Elite Shipyard

[Noobilite]

As always, these are trade-offs between screen real estate and readability vs information detail. Can you clarify what information from Coriolis' power bar you're missing on EDSY? I think all the same numbers are available, although for some you have to mouse-over a block on the power bar which may not be intuitive (and impossible on mobile, unfortunately). The two weapon heat numbers are (in theory) for when weapons are fired with a full WEP capacitor, vs a nearly empty capacitor (weapons generate more heat when the capacitor gets low); this detail is kind-of-sort-of mentioned in the mouseover text for the "WEP" label next to those heat readings, but I know that's not very intuitive either. Again, just a question of where to put those details and explanations that don't clutter the display more than it already is.

The biggest thing missing is the ability to see the exact 20% 40% 50% 80% and 100%. Plus the ability to click on the seperate areas and see the exact values. Is it possible to make the 1/2/3/4/5 clickable similar to coriolis to dispaly both the exact mw and %? Even scroll over information for exact mw for each weapon priority grouping on the display bar individually would be more than sufficient. Maybe just add the tooltip for scroll over adding up the Total exact MW(non rouneded) and a % of total if anything. Should work. And maybe a mark for 20% and maybe 80%. I know 20% is supposed to matter in some circumstances. But it is not referred to often.

Edit: NVM, there is a current tooltip! >< I think I had my window scrolled out too far and it wasn't displaying. I guess it just needs a 20% bar potentially. Which isn't really needed as it displays total % for each grouping. But if it's still a mechanic it might help bring awareness of it's existence to the community as a whole.

Some stuff hints that a certain type of damage or effect can happen that drops the power down to 20% for 5 seconds. Another drops it to 40% for 5 seconds. I'm not sure on 80%, but I've seen something indicating that also. On top of PP death being at 50% after destruction. I think it was 20% for 5 seconds then 50% afterwords. I forget though. It has to do with some of the odd disabling abilities from weapons potentially or the PP destruction.

PvP - So does power plant damage mean nothing anymore?

At one time zeroing the PP was directly followed by destruction, but many patches ago it was changed to having a chance to destroy a ship. These days you have to continue firing, sometimes well beyond zero, in order to get an explosion.

forums.frontier.co.uk

Unless this is no longer valid. I always start my hypothetical designs trying to give superprioirty at 1 below 20% just so somethings aren't stopped even by power supply death. I think it's 5 seconds then it goes to 50%. I think the 40% is from various weapons effect disruptions which I think it also supposed to be 5 seconds. I could be very wrong though.

I do priority 1 <= 20%, 2 <= 40%, 3 <= 50%, 4 <= 100%, 5 <= 100% or overflow. Example: Crazy Cutter!

If thrusters are more than 20% overall I make them priority 2 and make 1+2<=40% while 1 is 40%-thrusters and still below 20% total. Although having thrusters cut with fsd won't help much. But big thrusters tend to be more than 20% total even with the biggest PPs. So, I usually put shields and FSD or something that might be advantagous at 1. Like getting shields back up without interruptions.

I've heard of an 80% power thing also, but can't remember where. Any idea why 80% might be important? I could be remembering wrong.

That's a good idea, I'll put it on the list. Do you know of any reference for what all of the bonuses are for all ammo types of all weapons? Is the wiki accurate for those details?

I'm assuming it's just a 15% and 30% bonus. I haven't got to test it though in game. From what I've looked at in the synth screen for the ammo it just says 15% or 30% for any applicable ammo bonuses if it has it.

For now the easiest way to clear out engineering is to use the drop-down above the details pane and change it back to "(Stock)". But I'm planning to tweak those controls since it seems to be a common issue that folks expect the blueprint to be applied as soon as they set it, and don't realize they also have to click the blue circle to choose a roll level; when that change is made, then simply changing the blueprint back to "(No Blueprint)" could also reset the modifiers, although that would make it harder to type in custom values for a "what-if" kind of modification.

