Actually what bothers me the most about the numbers is the increased miss-rate when using FAW. That acc overflow is variable and therefore can't be relied upon to give a consistent bonus to crth/d I won't dispute, but that activating FAW would cause an increased miss-rate even using [acc]x3 weapons on top of 29,5% base overflow I find rather peculiar. Especially since movement during FAW and non-FAW fire doesn't seem likely to vary in such a large amount as to drop accuracy below 100%.
Further testing is in progress however,
I agree with you in that acc in regards to missing has always bothered me. However if the target ship is moving it gains def and this would decrease your chance to hit. Example follows.
Targets def value from speed and assuming 100% hit chance at 0 defense (which ignores the tooltip that says 95%)
+0% acc
+25% defense
hit chance=80%
+0% acc
+50% defense
hit chance=66.67%
+0% acc
+75 defense
hit chance=57.14%
+25% acc
+25% defense
hit chance=100%
+25% acc
+50% defense
hit chance=80%
+25% acc
+75% defense
hit chance=66.67%
+45% acc
+25% defense
hit chance=100%
+45% acc
+50% defense
hit chance=95.24%
+45% acc
+75% defense
hit chance=76.92%
When you use FAW hit chance will decrease as it shoots at torpedos, pets, etc. All of which have a higher def mainly due to speed. However i still feel that boff abilities still miss at a higher rate then normal autofiring. I miss Dreadnoughts etc that aren't even moving or are moving very slowly when using FAW. And this makes no sense to me why i miss them unless they used an ability which increased their def beyond my +35% acc. Or did someone using Repusler cause their speed and therefor their def to exceed my 100% chance to hit. Another reason for me to hate when people use that ability if this is true.
Sadly this is a very difficult one to test as you'd need a target that has a consistent def and preferably a high one like 75% or so. So the only way i know to get consistent results would be to challenge a friend. He'd need to be at max impulse speed to achieve a high enough def value to conduct a real test. And as the hit chance will still be determined by a die roll of 0-99 with having to roll a 19-99 for an 80% chance to hit as an example it means sample size would have to be quite large. I'd say at least a 60k sample size.
This is why we use stationary targets for testing acc overflow for crt hit and crit severity. But as they have we assume -15% def we'll never miss. So we can't test hit chance that way.
I already posted these results on the Trible Bug Thread, but since I am unsure off where the Devs will be reading, I will post them here as well.
I performed testing on Tribble on the new FAW-fix, in a PvP environment, using 3 [dmg] beam arrays, 3 [acc] beam arrays, and depending on the tests, between 9 and 0 points in Energy Weapon Specialisation (EWS) and Starship Targetting Systems (STS). The targets where unshielded, and had known defense ratings. Base critical chance was 5,4% for all three tests.
Test 1, Base acc overflow 25, 9 points in EWS, targets defense rating 10, unshielded target, 9 points in STS
Hits
Crits-Actual Crt%-Base Crt%-Acc. Overflow Crt%-EWS Crt%-Expected Crt%
BA [acc]
8891
881
9,91
5,4
2,5
2
9,9
BA [dmg]
8774
812
9,25
5,4
1,63
2
9,03
BA FAW [acc]--10079----775
7,69
5,4
2,5
2
9,9
BA FAW [dmg]-10084----754
7,48
5,4
1,63
2
9,03
Test 2, Base acc overflow 25, 0 points in EWS, targets defense rating 7.7, unshielded target, 9 points in STS
Hits
Crits-Actual Crt%-Base Crt%-Acc. Overflow Crt%-EWS Crt%-Expected Crt%
BA [acc]
9680
765
7,90
5,4
2,68
0
8,08
BA [dmg]
9712
769
7,92
5,4
1,84
0
7,24
BA FAW [acc]--9240
469
5,08
5,4
2,68
0
8,08
BA FAW [dmg]-9245
516
5,58
5,4
1,84
0
7,24
Test 3, Base acc overflow 10, 9 points in EWS, targets defense rating 10, unshielded target, 0 points in STS
Hits
Crits-Actual Crt%-Base Crt%-Acc. Overflow Crt%-EWS Crt%-Expected Crt%
