Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
Discussions Rules and Guidelines
Report this post
wait... the cruise can only be shot once every 5 secs ?
nah... I got with what I see. Not by what I feel,
Beginning the game to about "the middle" I'll stick to Beam Laser. In my "experience" of the game, that weapon gave me more pure/special ores than the rest. Since those are actually quite difficult to come by when you start... using a beam laser may very well give you that one-extra pure Clygon that you need to create a component.
What our dear stats-friend discounted is the extra bit that you get when you add all modifiers together. Not including pure ore AND the unknown that is brought by the Flak's AOE is a mistake IMO. Who's to say that the Flak can actually make use of the extra 10%, therefore the extra 25% of that and as a result the extra special ore that might yield.
(if you disregard the "extra" then, might as well not mine for anything and just wait for a special weapon drop that might or might not happen... stats compile and the Beam skewed ever so slightly towards being useful when I needed that extra juicy ore - again, in my experience -)
Like in "everything" why not put the extra effort and luck to your side if you've got the time to do so ? ;)
so, Flak when you don't care about crafting quicker, and Beam when you want those special components at hand. (that "ever so slightly" actually matters at the beginning of the game - sorry for repeating myself -)
If "this" is actually broken, and my observations are based solely on me being lucky, I'd like to know... 'cause if that's the case, I'll need to make a quick run to the nearest National Lottery booth.
I need to drink some water, lie down, and hope I can sleep more than 3 hours...............
(too much coffee today, and I might not have made ANY sense at all hahaha)
It's not like this game requires hyper optimization to beat. You can beat the game using whatever random gear you happen upon so long as it's level appropriate, optimizing a build just makes it easier. So I'd wager that the devs didn't intend for beam to be the one and only weapon anyone should ever mine with and they balanced it as such. You're fine just using whatever weapon works for you, and if you use a beam to do it, over the course of the game you'll have statistically scored yourself a decent amount of extra ores as a bonus.
Well, I cannot comment on whether there is some "unknown" about the flak, I'm not sure why you would assume there is some weird mechanic where the flak can't use the mining bonus. BUT, that's neither here nor there and we are actually in agreement even if you may not realize it. I think we don't know enough about the underlying mechanics and base numbers to make hard, definitive statements. The main point I was trying to get across is just how hard it is for us as players to verify (that is, with high degree of statistical confidence) these mechanics just looking at the results of a handful of nodes from a couple players. It would be easy to tell if the beam was +100% ore mined, or even +70%.
Ultimately, I do think using the beam will mine a decent amount of additional ore over the course of a game, including rares which is probably the most important. I just don't think it's going to matter for most players.
Cruise missile can't turn fast enough to hit anything cept big slow ships. So, no. They aren't useful against most enemies in the game.
On the subject of Flak vs Beam... Rithrin brought up a good point. The 25% bonus on Beam is not a direct bonus to the yield, it is a bonus to the modifier. It's a bonus to a bonus, basically.
The lev 25 reds I made have 131% increased chance for rare. That seems pretty straight forward. On average you should get 231%, or 2.31x as much as you would without it. If the 25% Beam bonus is multiplicative with that modifier, it should net a ~14% increase in rare ore yield, by my maths. If it is additive, it should net a ~11% increase.
If that's not how it works (or is meant to work), then I can't imagine the logic of it.
Anyway, I'm not gonna do more tests, I don't think. I'm not trying to make this my life's work, or anything. Maybe it's working as intended, maybe not. I posted my findings in the Bugs & Technical Issues forum.
I WILL say... even if I had found that Beam DID yield 25% more rare ores... I think I would still use Flak.
that's the point I was trying to make ^^
(mind was really fuzzy yesterday hahah)
have great Thursday !
Why are you assuming the 25% bonus applies just to the catalyst and not the base weapon as well? The 25% mining modifier should apply regardless if it has a catalyst on it or not. In other words if you mine 100 ore with a Flak and you were to mine the exact same mines with a beam you should get around 125 ore instead of 100. That's a 25% increase to the yield.
If you add a catalyst to both weapons then you could either get a 15% increase to the base and the bonus or just the bonus 25% like you mentioned, but how do you know which it is?
If it's the latter as you said than putting a catalyst on a flak should give you a 0% increase to the yield because you said the increase applies only to the bonus which for a flak is 0%. That doesn't make any sense so it would appear the 15% applies to the base for a flak at least.