You could also just change it so when clicking, "(No Blueprint)" the blue objects next to the secondary effect aren't greyed out. If those blue circles are clickable those apply all bonuses and would accomplish the same thing. Although automatic changes would work too.

Didn't see the stock thing. That is even faster than what I am proposing.

TLDR:

So, basically the only things that might help are the 20% power mark, and a premium ammo application with 15% and 30% bonuses.

BTW, what is the 14s in red just below the weapons thermal%?

Edit: found something else potentially. The only shield res% that changes with pip changes is the absolute res %. And is there any way to input price reduction for ships and modules and the odd alpha beta rebuy stuff? I think there is power play rebuy in the game too now and various other modifications to it. Not sure how much of a hassle some of that might be though. Edit: I found it in the old look but it is missing from the new look. All of what I've been saying is from the perspective of the new look. I forget there are two of them since I usually just use the new one.

 

[Polaras]

Welcome back, taleden!
Is that paypal link on the legacy site still good?

 

[Daniel Klimchuk]

Great work! That'll come in handy!

 

[Noobilite]

I had an idea for premium ammo. Make another set of shapes just under the Blue circles in the item detailed description per item. But don't have it greyed out when selecting no blueprint. Maybe use triangles!(or whatever shape hasn't been used that is appropriate.) Or maybe a Triangle/Square/Pentagon? This represents an increase in value based on tier. Each one having sides +1.

Make 3 shapes:
1: no bonus (this removes the bonus altogether)
2: 15% When clicked it redoes the % bonus by adding (*1.15)
2: 30% When clicked it redoes the % bonus by adding (*1.3)

Then just make a variable onto the formula that is 1.XX.

1: 1.00
2: 1.15
3: 1.3

Easy peasy! Redisplay the bonus value and new damage/total upon clicking one of these three boxes. Set default to 1.00.

The multiplier should always calculate the total bonus before applying to the base damage. Obviously! 8)

 

[Truesilver]

Hi All,

For any who might remember me, I no longer play ED but used to contribute a lot towards weapons data both in the earliest era of the game (when, pre-2.1, Frontier released nothing, so we had to test everything) and also subsequently when some (not all) data started making its way into Outfitting. The first iteration of the weapons data on Coriolis was based upon my old thread here:

https://forums.frontier.co.uk/threads/official-fdev-damage-stats-for-every-weapon.246086/

Within that, you’ll see that I used the 2:1 thermal:kinetic damage ratio for rails because that had already been established in No.2 of my ‘Truesilver’s Tests’ series, hence Coriolis used that split. Sadly it appears that (unlike some of my other stuff) that thread may not have survived Frontier’s transition to the new forum (it may still exist somewhere on the www, I suppose). Suffice to say that the testing was entirely scientific and used the same multiple-firings-at-sys-depleted-shield-of-known-value-then-backwards-calculated-by-resistances method that Cmdr Maligno has used in his much more comprehensive and recent tests.

Anyways, I was checking back and just wanted to chip in with a few things for old times’ sake:

(a) First and foremost, I’m delighted to see Cmdr Taleden is back. Thank you as ever for all your work;

(b) I’m pleased to see that the 2:1 thermal:kinetic rail ratio has been confirmed by Cmdr Maligno as remaining accurate;

(c) I’m not sure that plasma really needed to be tested because the 60:20:20 absolute:thermal:kinetic ratio is a Develop-stated value going back to the introduction of the absolute component in ED Patch 2.2.03 … although of course it’s always good to confirm stuff!