BA [acc]
9876
916
9,27
5,4
1,14
2
8,54
BA [dmg]
9796
752
7,67
5,4
0
2
7,4
BA FAW [acc]--9225
695
7,53
5,4
1,14
2
8,54
BA FAW [dmg]-9200
707
7,68
5,4
0
2
7,4
Test 1,difference between expected crt% and actual crt%
Actual Crt%-Base Crt%-Acc. Overflow Crt%-EWS Crt%-Expected Crt%-difference Crt%
BA [acc]
9,91
5,4
1,84
2
9,9
0,01
BA [dmg]
9,25
5,4
1,63
2
9,03
0,22
BA FAW [acc]
7,69
5,4
1,84
2
9,9
-2,21
BA FAW [dmg]
7,48
5,4
1,63
2
9,03
-1,55
Test 2,difference between expected crt% and actual crt%
Actual Crt%-Base Crt%-Acc. Overflow Crt%-EWS Crt%-Expected Crt%-difference Crt%
BA [acc]
7.90
5,4
2,68
0
8,08
-0,18
BA [dmg]
7,92
5,4
1,84
0
7,24
0,68
BA FAW [acc]
5,08
5,4
2,68
0
8,08
-3,00
BA FAW [dmg]
5,58
5,4
1,84
0
7,24
-1,66
Test 3,difference between expected crt% and actual crt%
Actual Crt%-Base Crt%-Acc. Overflow Crt%-EWS Crt%-Expected Crt%-difference Crt%
BA [acc]
9,27
5,4
1,14
2
8,54
0,73
BA [dmg]
7,67
5,4
0
2
7,4
0,28
BA FAW [acc]
7,53
5,4
1,14
2
8,54
-1,00
BA FAW [dmg]
7,68
5,4
0
2
7,4
0,28
Difference in Crt% between FAW and non-FAW fire:
Test 1, FAW [acc] weapons, 2,2% lower Crt% then regular fire
Test 1, FAW [dmg] weapons, 1,8% lower Crt% then regular fire
Test 2, FAW [acc] weapons, 2,83% lower Crt% then regular fire
Test 2, FAW [dmg] weapons, 2,3% lower Crt% then regular fire
Test 3, FAW [acc] weapons, 1,74% lower Crt% then regular fire
Test 3, FAW [dmg] weapons, 0,00818% higher Crt% then regular fire
Average difference in Crt% between FAW and non-FAW fire on tests 1 and 2:
FAW on average 2,3% lower Crt% compared to non-FAW fire
Average difference in Crt% between FAW and non-FAW fire on test 3:
Interestingly enough, there is no significant difference when we look at the [dmg] FAW vs. normal firing. Note that the [acc] weapons do show a difference of 1,74%
Total sample size test 1; 37828 hits, test 2; 37877 hits, test 3; 38097 hits, total amount of hits; 113802 hits. This is not an extremely large sample size, but, I wouldn't consider it to be too low to be significant either.
With regards to critical chance, EWS seems to do pretty much what it is supposed to do. The observed Crt% is rather close to the expected Crt%, during normal firing. There is some variance between expected and observed Crt%, but that is most likely due to sample size. The moment FAW becomes activated, this changes completely. With or without 99 points into EWS, I observed an average lower Crt% of 2,3%. This appears completely unrelated to EWS. Having tested the use of FAW using 3 weapons where total acc overflow equals defense, and using 3 weapons where total acc overflow exceeds defence, the results regarding Crt% seem clear. There is no significant reduction in Crt% for the [dmg] mod where acc equals defense, whereas there is a significantly lower critical chance of 1,74% between normal firing and FAW firing for the [acc] weapons. Albeit this number is slightly higher then expected, looking at the results I can only conclude that accuracy overflow does not get converted into Crt% when using FAW.
On a perhaps interesting side-note, during FAW firing using the [dmg] mod weapons whereby defence equalled total accuracy, there where 0 misses recorded.
I know there is some speculation regarding critical severity and EWS not doing what it is supposed to there, but that fell outside of the scope of my tests. I have the data, and when I find a convenient way of extracting it I might update with results regarding severity.
PS. Any feedback would be welcome:).
PPS. A way too import tables from Excel would have made this post look a lot less messy;).
Lost and Delirious... and Disenchanted too Apparently some forum posters have diplomatic immunity nowadays, where can I get mine?
OK more testing but with the Daeinos "Console-Universal-Dynamic Tactical System". Also weapons were changed out to Plasma Beams [Acc]x3. But still using the Kinetic Cutting beam.
