Symthic Forum was shut down on January 11th, 2019. You're viewing an archive of this page from 2019-01-08 at 22:45. Thank you all for your support! Please get in touch via the Curse help desk if you need any support using this archive.

Welcome to symthic forums! We would love if you'd register!
You don't have to be expert in bit baking, everyone is more than welcome to join our community.

You are not logged in.

## The impact of decreasing SIPS for SLRs, TT edition

Posts: 307

Date of registration
: Mar 31st 2015

Platform: Xbox One

Reputation modifier: 8

Sunday, December 10th 2017, 7:27pm

### The impact of decreasing SIPS for SLRs, TT edition

A new DLC is once again upon us and shortly thereafter a fresh balancing patch with TTK adjustments. For those of you who have played the CTE, they are quite fun, though in some scenarios, I felt a little underwhelmed by particular medic rifles. I also felt like some variants, in particular storm variants, felt quite a bit better than in retail. I set out to explore why through the simple lens of effective fire rate.

First, let's go through the minimum TTK of SLR with different fire rates.

### Spoiler

4 Bullets to kill (BTK):
• 449 RPM = 401 ms (Fedorov Avtomat)

3 BTK:
• 299 RPM = 401 ms (Cei-Rigotti, General Liu, M1907, Selbstlader 1906)
• 257 RPM = 467 ms (Mondragon, Farquhar-Hill)
• 224 RPM = 536 ms (Selbstlader 1916)

2 BTK:
• 163 RPM = 368 ms (RSC)

Now, let's discuss optimal fire rate (click rate). The optimal rate is defined as the rate at which spread resets fully between bullets, such that your weapon will predictably hit your target. The equation to compute optimal fire rate is:

RPM_O = 60/((60/RPM)+(SIPS/SDec))

SIPS is the spread increase per shot, and SDec is the spread decrease rate. The ratio of SIPS to SDec serves to always produce an optimal fire rate below the maximum fire rate of an SLR. In retail, Optical, Marksman, and Factory variants always step down one fire rate tier (e.g. 299 --> 257 RPM) while Storm, Trench, Sweeper, Extended, and Sniper variants step down two fire rate tiers (e.g. 299 --> 224 RPM). With the SIPS buff (0.2 --> 0.1 SIPS), the RPM step down is cut in half. Now, Optical, Marksman, and Factory variants will step down 1/2 fire rate tier (e.g. 299 --> 276 RPM) while Storm, Trench, Sweeper, Extended, and Sniper variants will step down one fire rate tier (e.g. 299 --> 257 RPM). Below is an effective TTK chart for each fire rate tier with the new (left) and old (right) TTK calculated using optimal fire rate. The 1/2 step is be labeled O,M,F and the full step is labeled S,T,E.

### Spoiler

449 RPM = 401 ms (Fedorov Avtomat), 4 BTK
• 399 RPM, 451 ms - O,M,F - 359 RPM, 501 ms
• 359 RPM, 501 ms - S,T,E - 299 RPM, 602 ms

• 326 RPM, 368 ms - O,M,F - 299 RPM, 401 ms
• 299 RPM, 401 ms - S,T,E - 259 RPM, 496 ms

299 RPM = 401 ms ((Cei-Rigotti, General Liu, M1907, Selbstlader 1906), 3 BTK
• 276 RPM, 435 ms - O,M,F - 256 RPM, 469 ms
• 256 RPM, 469 ms - S,T,E - 224 RPM, 536 ms

257 RPM = 467 ms (Mondragon, Farquhar-Hill), 3 BTK
• 240 RPM, 500 ms - O,M,F - 224 RPM, 536 ms
• 224 RPM, 536 ms - S,T,E - 200 RPM, 600 ms

224 RPM = 536 ms Selbstlader 1916), 3 BTK
• 210 RPM, 571 ms - O,M,F - 200 RPM, 600 ms
• 200 RPM, 600 ms - S,T,E - 179 RPM, 670 ms

