the appropriate percentage.

I opted to double check on my own vessel, having recently looted a rare Mk XI quantum torpedo console.

Unfortunately, I found that it did not increase my quantum torpedo damage by 26% of the base damage of my launchers. Well short of it, in fact.

So I decided to do some research. Not wanting to blow large chunks of EC on consoles I didn't need, I decided to work with the following items to test my math: a Mk VII common photon torpedo console (+15%), a Mk XI common photon torpedo launcher, and a Mk I Photon torpedo launcher. On a whim, while buying the Mk I launcher on the exchange, I also grabbed for 1 EC a Standard Issue photon torpedo launcher, the very base equipment your first ship comes with.

I installed the Mk I and Mk XI launchers on my ship, and then installed the console to see how much it modified the values by.

A Mk XI photon torpedo launcher has a base damage of 2842. A 15% increase would be an additional 426.3 damage. The Mk XI launcher instead gained 203 damage.

A Mk I photon torpedo launcher has a base damage of 1462. A 15% increase would be an additional 219.3 damage. The Mk I launcher instead gained.... 203 damage. The same amount as a Mk XI launcher.

Clearly the console is not modifying either weapon by 15% of their base damage value. They both gain the same amount, and that amount is less than what the math says a Mk I launcher would gain.

On a whim, I looked at the Standard Issue launcher (which, I should note, was not installed on my ship at any point). It has a base damage of 1352. A 15% increase would be an additional.... 202.8 damage.

So yes, projectile damage boosting consoles apparently are indeed percentage based, unlike their energy weapon counterparts. However, they do not boost your damage by a percentage of your current weapon's base damage. Instead, they boost it by a percentage of the absolute base value for that category of weapon, a common Standard Issue (lower than Mk I) version. Note that such launchers are not available in game, other than the photon torpedo launcher.

I have not yet checked using multiple copies of the consoles, to see if that leads to diminishing returns. My prediction (which I will check later) is that each +15% console will increase photon torpedo damage by another 202.8 damage.

I will also, just to cover my bases, check a couple of other damage types and their consoles, to make sure this isn't an oddity that only affects photon torpedo launchers.

RCS Accelerators
Currently very popular due to the release of the slow-turning Odyssey and BortaS ships. I'll reiterate my earlier findings to establish just how bad these consoles are on those ships. I should note that my tests predate Season 5, and it's possible the set-up has changed since then. However, there have been no patch notes indicating a change. To the best of my understanding, all turn rate increases from skills work from your base value, and would not affect the consoles in any way.

RCS Accelerators claim to increase your turn rate by a percentage value. The best in the game grant +34%.

They do actually grant that much of a boost, but not on your actual or base turn rate.

Instead, the formula for how much you gain is as follows: (Base Turn Rate - 3) * RCS Accelerator boost = Actual Gain in turn rate in degrees per second.

So the actual benefit is always lower than if it was a straight percentage based boost from your base turn rate. Even worse, the lower your base turn rate is to begin with, the greater the impact that the -3 modifier has on the final result.

The difference, for instance, on a Bird of Prey`s 23 base turn rate is as follows:
Straight percentage boost (34% console): 7.82 deg/sec
Actual boost: 6.8 deg/sec

Galaxy class base turn rate of 6
Straight percentage boost (34% console): 2.04 deg/sec
Actual boost: 1.02 deg/sec

Note, that as all player-facing numbers are rounded, some of my math will be off slightly due to behind-the-scenes rounding. However, I'm sure you'll find that my results are quite close to what you actually gain, unless there's been a significant and unmentioned change to these consoles.

The Odyssey class, according to dev posts about final stats, has a base turn rate of 5.5
Straight percentage boost (34% console): 1.87 deg/sec
Actual boost: 0.85 deg/sec

Now, I'm sure plenty of you would say that you can feel the difference in turn rate that such a console makes. Perhaps you're much more sensitive to minute changes in turn rate than I am, but I'm pretty sure a change of less than a degree per second is at the very limits of my ability to actually notice at all. It's certainly a small enough boost that I feel it's not worth spending one of my console slots on, when there are consoles which make far more significant changes to my ship available (though I have begun to doubt that any of the consoles does what it claims to, and will need to check some of my assumptions).

As far as stacking and diminishing returns go, there are no diminishing returns on RCS Accelerators. Allowing for differences due to rounding, you'll find that each RCS Accelerator of equal value adds the same amount of boost as the last.

---

Feel free to check any and all of my findings, and let my know if my results are off.
Post edited by Unknown User on

Comments

  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2012
    Good stuff, thanks for posting that.

    One question though, when working on the energy weapon consoles, were you also considering the stats of a weapon before it was equipped (and thus before it's numbers are modified by skills etc)?
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2012
    thank you for your effort
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2012
    I agree, thank you for your research.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2012
    I appreciate this greatly as it clarifies an old question that lingered between me and a fleet mate.