Sample size=60k iterations
Ship stats
acc 29.5% (this increased by 4.5% from Daeinos's Console-Universal-Dynamic Tactical System)
Crit Hit 15.9% (not testing crit hit as the test target has shields)
Crit Sev 82.9%
Additional items and skills that don't show under ship attack
99 into Energy Weapons Specialization for 2% crit hit% and 25% crit sev
Nukara Particle Converter for 10% Accuracy to beams
Weapons are
Plasmas beams [Acc]x3 or +30% acc (Expected crit Sev before factoring in acc or def=107.9%)
Kinetic Cutting Beam=(Expected crit Sev before factoring in acc or def=107.9%)
Acc 29.5%
Acc 10% (Nukara Particle Converter)
Acc 30% Plasma Beams [Acc]x3=30%
Total Acc=69.5%
Assuming -15 defense for the Starbase 234
Diff= +84.5
Chance to hit=145.8%
Acc Overflow for Crit Sev=45.8*.5=22.9%
Plasma Beams [Acc]x3 or 30%=107.9%+22.9%=130.8%
Plasma Beams [Acc]x3 normal firing
expected crit severity=130.80%
Actual result=130.78%
difference= -0.02%
Plasma beams [Acc]x3 Fire at Will III
expected crit severity=130.8%
Actual result=108.01%
difference= -22.79% (Note: This one is way off what it should be.)
Acc 29.5%
Assuming -15 defense for the Starbase 234
Diff= +44.5
Chance to hit=130.8%
Acc Overflow for Crit Sev=30.8*.5=15.4%
Kinetic Cutting Beam=107.9%+15.4%=123.3%
If we first look at the Plasma beams [Acc]x3 during normal firing it tracks within 0.02%. However when using Fire at Will it's -22.79%. Note that if Acc Overflow does not work the expected Crit Sev% is 107.9%. Which would then track at +0.11%. Coincidence? I don't think so.
-Conclusion of Tribble testing-
I'm fairly convinced, especially after respeccing and testing the high acc build for crit severity this time around that Accuracy Overflow is NOT working for Fire at Will. Especially combined with gr4v1t4r's Crit Hit % testing which also had the same behavior.
Comments
I agree with you in that acc in regards to missing has always bothered me. However if the target ship is moving it gains def and this would decrease your chance to hit. Example follows.
Targets def value from speed and assuming 100% hit chance at 0 defense (which ignores the tooltip that says 95%)
+0% acc
+25% defense
hit chance=80%
+0% acc
+50% defense
hit chance=66.67%
+0% acc
+75 defense
hit chance=57.14%
+25% acc
+25% defense
hit chance=100%
+25% acc
+50% defense
hit chance=80%
+25% acc
+75% defense
hit chance=66.67%
+45% acc
+25% defense
hit chance=100%
+45% acc
+50% defense
hit chance=95.24%
+45% acc
+75% defense
hit chance=76.92%
When you use FAW hit chance will decrease as it shoots at torpedos, pets, etc. All of which have a higher def mainly due to speed. However i still feel that boff abilities still miss at a higher rate then normal autofiring. I miss Dreadnoughts etc that aren't even moving or are moving very slowly when using FAW. And this makes no sense to me why i miss them unless they used an ability which increased their def beyond my +35% acc. Or did someone using Repusler cause their speed and therefor their def to exceed my 100% chance to hit. Another reason for me to hate when people use that ability if this is true.
Sadly this is a very difficult one to test as you'd need a target that has a consistent def and preferably a high one like 75% or so. So the only way i know to get consistent results would be to challenge a friend. He'd need to be at max impulse speed to achieve a high enough def value to conduct a real test. And as the hit chance will still be determined by a die roll of 0-99 with having to roll a 19-99 for an 80% chance to hit as an example it means sample size would have to be quite large. I'd say at least a 60k sample size.
This is why we use stationary targets for testing acc overflow for crt hit and crit severity. But as they have we assume -15% def we'll never miss. So we can't test hit chance that way.
Don't expect anything this time just because they pinky-swear its finally fixed, after promising the exact same thing for literally years of patches.
I performed testing on Tribble on the new FAW-fix, in a PvP environment, using 3 [dmg] beam arrays, 3 [acc] beam arrays, and depending on the tests, between 9 and 0 points in Energy Weapon Specialisation (EWS) and Starship Targetting Systems (STS). The targets where unshielded, and had known defense ratings. Base critical chance was 5,4% for all three tests.