163 RPM = 368 ms (RSC), 2BTK
• 156 RPM, 385 ms - O,M,F - 149 RPM, 403 ms

Some takeaways:
1. This is an effective buff to Storm, Trench, and Sniper variants. The effective TTK improvement for O,M,F variants is a little more than half that of the effective TTK improvement for S,T,E variants. (e.g. Cei-Rigotti Optical/Factory buff is a 7.2% decrease in optimal TTK, but the Cei-Rigotti Trench buff is a 12.5% decrease in optimal TTK
2. High fire rate variants also received an effective buff, independent of variant. The effective TTK improvement of the Cei-Rigotti Optical/Factory was 7.2%, but the effective TTK improvement of the RSC Optical/Factory was only 4.5%.
3. This should massively improve the Fedorov Avtomat Trench, as it saw the single best improvement in optimal TTK (a full 100 ms, or 16.7%). The other big winners are the Autoloading 8 .25 Extended (14.5%), the Cei-Rigotti Trench (12.5%), the General Liu Storm (12.5%), and the Fedorov Avtomat Optical (10%).
4. This is relatively very weak improvement to the RSC and Selbstlader 1916. Their Optical and Factory variants only received 4.5% and 4.8% buffs, respectively.
5. Finally, I think this exercise reveals the danger of just balancing around SIPS and range (which has been increased for SLRs as a whole). I believe SLRs also need a horizontal recoil (HRec) decrease to remain competitive, particularly for the members of the low RPM groups.

This post has been edited 4 times, last edit by "InterimAegis" (Dec 10th 2017, 7:39pm) with the following reason: Words and formatting

Posts: 181

Date of registration
: Dec 14th 2016

Platform: PS4

Location: UK

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 5

Sunday, December 10th 2017, 7:37pm

Nicely compiled, but wasn't all of this obvious as soon as we had the numbers for the spread buff?

Symthic Developer

Posts: 3,750

Date of registration
: Mar 21st 2013

Platform: PC

Location: __main__, Finland

Reputation modifier: 17

Sunday, December 10th 2017, 7:39pm

### Quoted from "Shalan"

Nicely compiled, but wasn't all of this obvious as soon as we had the numbers for the spread buff?

Something being obvious is not equal to "proven" / backed up by evidence. One should not argue with "it is obvious", because sometimes things are not as everyone assumes.
• 3VerstsNorth - Analysis of game mechanics in BF4 (tickrates, effects of tickrate, etc)
• InterimAegis - Weapon comparisons/scoring.
• leptis - Analysis of shotguns, recoil, recoil control and air drag.
• Veritable - Scoring of BF4/BF1 firearms in terms of usability, firing and other mechanics.
• pmax - Statistical analysis of BF4 players/games.
• Miffyli - Random statistical analysis of BF4 battlereports/players and kill-distances. (list is cluttered with other threads).
Sorry if your name wasn't on the list, I honestly can't recall all names : ( . Nudge me if you want to be included

Posts: 307

Date of registration
: Mar 31st 2015

Platform: Xbox One

Reputation modifier: 8

Sunday, December 10th 2017, 7:40pm

### Quoted from "Shalan"

Nicely compiled, but wasn't all of this obvious as soon as we had the numbers for the spread buff?

To those of us on here all the time, yes. This post is designed to correct a lot of misinformation. I also feel like some of the winners and losers might not be obvious if you donÂt lay everything out logically.

This post has been edited 1 times, last edit by "InterimAegis" (Dec 10th 2017, 7:47pm)

Posts: 327

Date of registration
: Jun 6th 2014

Platform: PS4

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 7

Sunday, December 10th 2017, 10:46pm

Sometimes it's also nice to just have writeups that put the big sea of numbers into practical wording.

I'll admit to having trouble just parsing all the raw data into meaningful information some of the time.

Posts: 21

Date of registration
: Oct 31st 2017

Platform: PC

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 1

Monday, December 11th 2017, 4:05am

### Quoted from "InterimAegis"

With the SIPS buff (0.2 --> 0.1 SIPS), the RPM step down is cut in half.

Did they actually buff SIPS of all SLR variations? Your last thread Some interesting facts about the new Turning Tides weapons noted that "The spread decrease on SLRs was also improved by 25% it seems, but the SIPS was also increased by 25% from 0.2 to 0.25 for all non-optical SLRs."
Which one is true? Or did I misunderstand something.

This post has been edited 1 times, last edit by "stopbeefing" (Dec 11th 2017, 4:13am)

Posts: 3,292

Date of registration
: Apr 26th 2013

Platform: PS4

Location: Arizona, USA

Reputation modifier: 15

Monday, December 11th 2017, 5:25am

Don't pay attention to the non-Tides weapon stats. That was old data.
To Aim Assist or not to Aim Assist, that is the question.

