COMPLETED CG Deliver Rarities for Azimuth Event (Rares)

[Ned Flandalorian]

Breach damage is not irrelevant it is the only way that modules receive damage - its part of the damage modelling within Elite Dangerous. AS it is possible to destroy an interceptor without hitting or damaging a heart then they are 'modules' and the damage is from the 'breach damage' and the chance of breach become a major factor, see below.

No... that's not how that works at all. "Gibbing" an interceptor (killing it without removing the hearts) has nothing to do with breach damage, it simply means the raw DPS was higher than the thargoid's regeneration rate and its hull reached 0%.

This was worked out a long time ago, and is a fundamental flow chart.

And for interceptors it is wrong / does not apply.

Thargoid Interceptor Hull Analysis | Canonn Research Group

1. Introduction Some time ago it was discovered that is is possible to repair Thargoid ships with human repair limpets [1]. The discovery opened up the possibility of measuring the properties of Thargoid Interceptor hulls, namely total integrity and Armor Rating. Recent understanding of...

canonn.science

If you think it's wrong go try it out for yourself.

 

[Kallipar]

For human ships you are right.
Interceptors behave differently

How? Where is the evidence? Why does AX MC's have breach stats and why bother to change them?
Why change a working model?

 

[Kallipar]

No... that's not how that works at all. "Gibbing" an interceptor (killing it without removing the hearts) has nothing to do with breach damage, it simply means the raw DPS was higher than the thargoid's regeneration rate and its hull reached 0%.


And for interceptors it is wrong / does not apply.

Thargoid Interceptor Hull Analysis | Canonn Research Group

1. Introduction Some time ago it was discovered that is is possible to repair Thargoid ships with human repair limpets [1]. The discovery opened up the possibility of measuring the properties of Thargoid Interceptor hulls, namely total integrity and Armor Rating. Recent understanding of...

canonn.science

If you think it's wrong go try it out for yourself.

That's hull analysis. Not modules.

No... that's not how that works at all. "Gibbing" an interceptor (killing it without removing the hearts) has nothing to do with breach damage, it simply means the raw DPS was higher than the thargoid's regeneration rate and its hull reached 0%.


And for interceptors it is wrong / does not apply.

Thargoid Interceptor Hull Analysis | Canonn Research Group

1. Introduction Some time ago it was discovered that is is possible to repair Thargoid ships with human repair limpets [1]. The discovery opened up the possibility of measuring the properties of Thargoid Interceptor hulls, namely total integrity and Armor Rating. Recent understanding of...

canonn.science

If you think it's wrong go try it out for

Maybe canonn need to check out stuff too. And why should I try to beat them.

Why change an inherent model and why does the breach damage change on enhanced ax mc's? Nothing you have stated affects the flow chart. Maybe they hadn't factored in that model. Would be interested to hear. Received wisdom doesn't have to be right. And please don't Diss me with the challenge of doing Canonns work I find that offensive. Any theory is subject to the scientific method.

 

[Ned Flandalorian]

Please read the article properly, there's a whole appendix on heart damage modelling.

(Better yet, go out and do some actual testing yourself and you'll soon see the modelling is different to human modules. As someone who has researched this, it's offensive that you'd dismiss it as incorrect without even bothering to personally test it.)

 

[Northpin]

How? Where is the evidence? Why does AX MC's have breach stats and why bother to change them?
Why change a working model?

You have the evidence posted by @Ned Flandalorian
They devised a working model for human ships and for interceptors they devised a different internal damage model (as they dont have internal modules)

And why AX MC has breach damage?
Because they can be used, albeit at reduced efficiency, against human ships too

 

[Kallipar]

Hi Ned,

Can I ask a question. Were you aware of the Flow chart, and if so why do you dismiss it? Also the Heart appendix was done with a Gauss not a MC, enhanced or otherwise.

 

[Kallipar]

You have the evidence posted by @Ned Flandalorian
They devised a working model for human ships and for interceptors they devised a different internal damage model (as they dont have internal modules)

And why AX MC has breach damage?
Because they can be used, albeit at reduced efficiency, against human ships too

The Glaive has no internal modules. The hearts are sub targettable, the question is are they modules?
Also please check the cyto scrambler it has 0% breach and breach damage. Interesting - yes it is a human module, but that suggests breach can be set to 0, so why increase it for enhanced AX MC's?

 

[Ned Flandalorian]

Hi Ned,

Can I ask a question. Were you aware of the Flow chart, and if so why do you dismiss it? Also the Heart appendix was done with a Gauss not a MC, enhanced or otherwise.

Because it's based around breach damage being a random roll, which is incorrect for hearts. I explained that before you even linked the flowchart.

 

[Sublime]

Interesting - yes it is a human module, but that suggests breach can be set to 0, so why increase it for enhanced AX MC's?

Whoever adjusted the stats probably doesn’t play the game and didn’t know much about the game mechanics. They’re already very different from the advertised description. Also not the first time modified pre-engineered modules were released messed up.