Skippie, it hasn't been proved yet: only Recoda himself has been able to see any difference. The two other testers since then have only checked maxed weapons and seen no obvious difference.
Anyone wondering about this should download Recoda's little program and start collecting data themselves. It will take a massive amount of very carefully collected data to "prove" this to any degree of certainty, much less work out what exactly the attachments do. For example, even if the full mod % is applied to the HA (like what you describe Skippie), but there is no modification at 10/10, at what point does one fade into the other?
BTW that program is useful for keeping count if you're testing evade, too.
Besides, Recoda is a wiz with statistics and data
Recoda said:These tests were done with 1000 shoots in total. I think I'm going to try to do at least 10,000 shoots later on to get more accurate results.
Hi,
impressive work, I will spread some +rep around.
One thing bugs me though -- I have the strong feeling (and I may test that later using the program) that the mob itself does also affect my hitrate. I have noticed several times that hunting mobs that are near my limit (i.e. that I can take down alone barely) comes with a crappy hitrate. E.g. I hit Corn Mature almost every time, on a Corn Stalker, I can easily miss three shots in a row with the same weapon (as they are bigger, I should miss lest often, but hey, that would be realistic ). Meaning: Each mob may have it's own Evade/Dodge skill. If this turns out to be true, the research must be limited to 1 mob, 1 maturity .
Anyone have proof against his (making things a bit easier)? Otherwise, I shall test this.
Now... Based on the above, wouldn't the obvious assumption be that low conditioned lasers/scopes lowers your effective HA?
And if so, is it then worth to use low conditioned lasers/scopes if your on 6.2 HA, to get skills like you did at 5.8? (Just example numbers, ofc)
Hmmm... Interesting.
Konve said:Edit2: I wonder if there will be laser and scopes with Negative figgures in the future. Say you have really high skills, your have a hidden HA figgure of 15. But the gun is maxed at 10 so it doesn't show more then that. But still, from hunting you can tell that you gain almost no skills at all, because they are already so high - all mobs are below your level.
So if you attach some -50% to your weapon, and you now have a hidden figgure of 10, and your shown HA is still 10. So your stats were not modified, however you now gain skills a lot faster because the mobs are at your level (again).
I agree with Demoniac that it's about time, MA visualized the effects of the amps.
Who knows... Maybe damage amps also affetcs HA? It's another popular belief that damage amps affects you skill gains too...
Hmm... Now my head hurts again
Nice work on the wiki Witte. I'm glad to see there's a bold disclaimer that attachments aren't fully understood yet. I notice that it doesn't remove non-ranged weapons from the list when sights and scopes are added, is that intended behavior? Also, it appears from testing here that there is no affect over 10 HA. Is that currently considered for SIB weapons in the wiki stats?
Edit: actually, there is very little change in any weapon eco on wiki when adding attachments. What formula did you use?
Very cool thing Witte. But might I ask, does it calculate your eco on the gun using both average damage and missed shots accoring to your HA?
Soon there will only be critical hits left to deal with.
(And of course the whole loot pool thing. )
I tried changing the conventionally accepted hit % range (80-92) to 80-91 but the unmaxed values fit much closer if i kept the old range.
What about 81 to 91? What is your HA in this test?
I did a small test with an unmaxed weapon on ambus today...
But how small, is small?
Doer said:I did a small test with an unmaxed weapon on ambus today and updated my earlier post with the actual data.
I have been thinking about the data posted in all the posts and while there is some good data, it is still not enough to draw any conclusion...
There is a nice thing called a statistical test, used to determine if two sets of data are significantly different from another. Significantly means a level of confidence of 95%.
As I posted earlier in this thread; I did four runs at 10 HA:
1079 shots fired; 89 misses (8,2%)
1212 shots fired; 106 misses (8,7)
1171 shots fired; 117 misses (9,9%)
1098 shots fired; 98 misses (8,9%)
None of these were significantly different (form the lowest at 8,2%), right?
Or do they have to be exactly the same amount of shots before you're convinced?
Gingko said:Conclusion: The only data set we seem to have enough data on is the one with maxed weapons -- here we could potentially throw all data in one pot.
Non-maxed weapons with and without attachments need much more data to be able to really see the difference -- and to calculate the effect on eco without big assumptions.
What is mostly proven so far:
-skill modification attachments (sights and scopes) do not improve your hit rate on maxed SIB weapons
Actually - any and all test so far using an already maxed out weapon (only SIB so far) with scope and lasers has had a worse performance then those without.
Any improvement (if it exists) in the hit rate of maxed weapons due to scopes and sights is more than overcome by the extra decay of those attachments, meaning that putting modification attachments on a maxed SIB weapon is a bad idea when it comes to economy.
Unless it will alter your level (for better or worse {by using low TT attachments}) and alater your skillgains to the better - which has not been proved.