Test 1, Base acc overflow 25, 9 points in EWS, targets defense rating 10, unshielded target, 9 points in STS
Hits
Crits-Actual Crt%-Base Crt%-Acc. Overflow Crt%-EWS Crt%-Expected Crt%
BA [acc]
8891
881
9,91
5,4
2,5
2
9,9
BA [dmg]
8774
812
9,25
5,4
1,63
2
9,03
BA FAW [acc]--10079----775
7,69
5,4
2,5
2
9,9
BA FAW [dmg]-10084----754
7,48
5,4
1,63
2
9,03
Test 2, Base acc overflow 25, 0 points in EWS, targets defense rating 7.7, unshielded target, 9 points in STS
Hits
Crits-Actual Crt%-Base Crt%-Acc. Overflow Crt%-EWS Crt%-Expected Crt%
BA [acc]
9680
765
7,90
5,4
2,68
0
8,08
BA [dmg]
9712
769
7,92
5,4
1,84
0
7,24
BA FAW [acc]--9240
469
5,08
5,4
2,68
0
8,08
BA FAW [dmg]-9245
516
5,58
5,4
1,84
0
7,24
Test 3, Base acc overflow 10, 9 points in EWS, targets defense rating 10, unshielded target, 0 points in STS
Hits
Crits-Actual Crt%-Base Crt%-Acc. Overflow Crt%-EWS Crt%-Expected Crt%
BA [acc]
9876
916
9,27
5,4
1,14
2
8,54
BA [dmg]
9796
752
7,67
5,4
0
2
7,4
BA FAW [acc]--9225
695
7,53
5,4
1,14
2
8,54
BA FAW [dmg]-9200
707
7,68
5,4
0
2
7,4
Test 1,difference between expected crt% and actual crt%
Actual Crt%-Base Crt%-Acc. Overflow Crt%-EWS Crt%-Expected Crt%-difference Crt%
BA [acc]
9,91
5,4
1,84
2
9,9
0,01
BA [dmg]
9,25
5,4
1,63
2
9,03
0,22
BA FAW [acc]
7,69
5,4
1,84
2
9,9
-2,21
BA FAW [dmg]
7,48
5,4
1,63
2
9,03
-1,55
Test 2,difference between expected crt% and actual crt%
Actual Crt%-Base Crt%-Acc. Overflow Crt%-EWS Crt%-Expected Crt%-difference Crt%
BA [acc]
7.90
5,4
2,68
0
8,08
-0,18
BA [dmg]
7,92
5,4
1,84
0
7,24
0,68
BA FAW [acc]
5,08
5,4
2,68
0
8,08
-3,00
BA FAW [dmg]
5,58
5,4
1,84
0
7,24
-1,66
Test 3,difference between expected crt% and actual crt%
Actual Crt%-Base Crt%-Acc. Overflow Crt%-EWS Crt%-Expected Crt%-difference Crt%
BA [acc]
9,27
5,4
1,14
2
8,54
0,73
BA [dmg]
7,67
5,4
0
2
7,4
0,28
BA FAW [acc]
7,53
5,4
1,14
2
8,54
-1,00
BA FAW [dmg]
7,68
5,4
0
2
7,4
0,28
Difference in Crt% between FAW and non-FAW fire:
Test 1, FAW [acc] weapons, 2,2% lower Crt% then regular fire
Test 1, FAW [dmg] weapons, 1,8% lower Crt% then regular fire
Test 2, FAW [acc] weapons, 2,83% lower Crt% then regular fire
Test 2, FAW [dmg] weapons, 2,3% lower Crt% then regular fire
Test 3, FAW [acc] weapons, 1,74% lower Crt% then regular fire
Test 3, FAW [dmg] weapons, 0,00818% higher Crt% then regular fire
Average difference in Crt% between FAW and non-FAW fire on tests 1 and 2:
FAW on average 2,3% lower Crt% compared to non-FAW fire
Average difference in Crt% between FAW and non-FAW fire on test 3:
Interestingly enough, there is no significant difference when we look at the [dmg] FAW vs. normal firing. Note that the [acc] weapons do show a difference of 1,74%
Total sample size test 1; 37828 hits, test 2; 37877 hits, test 3; 38097 hits, total amount of hits; 113802 hits. This is not an extremely large sample size, but, I wouldn't consider it to be too low to be significant either.