(d) I’m very grateful to Cmdr Maligno for his confirmation of the 90:10 thermal:kinetic ratio on incendiary, which afaik is completely fresh info, thank you;

(e) In case anyone is interested, Mark Allen (FDev Damage Supremo) confirmed to me on PM that the SLF plasma-repeater did not move to the 60:20:20 ratio with regular plasma but instead remained on the prior 50:50 thermal:kinetic ratio with no absolute component. I expect that remains good info but as the PM was about 2 years ago, this perhaps is something Cmdr Maligno or others could confirm;

(f) In answer to Cmdr Nooblite about Powerplant outputs, whenever a Powerplant that still has any module hp remaining malfunctions (whatever the cause) it drops to 40% output. When a PP reaches 0% health it drops briefly to 20% output before rising to 50% output. Any malfunction on 0 hp causes ship destruction. Oddly, yes, this means that a malfunctioning powerplant on 90% health gives less power than a PP on 0% health.

o7’s to all,

Truesilver

 

[Maligno]

Yes indeed, your report is exactly where I got the updated Incendiary numbers. If you ever have time to test the damage split of High Yield Shell and Overload Munitions, I'd be much obliged!

Hey, I updated the analysis to include High Yield Shell and Overload munitions.

It turns out High Yield Shell splits the damage 50/50 between kinetic and explosive. Ditto for Overload Munitions, splitting 50/50 between thermal and explosive.

 

[Maligno]

(e) In case anyone is interested, Mark Allen (FDev Damage Supremo) confirmed to me on PM that the SLF plasma-repeater did not move to the 60:20:20 ratio with regular plasma but instead remained on the prior 50:50 thermal:kinetic ratio with no absolute component. I expect that remains good info but as the PM was about 2 years ago, this perhaps is something Cmdr Maligno or others could confirm;

I can try having a look at the Plasma Repeater SLF. It'll give me a good excuse to finally get that SLF and play with it =) I should also test the Trident SLF and see if it shares the roughly 50/50 split between AX damage and Absolute damage of Plasma Chargers.

Regarding other measurements, it's nice to see consistency over a period of 2 years since you started looking at this stuff. There are some trust issues between players and fdev, so it's always good to keep checking. Speaking of which, I rechecked all the numbers above and they are still the same in 3.4 (thank goodness).

Below is a link to my AX damage split study. Please keep in mind that the numbers listed for the conventional damage of each weapon in the outfitting screen are probably off by 10%, which would have an effect on the solutions AX weapons.

AX Weapon Damage Partitions | Canonn Research Group

1. Introduction There has been recent success in using rigorous mathematical techniques to accurately estimate the damage partitioning of human weapons, such as Plasma Accelerators and Railguns [1]. Information from the weapon damage partitioning study and similar mathematical techniques were...

canonn.science

 

[Noobilite]

Hey, I updated the analysis to include High Yield Shell and Overload munitions.

It turns out High Yield Shell splits the damage 50/50 between kinetic and explosive. Ditto for Overload Munitions, splitting 50/50 between thermal and explosive.

That is interesting. I've found in coriolis and edshipyard there is a way to make shields get even res on Kinetic and Thermal or Kinetic and Explosive. It fits those perfectly. And armor can be made to be even Kinetic and Thermal and sometimes all three even. Not sure on exploive/kinetic yet for armor although I think that is doable also. I think It's intentional. And from what I've played with it takes full use of utility slots with specialized shields. Say, Thermal focus. This is an example on my Crazy Cutter Coriolis! They differ slightly on implementation from coriolis to Shipyard though. But the difference is only changing one sheild booster from thermal to kinetic secondary. Crazy Cutter Shipyard!

Explosive/Kinetic Cutter!

With this Krait you can simply change it from Thermal to Reinforced and adjust with miltiweave/FastCharge/High Cap/LowDraw to fit which type of sys regen you are sporting.

Coriolis EDCD Edition

A ship builder, outfitting and comparison tool for Elite Dangerous

s.orbis.zone

 

[MartinG]

hello again!

Glad to see you work on EDSY again!

And what makes me really happy is that loadout file import is working now!!

In answer to Cmdr Nooblite about Powerplant outputs, whenever a Powerplant that still has any module hp remaining malfunctions (whatever the cause) it drops to 40% output. When a PP reaches 0% health it drops briefly to 20% output before rising to 50% output.