    Good work sir, I look forward to any other quirks and future findings you may have......;)
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2012
    I'd like to see a dev comment on this and review the results that you put forth. Not because I think that you're wrong, but to see how they respond since they claimed that the damage consoles did work on percentages and diminishing returns.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2012
    Most consoles (the ones that boost skills) don't work the way you say. Consoles all to the skill bonus that get get. At rank 9 of a skill get have 99 skill bonus. If the full bonus value is used for an ability the boost you get is X * (1 + ( <skill bonus>/100 ) ). For for skill bonus of 99 it's X * 1.99. Almost double the base value. Consoles are just added onto the skill bonus. So if you have 2x +25% consoles you are adding +50 to your skills strength. So X * ( 1+ ( 99 + 50 )/100) = X * 2.49.

    Weapons are a bit more complicated as they are a two other factors in the math according to Al Rivera on the Prioitu 1 Interview. First is he "Strength" of the weapon depending on the Mk (5 or 10). And the "Strength" of your ship depends on it's Tier. "Strength" is a hidden value of the weapons and ships. I assume it's reflected in the pop-up info of the weapons. The example Al used are Mk 10 Weapons have a "Stregnth" of 1. And Tier 5 ships have a "Strength" of 1. Skill Bonus and Consoles totals are other factors the ship and weapon strength values. So: base weapon damage * ( 1 + ( <weapon strength> + <ship strength> + <skill bonus> + <consoles total> ) / 100 ). Weapon power for Energy weapons is a straight multiplier to the adjusted damage based on eh scale you described.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2012
    Subscription to this important thread added to my DEV folder.
    Waiting with baited breath for that Dev post.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2012
    I do hope that we get that dev post!
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2012
    I'd like to keep up the support for this thread! Let's see if we can get an answer from the dev's through positive and constructive input!
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2012
    That is why the items in the ship must fit the style of play if you like your shields maxed out, phaser enhancements for example will not help you but torpedo ones will but if you put a shield enhancement on its a big deal like faster power boosts to them or faster recharge it matters.

    But that is the point of all the variety you can min/max your ship to meet your style speed, firepower, shields, more armor here, better sensors there so I suggest use the Wiki and common sense.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2012
    tkolter wrote: »
    That is why the items in the ship must fit the style of play if you like your shields maxed out, phaser enhancements for example will not help you but torpedo ones will but if you put a shield enhancement on its a big deal like faster power boosts to them or faster recharge it matters.

    But that is the point of all the variety you can min/max your ship to meet your style speed, firepower, shields, more armor here, better sensors there so I suggest use the Wiki and common sense.

    Tkolter, I find all of your points to be very salient, but my biggest concern, like the OP's, is the math behind the consoles and whether they are working as intended.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2012
    Picking the appropriate consoles to suit your style of play is a lot trickier to do if consoles don't do what they say to do, especially if you're unaware that the discrepancy exists.

    "Common sense" tells us that a console that says it increases our damage by 26% will increase our damage by something somewhere in the ballpark of 26%, calculated based on the weapon we're using. Not by 26 points of damage, or by a percentage of some other weapon we aren't actually using.

    For a more concrete example, using results from this very thread, consider the fact that Energy Weapon consoles compete directly for console slots with Projectile Weapon consoles in a great many builds.

    In almost all cases, you have more energy weapons than projectile weapons, and furthermore are firing them off a greater percentage of the time. Therefore, something that increases all of my energy weapons damage by 24% is clearly a better investment than something that increases my projectile weapon damage by 24%.

    Except maybe it's not. Because neither of the consoles that claim to do those things do what they say they do.

    If, after doing the math, you realize that the +24% energy weapon damage console only boosts your energy weapons damage by a maximum of 60 per weapon (less if you run at less than 125 weapons power), and the projectile weapon console increases your projectile weapon damage by 330 per weapon, then maybe you change your view on which is more desirable.

    Until recent changes moving the +35% shield capacity console over into the Science category from Engineering, it was competing for slots against damage reduction consoles and RCS consoles. But while the shield console does exactly what it says on the tin, the armor consoles have a complex formula that many players don't understand, and the RCS console can produce results of less than half of what you'd expect based on the tool-tip.


    ---

    Further (and more thorough) testing of photon torpedoes and their consoles leads me to the conclusion that my earlier testing was (mostly) right. It's not exact though.

    My predictions based on player facing math (listed base damage of standard issue photon launcher multiplied by the listed percentage boost on a given console) produce numbers that are bang on at some marks, but off by as much as 10 points of damage at Mk X.

    The discrepancy starts at Mk I, with the numbers actually being produced being 1 lower than my calculations predict. As you increase in Mark, this discrepancy goes up by roughly 1 per Mark, until you hit Mk X. At Mk XI, things suddenly kick over to the point of Mk XI consoles producing 1 more point of damage than my calculations would suggest.