But if that's true as I contend it is then you should get a (100*25%)*15%) increase to the yield for the beam. If that's true you should get 143 ore instead of 125 ore. Even if the percentages are only added together rather than multiplied than you should get (100*25%) + (100*15%) or 140 ore rather than 125. Either way that's a significant difference over the 115 ore that you should get with the flak.
He tested with 50 mines. I don't really know what the yield on average would be for 50 mines but it should be heck of a lot more than 100 ore. With that amount of testing he should have gotten a fairly substantial increase in the amount of ore mined with the beam over the flak. Unfortunately he didn't actually check the total ore he got only the higher quality yield which does throw a monkey wrench into this whole argument, but I still contend that just the 25% increase to yield alone should give you a fairly substantial increase to the quality as well and that's without the additional 25% increase to quality. Yet he only got an increase of a single higher quality ore in all of his testing. Even accounting for just plain randomness of mines, that doesn't make any sense. Something is definitely amiss or there was some flaw in his testing, which is quite possible. Perhaps all mine types don't generate the same yield? If so unless he mined the exact same number of mines of the same type that could throw off the results.
I'll do some testing of my own when I have a chance. I really haven't spent a lot of time playing since release 1.0 as I had already played over 800 hours of ES2 in EA and I've had a few real life things going on since release 1.0.
It's actually pretty good against minefields and drones as well.
Close in on 2km from target, fire a missiles, shoot a few flak rounds, then finish off with primary weapon.
So if you have a vanilla Beam and a vanilla Flak, neither of them have *any* mining modifiers whatsoever (energy refund on mining, additional ore yield, etc). Since they have no mining modifiers, the beam's +25% has nothing to affect. I hope this is a more clear explanation.
Imagine that you had a unit of Destabilizer Missiles, then installed an Energy Damage catalyst which adds a line to those missiles that reads "+25% Energy Damage". Since the missiles don't do damage, it wouldn't suddenly start doing energy damage, right? 0 damage increased by 25% is still 0. It needs to do at least some energy damage for that ability to have any effect.
Not 100% I comprehend what you are saying here, but I'm saying the beam's natural bonus, as worded, applies only to modifiers, not that the Catalyst only applies to modifiers. The Catalyst *grants* modifiers to an item, so it works with the Flak, of course.
Well, yes and no. If it works the way you suggest then the 15% isn't correct. I came to the 15% because a 25% increase of the Catalyst's 50% results in a delta of 15%. If it works the way you suggest, then it would be (100*50%)*25% or (100*50%) + (100*25%). But yes, it would be quite significant if it works that way.
I agree. If, as you contend, the beam bonus is a flat +25% to the base mining performance (rather than "modifiers" as it states), then it should be providing very significant bonuses to yield that would be almost immediately obvious even with small-ish sample sizes. But it doesn't appear to be, given the results of that 50 node test. So I'm inclined to believe my very literal reading of the beam's ability to be correct.
Yes, I wondered as well if each type of mineral has it's own attributes that modify your yield rate and chance at increased quality. This is yet another possible variable that makes it difficult to verify all these mechanics with small sample sizes. Additional variables are that I don't actually know what the base minimum or maximum yield is from a standard node, if it varies per ore type, if the number of hits a node can take is standard, etc, etc.
Beams will sometimes roll with some of the Mining Catalyst bonuses already one them. They don't have the Mining Prefix and the ones I've seen don't have all 3 bonuses.
They are the same bonuses as Catalyst, though. Same values (dependent on level and rarity of the weapon), and adding a Mining Catalyst to that weapon will not increase them, it only adds any of the 3 bonuses that it didn't originally roll with.
Assuming you guys are talking about my test. Yeah, I didn't care about the non rare drops because by the time I am fussing over Mining Catalysts, non-rare drops are irrelevant.
In terms of the nodes I mined, I kept careful track to do exactly the same number of each ore type for each weapon, but they weren't the exact same nodes. That would be difficult without save-scumming. So... if all nodes of the same ore type do not have equal possible yield, then that would skew my results. I doubt that's the case, but I can't be certain.
I may do another test soon, with my current, post-release play through, now that I am gearing up at level 30.
EDIT: TBH, I will keep using Flak to mine, regardless of what any future tests reveal. But I love that kind of stuff for some weird reason. Also, if I keep telling people 'Use Flak, it's better" then I want to be able to back it up with data.