With regards to critical chance, EWS seems to do pretty much what it is supposed to do. The observed Crt% is rather close to the expected Crt%, during normal firing. There is some variance between expected and observed Crt%, but that is most likely due to sample size. The moment FAW becomes activated, this changes completely. With or without 99 points into EWS, I observed an average lower Crt% of 2,3%. This appears completely unrelated to EWS. Having tested the use of FAW using 3 weapons where total acc overflow equals defense, and using 3 weapons where total acc overflow exceeds defence, the results regarding Crt% seem clear. There is no significant reduction in Crt% for the [dmg] mod where acc equals defense, whereas there is a significantly lower critical chance of 1,74% between normal firing and FAW firing for the [acc] weapons. Albeit this number is slightly higher then expected, looking at the results I can only conclude that accuracy overflow does not get converted into Crt% when using FAW.
On a perhaps interesting side-note, during FAW firing using the [dmg] mod weapons whereby defence equalled total accuracy, there where 0 misses recorded.
I know there is some speculation regarding critical severity and EWS not doing what it is supposed to there, but that fell outside of the scope of my tests. I have the data, and when I find a convenient way of extracting it I might update with results regarding severity.
PS. Any feedback would be welcome:).
PPS. A way too import tables from Excel would have made this post look a lot less messy;).
Apparently some forum posters have diplomatic immunity nowadays, where can I get mine? [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
Sample size=60k iterations
Ship stats
acc 29.5% (this increased by 4.5% from Daeinos's Console-Universal-Dynamic Tactical System)
Crit Hit 15.9% (not testing crit hit as the test target has shields)
Crit Sev 82.9%
Additional items and skills that don't show under ship attack
99 into Energy Weapons Specialization for 2% crit hit% and 25% crit sev
Nukara Particle Converter for 10% Accuracy to beams
Weapons are
Plasmas beams [Acc]x3 or +30% acc (Expected crit Sev before factoring in acc or def=107.9%)
Kinetic Cutting Beam=(Expected crit Sev before factoring in acc or def=107.9%)
Acc 29.5%
Acc 10% (Nukara Particle Converter)
Acc 30% Plasma Beams [Acc]x3=30%
Total Acc=69.5%
Assuming -15 defense for the Starbase 234
Diff= +84.5
Chance to hit=145.8%
Acc Overflow for Crit Sev=45.8*.5=22.9%
Plasma Beams [Acc]x3 or 30%=107.9%+22.9%=130.8%
Plasma Beams [Acc]x3 normal firing
expected crit severity=130.80%
Actual result=130.78%
difference= -0.02%
Plasma beams [Acc]x3 Fire at Will III
expected crit severity=130.8%
Actual result=108.01%
difference= -22.79% (Note: This one is way off what it should be.)
Acc 29.5%
Assuming -15 defense for the Starbase 234
Diff= +44.5
Chance to hit=130.8%
Acc Overflow for Crit Sev=30.8*.5=15.4%
Kinetic Cutting Beam=107.9%+15.4%=123.3%
Kinetic Cutting Beam [Dmg]x3
expected crit severity=123.3%
Actual result=122.85%
difference= -0.45%
If Nukara Particle Converter does work for the KCB
Acc=29.5%
Acc 10% (Nukara Particle Converter)
Total Acc=39.5%
Assuming -15 defense for the Starbase 234
Diff= +54.5
Chance to hit=135.28%
Acc Overflow for Crit Sev=35.28*.5=17.64%
Kinetic Cutting Beam=107.9%+17.64%=125.54%
Kinetic Cutting Beam [Dmg]x3
expected crit severity=125.54%
Actual result=122.85%
difference= -2.69%
If we first look at the Plasma beams [Acc]x3 during normal firing it tracks within 0.02%. However when using Fire at Will it's -22.79%. Note that if Acc Overflow does not work the expected Crit Sev% is 107.9%. Which would then track at +0.11%. Coincidence? I don't think so.
-Conclusion of Tribble testing-
I'm fairly convinced, especially after respeccing and testing the high acc build for crit severity this time around that Accuracy Overflow is NOT working for Fire at Will. Especially combined with gr4v1t4r's Crit Hit % testing which also had the same behavior.