I believe the temporary drop to 20% results from the total integrity loss commonly occurring simultaneously with a malfunction (note that 0.5×0.4 = 0.2). That would explain why, according to reports I’ve read on these forums, it happens frequently but not always.

 

[taleden]

Updated to 3.4.0a6 :

• redesigned the blueprint, grade and roll selectors to behave more intuitively; choosing a blueprint now immediately applies it at maximum grade/roll, and changing the grade or blueprint re-applies it at the selected roll level (except for the "custom" roll, which will always leave attribute values as-is)
• added support for ship and module price discounts
• added support for importing ship builds from CAPI profile or journal data (currently only by copy-paste of JSON; automatic imports directly from the FDev API hopefully to follow)
• fixed a bug in the calculation of replace/restock/rearm costs
• redesigned all icons in SVG
• corrected the stock Sidewinder and Eagle loadouts
• corrected the Mamba's armor hardness
• updated the High Yield Shell and Overload Munitions with damage-type changes

 

[Noobilite]

What about preserving the pip state in a save. I don't know if it matters but I use is it a lot in coriolis.

Plus. What does the potentially red number in seconds mean beneath the weapons % in the thermal section? It's between WEP and SCB

Is it just weapons heat? If so is it weapons heat alone or with all other things running?

 

[taleden]

What about preserving the pip state in a save. I don't know if it matters but I use is it a lot in coriolis.

That was actually implemented at one point but disabled when the power controls were moved from the central slots panel down to the status panels. Design-wise it feels weird to me for the build to save those settings now, since they're positioned more like UI state than part of the build configuration. But I see the point that it does make sense to have different default pip setups for different kinds of builds; I'll think on that.

Plus. What does the potentially red number in seconds mean beneath the weapons % in the thermal section? It's between WEP and SCB

Is it just weapons heat? If so is it weapons heat alone or with all other things running?

Yes, the two numbers beside WEP are the estimated heat with weapons firing, the first while the WEP capacitor is full and the second while it's nearly empty, since weapons start to generate more heat as the capacitor depletes. When the number is a percentage, it's the equilibrium heat level; when it's a duration in red, it's the time until the ship will begin to overheat (in which case there is no equilibrium, it will of course continue heating up until you stop firing or run out of capacitor). These details are also mentioned in the mouseover text for the WEP label.

 

[Maligno]

(e) In case anyone is interested, Mark Allen (FDev Damage Supremo) confirmed to me on PM that the SLF plasma-repeater did not move to the 60:20:20 ratio with regular plasma but instead remained on the prior 50:50 thermal:kinetic ratio with no absolute component. I expect that remains good info but as the PM was about 2 years ago, this perhaps is something Cmdr Maligno or others could confirm;

I just completed an analysis of SLF damage splits. And yes, the Plasma Repeater is 50% kinetic and 50% thermal with no absolute component.

I also take the time to explain why the Trident SLF is so darn bad. Check out the link below:
https://canonn.science/codex/slf-damage-partition-analysis/

 

[Noobilite]

Did anyone ever prove wether rails and imperal hammers are 33/66 or 50/50.. I'm confused now about it. I swore that shipyard said it was 66% kinetic and 33% thermal. But now it says it's 66% thermal and 33% kinetic. I might have read it wrong before. I think coriolis still says they are 50/50.

 

[Maligno]

Did anyone ever prove wether rails and imperal hammers are 33/66 or 50/50.. I'm confused now about it. I swore that shipyard said it was 66% kinetic and 33% thermal. But now it says it's 66% thermal and 33% kinetic. I might have read it wrong before. I think coriolis still says they are 50/50.

Yes, I showed that rails have 66% thermal and 33% kinetic in the paper below:

Weapon Damage Partition Analysis | Canonn Research Group

1. Executive Summary The partition of the different types of damage (i.e. thermal, kinetic, absolute) has been determined for Railguns, Incendiary Multi-Cannons, High Yield Shell Cannons, Overload Munitions Seeker Missiles, Inertial Impact Burst Lasers, and Plasma Accelerators. The results are...

canonn.science

I didn't look at imperial hammers, but I think it's safe to assume they are the same.

