Comparing ship performance

[smartass]

So to compose my fleet groups, I've mostly been adding and removing ships to my opinion of how they perform. However, I have been noticing that sometimes actual performance differs from my expected hypothesis. I was looking at the mission statistics at the end of a mission with a fleet Comp of 1 Jupiter, 2 Artemis, 1 Atlas, 1 Minotaur and 1 adamant (8000), and comparing battle results. And realised that there's a scientific method to be approached here. However, I am also, very lazy. So I was wondering, has anyone statistically compared damage outputs of different ships (also accounting for fleet positioning possibly, as a stack closer to the enemy will most likely do more damage)?
So far, n=1, Jupiter doesn't outperform the Artemis in damage. Adamant seems to outperform the Minotaur and the Atlas in pure damage output. (I actually had this suspicion for a while though).
I'm going to keep track of it, see how Long I can keep it going.

[smartass]

In addition, is anyone certain whether at the end battle review, whether the total damage done includes missile damage?

[USS Midway veteran]

Hello Smartass, You've got quite a list of complicated questions there.

Sir Wagglepuss III has written some excellent guides that will help you with a lot of that information. You may want to check them out - if you haven't already.


Of course, the closer you are to an enemy the better your guns will perform. But as a guide, heavy turrets and Battlestar Artillery will do the most damage, but are also the most inaccurate and fire at the slowest rate - particularly from a distance, while the light, point-defense and medium turrets fire faster and are more accurate, but don't do as much damage.

I don't know exactly how you are calculating damage output from various Colonial ships, but there is no comparison between the Minotaur and the Adamant at close range - particularly at close to moderate range. You may want to double-check your assessment there. The Atlas has heavy and medium guns and would perform better the closer it is to the target.

The comparison between the Jupiter battlestar and the Artemis is correct to some degree, they both have battlestar artillery, heavy turrets and point-defense cannons. However, a Jupiter has a lot more battlestar artillery overall - including those on top and those on the bottom - as well as more heavy artillery. However, the Jupiter is far more heavily armored and can take a lot more punishment while the Artemis is a lot faster but has a soft underbelly.

As far as the end of mission report, click on each ship in your fleet and it will give you a read-out of how many ships it destroyed, but it does not tell you too much about how it did it. It will give you a number. However, I don't think the read-out distinguishes between destruction by guns, Vipers or missiles. I've never looked closely at that, maybe someone else can answer that question for you.

[Sir Wagglepuss III]

It's worth noting that my SP and MP guides are seriously outdated at this point. My stats guide however, is completely up to date as of the latest patch.

I'll put updating the SP and MP guides on my to-do list. Probably at some point after the two DLC's drop so I don't have to potentially change it all again.

[smartass]

Yes, I read those guides, and they are pretty helpful in terms of figuring out initial tactics. especially on the amount of turrets, they were extremely helpful in determining the proper application of different ships in different formations. I thank the honourable gentleman sir Wagglepuss the third for that.

However, I'm currently working on fleet optimisation, As I was wondering as to which ships to bring on the final mission. I like the concept of the atlas, but I wanted to know whether it's a feasible pick, as it does slow my fleet down enormously, not to forget that the AI tends to focus them down. I also wanted to know how the minotaur stacks up against the adamant in terms of total damage done (turrets, missiles and fighters included).

So Simply put, I wanted to know the exact value in damage output each ship brings. And since no one has done it yet, I made an excel sheet :-)

So I've started documenting the differences. I've so far built up records of 18 battles, and ended up on the following results (downloadable image below). Now bear in mind, I am nowhere near enough results to provide decent enough statements. For one, the damage output for the Ranger munitions damage seems horribly low. I hope more data clears that up. Also, the damage done by Adamant fighters is also consistently lower as compared to battlestars per fighter, while use, hangar bonus and viper types remain constant. (granted, I did use their vipers once for missile defence in lieau of anything better, but it still doesn't explain why they perform consistently poorer.) Another caviot is that the fighters on the atlas should outperform the vipers on battlestars theoretically, however, they perform somewhat equal.

