Concerning to the discussion of these thread (http://forums.empiresmod.com/showthread.php?t=10546 and http://forums.empiresmod.com/showthread.php?t=10575) I have done an armor-vehicle table. Intent of this table is to easily see which armor is the best for each weapon. So you see e.g. best armor vs. guided is composite. Best armor vs. rail is absorbant. This table doesn't care about cost, weight, heat, bio effect, cycle time, clip size and accuracy because it is not possible to add these values in one simple table. Please check the values and calculation so I can put it on the wiki soon. Possible calculation problems: Does the angle modifier also affect HE MG and DU? Which is the correct order for the damage calculators? My calculation order currently is speed, damage reduction, angle modifier, bio. Wiki link: http://wiki.empiresmod.com/index.php?title=Image:Armor_weapon2.24.gif The .xlsx (Excel 2003) and .xls sheet can be downloaded at: www.pfffr.de/armor_weapon2.24.zip
:eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: WOW MATE! lol thats pritty dam awsome :p lol although its a bit hard to understand :S
Empty will come along and either congratulate you and slaughter you on your work. I'll take a good look if he thinks it's right. Nice work.
We should have a HowMuchPlatesRemovedPerSecond stat. Then we could really see what weapon is the most effective,
That explains why the AFV is so powerfull, Reflective with the Impirial Standard Cannon. Reactive is pretty bad too,
Which also just means absorbant is actually.. pretty damned good early game. That also means reactive is actually, pretty damned good but the problem would be plates and cost.
Reactive is usefull for light tanks in the early game, If we take cost and weight into count, then Absorbant and Reflective are pretty much the most effective armors in game. EDIT: Also, SalvoHoming is rape versus Absorbant.
That is really nice. Might I suggest adding the effective resources and weight destroyed per shot next to the number of plates destroyed per shot. It might also be nice to see weapon damages standardized to per second instead of per shot, but that would be more for weapon comparison than armour.
Adding more calculations like damage per second would be no problem but I'm tending more to see it on another table. With to many informations the table would be more difficult to read. If I publish it at the wiki I will also publish the .xls or .ods file. So everybody can make easily his own table.
what does it tell me. armor is either good or ... well ... not wasnt it like that different armor should be good vs different types of damage? this is not what this stats say - they say ... go reflective :\ NEEDS MOAR DIVERSITY!!!
Add in the cost and weight and you'll see that, in general, composite has the best protection for weight but wost for cost, reactive offers the best protection per layer but worst for weight, reflective the best damage reduction, and absorbent the best protection for cost but wost per layer.
some of this stuff seems wrong. where are you getting the 75% damage to reflective from vehicles mgs? I have been under the impression that vehicle mgs always do 100% to reflective. Also, selecting an arbitrary "average angle modifier" is being somewhat dishonest - it's impossible (or just really really really difficult) to know exactly what IS the average angle modifier used in real combat. I think there are other problems too, but I'm not sure what exactly to put a finger on, and I don't have the time to really research it now since I'm starting school again tomorrow. edit: I took a quick look and the angle modifier for reflective is actually 1 (which I knew, but double checked to make sure). How this exactly affects damage to reflective at various angles i'm not quite sure of, but at any rate, I wouldn't be surprised to find more inconsistencies with this spreadsheet if i picked around a bit more.
What's a formula I can use to figure out how many shots a plate of armor can take using the info. from this sheet?
You don't need a table. STD - Shit Gas Turbine - Ok but fat Fission - Awesome 3 Phase - OK Coolant - Pretty awful Bio Diesel - Won't stop running ever.
Because of this I'm waiting for a developer to check the calculation. (see possible calculation problems in OP). And having a minimum, averange and maximum angle modifier for standard, reactive and reflective armor would have wasted to much space in the table. But you can adjust this easily by changing the values in the .xls sheet. The .xls (no colors) and .xlsx (Excel 2003) sheet can be downloaded at: www.pfffr.de/armor_weapons.zip