 

[RELSPI]

I don't get that split on rails. Aren't rails literally just shooting super-fast bullets?

 

[Maligno]

I don't get that split on rails. Aren't rails literally just shooting super-fast bullets?

Haha, who knows. But my best guess is that the bullets "ignite" on impact and deal thermal damage.

 

[MartinG]

I don't get that split on rails. Aren't rails literally just shooting super-fast bullets?

Makes more sense than one might think. At sufficiently high velocities, a bullet hitting something solid can generate enough heat to melt (or even vaporize) the bullet along with some part of the solid it hits. That’s how micrometeoroid damage typically works.

 

[Truesilver]

I didn't look at imperial hammers, but I think it's safe to assume they are the same.

I can confirm that Imperial Hammers have the same 2:1 thermal:kinetic damage split as rails, as follows.

As noted in my recent post in this thread, in No.2 of my "Truesilver's Tests" series, back in 2015-16, I tested the above damage split and got the same outcome as Cmdr Maligno in his recent testing.

However, in No.1 of the same series, I'd already tested the total triple burst of an Imperial Hammer as doing about 8% more damage than the single shot of a c2 rail. Testing was against a vanilla shield as in those days ofc everything was vanilla. Very, very many shots were tested under controlled conditions without shield regen etc. and analysed using Windows Movie Maker.

This was, of course, before Frontier released their damage stats, hence the need for testing. Then, when in Patch 2.1, Frontier released damage stats we were able to see that each burst of an Imperial Hammer (45 damage) does indeed do about 8% more damage than a single rail (41.5 damage), or to be precise, 8.43% more damage. There have been no subsequent changes to those stats.

The additional 0.43% is well within the error margin.

Now, the above proves that Imp Hammers and Rails must have the same damage split, because otherwise my +8% would not have tallied with the subsequently revealed damage stats. The difference between kinetic (+40%) and thermal (-20%) resists on a vanilla shield is very large, so if Hammer damage had a different thermal:kinetic distribution, my testing would have yielded a result that would have seemed quite anomalously different to the subsequently revealed damage stats, rather than the same.

 

[Maligno]

I can confirm that Imperial Hammers have the same 2:1 thermal:kinetic damage split as rails, as follows.

As noted in my recent post in this thread, in No.2 of my "Truesilver's Tests" series, back in 2015-16, I tested the above damage split and got the same outcome as Cmdr Maligno in his recent testing.

However, in No.1 of the same series, I'd already tested the total triple burst of an Imperial Hammer as doing about 8% more damage than the single shot of a c2 rail. Testing was against a vanilla shield as in those days ofc everything was vanilla. Very, very many shots were tested under controlled conditions without shield regen etc. and analysed using Windows Movie Maker.

This was, of course, before Frontier released their damage stats, hence the need for testing. Then, when in Patch 2.1, Frontier released damage stats we were able to see that each burst of an Imperial Hammer (45 damage) does indeed do about 8% more damage than a single rail (41.5 damage), or to be precise, 8.43% more damage. There have been no subsequent changes to those stats.

The additional 0.43% is well within the error margin.

Now, the above proves that Imp Hammers and Rails must have the same damage split, because otherwise my +8% would not have tallied with the subsequently revealed damage stats. The difference between kinetic (+40%) and thermal (-20%) resists on a vanilla shield is very large, so if Hammer damage had a different thermal:kinetic distribution, my testing would have yielded a result that would have seemed quite anomalously different to the subsequently revealed damage stats, rather than the same.

Thank you for confirming they have the same damage split.

I don't yet own Imperial Hammers, but when I do I might take some time to run a quick test and make sure the damage split is still the same. I have no reason to believe they have changed, but in this game you never know =)