But so far, I can say the following:
- Adamants do more total damage than minotaurs in total. The Minotaur does remain the undisputed turret powerhouse of the gang, and to ensure that pesky revenenant stays at bay, I'd recommend keeping one in your fleet, however, more than one is simply crippling your damage potential.
- Jupiters are only worth the FP cost increase compared to the Artemis for the raptor and the greater flak field. It's actual damage increase over the Artemis just isn't significant enough to warrent it's increase in price. This is possibly caused by the fact that she has a lot of dificulties diving to get into optimal range, missing out on potential damage output.
- An atlas performs incredibly bad on turrets, as it can't dive to get it's opponents within fire range.

All statistics are collected on medium dificulty. Still working on the data before I post anything serious.


https://uiv1fw.am.files.1drv.com/y4mCED9bwo3EBRPRbrOuHRh87R53rkfHSme6j5ypVI_8qymLkP6-fjfLYapSBHLILF7dR4-cKOjBvZQfeE1wEPbnXoiuG7DCkQRsfKwI7T49v7NF6X6OpVBLfhYbUfAvymms8-EDf64_wD960v9K6vpyhMw7yzQ-ptT25W9STIUtAK8WfO9vD0je6WgEI2qD_R1TEH_gm1fsL3f00gBxsV6wg?width=868&height=320&cropmode=none

[Sir Wagglepuss III]

Fighter damage output is contextual in the extreme, and is only relevant if you're testing them under very, very controlled circumstances.

The Jupiter does not out perform the Artemis in damage output at their most optimal angles, this is true. The Jupiter brings durability and utility for it's price tag. It has enough ventral firepower to be a credible threat to targets which dive under it (Which the Artemis does not), and of course the much larger flak field and support slot.

Atlas exist to bring bulk squadrons on the cheap. Everything else it does past that (Being a damage soak, supplementary firepower, etc) is merely a bonus. The Atlas generally allows you to keep your squadron count up whilst taking higher point cost ships like the Jupiter and Minerva.

Minotaurs bring value in that they have equal range to Revenants by default, and pack enough firepower to win a 1 v 1 fight comfortably, where you'll end up losing an Adamant if you use less than 3 at once.

Breaking things down into pure ship performance can be useful and has it's places, but strong consideration also has to be maintained for the fact that ships are tools to be applied to specific problems. A DPS chart could hypothetically put a long range Adamant and Minotaur into near the same performance range, but it doesn't account for things like the Minotaur's ability to engage targets at all angles, subsystem placements on the ships, weak armour in critical locations (Adamant nose is flimsy, so it has to turn away from targets once under fire putting it's nav at risk, etc).

[condottiere]

Doctrine dictates composition.

[USS Midway veteran]

Originally posted by Sir Wagglepuss III:

It's worth noting that my SP and MP guides are seriously outdated at this point. My stats guide however, is completely up to date as of the latest patch.

I'll put updating the SP and MP guides on my to-do list. Probably at some point after the two DLC's drop so I don't have to potentially change it all again.

Glad to hear it Wagglepuss. Your guides have always helped me a lot.

[USS Midway veteran]

Originally posted by smartass:

Yes, I read those guides, and they are pretty helpful in terms of figuring out initial tactics. especially on the amount of turrets, they were extremely helpful in determining the proper application of different ships in different formations. I thank the honourable gentleman sir Wagglepuss the third for that.

However, I'm currently working on fleet optimisation, As I was wondering as to which ships to bring on the final mission. I like the concept of the atlas, but I wanted to know whether it's a feasible pick, as it does slow my fleet down enormously, not to forget that the AI tends to focus them down. I also wanted to know how the minotaur stacks up against the adamant in terms of total damage done (turrets, missiles and fighters included).