    I believe that the numbers I'm seeing at all stages (the listed based number, the calculated final number, and the listed bonus) are all rounded approximations of the numbers the system is actually using.

    If, for instance, the base damage of a Standard Issue Photon Torpedo Launcher is not the listed 1379, but actually 1378.5, and a 21% console is actually a 20.5% console, then the predicted result would be 3 off the one found in game, rather than 10.

    Admittedly, I've been unable to work out numbers that would produce exactly the results found in game, so maybe there's some detail I'm missing. Still, my method gives predictions never more than 10 points of damage away from the in-game result. Compare that to a straightforward interpretation that a +24% console will increase your Mk XI photon torpedo launcher by 24% of its damage... which produces a prediction over 350 points higher than the actual in-game result.

    ---

    Oh, I should also note that I checked for the following things:

    1. Yes, a second +15% projectile damage console (as well as a third) adds every bit as much as the first, so no diminishing returns there.

    2. A +15% console is a +15% console, regardless of whether it's a common Mk VII, an uncommon Mk VI, or a rare Mk V. There's no apparent extra unspecified benefit for rarity, beyond the ability to access the higher percentage at a lower Mk.

    ---

    I really wish Cryptic would just GIVE US the actual numbers and formulas for all powers, skills, abilities, and consoles in the game. Sure, use simplified numbers in the tool-tip for brevity's sake and to avoid scaring off those who don't want to see the math, but if I right click and choose Info, give me the exact numbers the system is using and tell me where they're coming from, so I can make intelligent informed decisions.

    Hiding the more complicated math from users who would be scared off by it is fine and reasonable. Hiding it away completely from those of us who'd like to be more informed serves no useful purpose that I can discern.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2012
    Thank you for posting this. I griped about the change to the Field Generator description, saying it added +35 to a shield skill, versus +35% to shield capacity.

    After reading this, I now realise had no idea how messed up the actual math was.

    And yes, a simple straight forward and accurate (this is what the console provides) description would be most welcome.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2012
    I'm in complete agreement with this Deshal. I really hope the devs could give us the math, at least for the people who do want to figure it out!
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2012
    Good going Deshal, this confirms my suspicions.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2012
    I'd like to see a formal response on this.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2012
    While not an official source, some research was done into this in a related manner in the early days of the game, and can be viewed in the blog post at http://theenginescannaetakeit.wordpress.com/articles-3/starship-weapons-overview/. For weapons, they break down into two components, the base damage (which is the damage done by a standard issue version of the weapon), and the mark bonus. Consoles and skills that improve weapons affect the base damage, while the mark bonus is unaffected. The entire thing is then modified by your ship's power levels. I presume this was done to reduce the effects of stacking several percentage multipliers, which start to grow very fast when you get a lot of them (consoles + skills + mark bonuses + power levels...)
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2012
    All this math is great. I applaud and thank everyone for the work they do to try and figure this stuff out. Still, we are always left with the same issues of what effects damage(and other traits too) as being a developer black box. They tweak it and fiddle with it as needed and then the math changes. They are never going to give us updates of exactly what they are doing and how they are doing it.

    I think we need a compromise, a place or mission to benchmark our builds in a controlled manner specifically against enemies that don't move or fire back. Vary your weapons, consoles, abilties, BOffs, distance...whatever. Everyone against the same set of targets...then live fire against active enemies at the end. Then if (I mean when) they nerf or change something we don't have to argue about the math. We all optimize our ship again the best we can against the same set of variables.

    I have been exploring ways to implement this with a foundry mission but cannot seem to find a construct that provides a suitable target(borg nanite generators might work if they were available :( ). I describe my thoughts in more detail in another post (link at bottom). I guess my main point is that developers by nature want to keep certain things out of the reach of players to keep us interested. This can get quite annoying but it is not going to change(the house always wins). Maybe we could compromise with them to give us players that want to, the ability to optimize our builds without as much guessing...or math.

    Cheers

    http://forums.startrekonline.com/showthread.php?t=254944&highlight=proving+grounds
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2012
    Thank you for this. :)
  • dpsloss88dpsloss88 Member Posts: 765 Arc User
    edited September 2014
    bump. Nice research, thanks.
  • jbmaverickjbmaverick Member Posts: 935 Arc User
    edited September 2014
    dpsloss88 wrote: »
    bump. Nice research, thanks.

    This thread is over 2 years old and the information in it no longer valid.

    The universe has a wonderful sense of humor. The trick is learning how to take a joke.
  • askrayaskray Member Posts: 3,329 Arc User
    edited September 2014
    jbmaverick wrote: »
    This thread is over 2 years old and the information in it no longer valid.

    What he said.

    Also bumping isn't allowed.

    /Closed
    Yes, I'm that Askray@Batbayer in game. Yes, I still play. No, I don't care.
    Former Community Moderator, Former SSR DJ, Now Full time father to two kids, Husband, Retail Worker.
    Tiktok: @Askray Facebook: Askray113


This discussion has been closed.