### Source code

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38

AccelerationInputThreshold 0.98
AccelerationMultiplier 5.0
AccelerationDamping 4.0
AccelerationTimeThreshold 0.15
SquaredAcceleration 0.0
MaxAcceleration::Vec2
x 2.0
y 2.0
YawSpeedStrength 1.0
PitchSpeedStrength 1.0
AttractDistanceFallOffs::Vec2
x 1.0
y 1.2
AttractSoftZone 0.75
AttractUserInputMultiplier 0.45
AttractUserInputMultiplier_NoZoom 0.5
AttractOwnSpeedInfluence 0.0
AttractTargetSpeedInfluence 0.85
AttractOwnRequiredMovementForMaximumAttract 0.0
AttractStartInputThreshold 0.1
AttractMoveInputCap 0.0
AttractYawStrength 1.0
AttractPitchStrength 0.34
MaxToTargetAngle 45.0
MaxToTargetXZAngle 45.0
ViewObstructedKeepTime 0.0
SnapZoomLateralSpeedLimit 1000.0
SnapZoomTime 0.2
SnapZoomPostTimeNoInput 0.2
SnapZoomPostTime 0.2
SnapZoomReticlePointPriority 999
SnapZoomAutoEngageTime 0.0
SnapZoomBreakTimeAtMaxInput 0.2
SnapZoomBreakMaxInput 0.2
SnapZoomBreakMinAngle 90.0
SnapZoomSpamGuardTime 1.2
SoldierBackupSkeletonCollisionData *nullGuid*
CheckBoneCenterOnlyDistance 40.0

### Source code

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39

AccelerationInputThreshold 0.98
AccelerationMultiplier 5.0
AccelerationDamping 4.0
AccelerationTimeThreshold 0.15
SquaredAcceleration 0.0
MaxAcceleration::Vec2
x 2.0
y 2.0
YawSpeedStrength 1.0
PitchSpeedStrength 1.0
AttractDistanceFallOffs::Vec2
x 1.0
y 1.2
AttractSoftZone 0.0
AttractUserInputMultiplier 1.0
AttractUserInputMultiplier_NoZoom -1.0
AttractOwnSpeedInfluence 0.0
AttractTargetSpeedInfluence 0.0
AttractOwnRequiredMovementForMaximumAttract 0.0
AttractStartInputThreshold 0.0
AttractMoveInputCap 0.0
AttractYawStrength 0.0
AttractPitchStrength 0.0
MaxToTargetAngle 45.0
MaxToTargetXZAngle 45.0
ViewObstructedKeepTime 0.0
SnapZoomLateralSpeedLimit 1000.0
SnapZoomTime 0.2
SnapZoomPostTimeNoInput 0.0
SnapZoomPostTime 0.0
SnapZoomReticlePointPriority 999
SnapZoomAutoEngageTime 0.0
SnapZoomBreakTimeAtMaxInput -1.0
SnapZoomBreakMaxInput 0.2
SnapZoomBreakMinAngle 90.0
SnapZoomSpamGuardTime 0.5
SoldierBackupSkeletonCollisionData *nullGuid*
CheckBoneCenterOnlyDistance 40.0
DisableForcedTargetRecalcDistance 7.0

### Source code

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39

 AccelerationInputThreshold 0.98
AccelerationMultiplier 5.0
AccelerationDamping 4.0
AccelerationTimeThreshold 0.15
SquaredAcceleration 0.0
MaxAcceleration::Vec2
x 2.0
y 2.0
YawSpeedStrength 1.0
PitchSpeedStrength 1.0
AttractDistanceFallOffs::Vec2
x 1.0
y 1.2
AttractSoftZone 0.75
AttractUserInputMultiplier 0.45
AttractUserInputMultiplier_NoZoom 0.5
AttractOwnSpeedInfluence 0.0
AttractTargetSpeedInfluence 0.85
AttractOwnRequiredMovementForMaximumAttract 0.0
AttractStartInputThreshold 0.1
AttractMoveInputCap 0.0
AttractYawStrength 1.0
AttractPitchStrength 0.34
MaxToTargetAngle 45.0
MaxToTargetXZAngle 45.0
ViewObstructedKeepTime 0.0
SnapZoomLateralSpeedLimit 1000.0
SnapZoomTime 0.2
SnapZoomPostTimeNoInput 0.0
SnapZoomPostTime 0.0
SnapZoomReticlePointPriority 999
SnapZoomAutoEngageTime 0.0
SnapZoomBreakTimeAtMaxInput -1.0
SnapZoomBreakMaxInput 0.2
SnapZoomBreakMinAngle 90.0
SnapZoomSpamGuardTime 0.5
SoldierBackupSkeletonCollisionData *nullGuid*
CheckBoneCenterOnlyDistance 40.0
DisableForcedTargetRecalcDistance 7.0

### My "Contributions"

Posts: 307

Date of registration
: Mar 31st 2015

Platform: Xbox One

Reputation modifier: 8

Monday, December 11th 2017, 1:57pm

### Quoted from "JSLICE20"

Hmm, 47m sounds like a gunplay rework/ TTK shift/ weapon rebalance value.

:thonk:

I should have been more clear - I tested it in CTE, so I would assume it had already been adjusted. Is that a bad assumption?