So Simply put, I wanted to know the exact value in damage output each ship brings. And since no one has done it yet, I made an excel sheet :-)

So I've started documenting the differences. I've so far built up records of 18 battles, and ended up on the following results (downloadable image below). Now bear in mind, I am nowhere near enough results to provide decent enough statements. For one, the damage output for the Ranger munitions damage seems horribly low. I hope more data clears that up. Also, the damage done by Adamant fighters is also consistently lower as compared to battlestars per fighter, while use, hangar bonus and viper types remain constant. (granted, I did use their vipers once for missile defence in lieau of anything better, but it still doesn't explain why they perform consistently poorer.) Another caviot is that the fighters on the atlas should outperform the vipers on battlestars theoretically, however, they perform somewhat equal.

But so far, I can say the following:
- Adamants do more total damage than minotaurs in total. The Minotaur does remain the undisputed turret powerhouse of the gang, and to ensure that pesky revenenant stays at bay, I'd recommend keeping one in your fleet, however, more than one is simply crippling your damage potential.
- Jupiters are only worth the FP cost increase compared to the Artemis for the raptor and the greater flak field. It's actual damage increase over the Artemis just isn't significant enough to warrent it's increase in price. This is possibly caused by the fact that she has a lot of dificulties diving to get into optimal range, missing out on potential damage output.
- An atlas performs incredibly bad on turrets, as it can't dive to get it's opponents within fire range.

All statistics are collected on medium dificulty. Still working on the data before I post anything serious.


https://uiv1fw.am.files.1drv.com/y4mCED9bwo3EBRPRbrOuHRh87R53rkfHSme6j5ypVI_8qymLkP6-fjfLYapSBHLILF7dR4-cKOjBvZQfeE1wEPbnXoiuG7DCkQRsfKwI7T49v7NF6X6OpVBLfhYbUfAvymms8-EDf64_wD960v9K6vpyhMw7yzQ-ptT25W9STIUtAK8WfO9vD0je6WgEI2qD_R1TEH_gm1fsL3f00gBxsV6wg?width=868&height=320&cropmode=none

Sounds interesting. I've never done anything like that. Really never need to, but it certainly is not a waste of time. I'd be interested in looking at all your data when you are finished. I pretty much just choose fleet optimization by known performance and varying tactics. I've come up with eight various 8,000 fleets that can take on any Cylon fleet up through the Admiral level. I only have three that I use when playing Fleet Admiral.

[smartass]

Oh ï completely agree with all points you bring up. I'm just trying to figure out a baseline damage stat per ship. The utility is the other half of the picture that always needs to be considered.
I'll also add that the damage output per ship is also completely dependant on the strategy used, the amount of points an enemy has, or the amount of fighters in the air. Could even depend on my mood. So I am definitely not saying that I'm trying to make the buy all end all solution. My numbers are extremely situational, however, they can serve a decent enough insight into ship dps with a high enough number of tests. I am definitely not trying to present it as a fleetbuilding guide :)

[USS Midway veteran]

Originally posted by smartass:

Oh ï completely agree with all points you bring up. I'm just trying to figure out a baseline damage stat per ship. The utility is the other half of the picture that always needs to be considered.
I'll also add that the damage output per ship is also completely dependant on the strategy used, the amount of points an enemy has, or the amount of fighters in the air. Could even depend on my mood. So I am definitely not saying that I'm trying to make the buy all end all solution. My numbers are extremely situational, however, they can serve a decent enough insight into ship dps with a high enough number of tests. I am definitely not trying to present it as a fleetbuilding guide :)

I think what you are doing is great. I can see what you are getting at. You certainly do need to consider the effect of all of a ship's offensive weaponry and defensive capabilities and not just its guns. Interesting stuff that you have there. Sounds like a lot of work, but fun too. I have almost 1,600 hours in this game and I'm still finding new ways to play and evaluate how to do it better. Keep at it.

[Leyline]

Minervas are the most offensive vessels, you get both massive artilley as well as 2 missile slots and 2 fighter bays.

for 1850 points, its not possible to replicate it with other ships.

try a 4 stack.

[condottiere]

They're the equivalent of battlecruisers.