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.

Hey! If this is your first visit on symthic.com, also check out our weapon damage charts.
Currently we have charts for Battlefield 3, Call of Duty: Black Ops 2, Medal of Honor: Warfighter and Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3

  • "Veritable" started this thread

Posts: 848

Date of registration
: Dec 8th 2013

Platform: PC

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 12

  • Send private message

1

Saturday, November 5th 2016, 8:38am

BF1 Medic Rifles - "The Race To...." - Featuring Shooting / Recovering / Reloading Times

On my first thread looking at BF1 Medic rifles, I attempted to quantify Reload using my BF4-style ranking of "how quickly can you load up on damage potential," with that thread as the result. In it, I declared that despite its "pitiful" 5 rounds internal magazine, the Auto-8 .35 Marksman's unparalleled TTK across pretty much all ranges made it the "top dog" in my view.

So! I used it! 3 Service Stars now, despite not playing nearly as much as I suspect most others get to... it is by far my most-used weapon. True to form, it absolutely excels at dropping 1 target from close to mid... even long is doable vs. the prone / standing + clueless. On the same token, I'm only ever going to get that 1 kill per reload.

Meanwhile, all the YouTubers, plus quite a few right here, say "nein nein nein! M1916 or go home!"

Then! I thought to myself, why not include actual Reloading Times to the Time / Damage Output equation? After all, when you're Reloading, you're not Shooting, and thus that still affects your ability to dish out Damage.

-----

Here is the Google Sheets worksheet that I whipped up: BF1 Medic Race To.... - Google Sheets

In order to get it to do what I want, I had to learn about Nested Ifs and Array Formula... but it was worth it, because now it is fairly automated. Here is the procedure.

-----

I set a series of Target Damages that I want the guns to achieve. I started with 500 (to "Squad Wipe" a healthy squad of 5) and went down to 100 (to win 1v1).

Shooting Method: 5RB-then-recover, repeat until Target Damage is met. Hitrates from Hitrate Simulator. To do well here, you want the gun to have good Bullet Damage, good Spread, good SIPS, and good H-Recoil. That means it will need fewer shots to achieve the Target Damage.

This brings us to the first of the three "Times," Shooting Time. The above is combined with the gun's RoF and then rolled into the Shoot-and-Recover Time Calculator. Fast RoF in addition to the above Hitrate + Damage, means the gun achieves the Target Damage quickly and with fewer wasted shots.

The Calculator is then used again to figure out the second of the three "Times," Recovery Time. This is the time the gun needs for the shooter to pause, so it can return to Base Spread. To do well here, of course the gun would need good SDEC, but in addition to that lower Shooting Time means fewer SIPS to recover from.

For both of thsee "Times" that Shooting Mechanics directly affect, for the Medic rifles, expect the Trench variants to do well in Hipfire, Optical / Marksman variants to do well in ADS, and the Factory variants to do fairly well in all situations.

Finally, there is Reload Time. With the number of shots that the gun needs to achieve Target Damage now known, it is thrown into the Reload portion of the Google Sheets, which figures out how long the gun needs to "replenish" those expended bullets. Full Reloads are done first, then Partial Reloads for the detachable magazine guns... or 5 rounds stripper clips for the internal magazine guns, then finally single bullets.

To recap:

Shooting Time - you want fast RoF, high Hitrate, high damage per hit.

Recovery Time - you want low SIPS, high SDEC, fast RoF.

Reload Time - you want fast Reload times and large Magazines... Detachable Magazine, especially, is even better! Is that worth it, though? That's what I wanted to find out!

-----

For this instance, I looked at 50m ADS Not Moving. Please see the attached Chart image for total Times from 100dmg to 500dmg. Smaller the bar, the faster to achieve Target Damage, finish Recovery AND done the necessary Reloads.

I will have detailed 100dmg to 500dmg charts, plus a specific Case Study, in the following 2 posts.

For me, personally, though? I'm not going to fall THAT far and join the M1916 25+1 crowd. I have already dabbled at the Mondragon Optical, and maybe that's where I'm going. The Auto-8 .35 Marksman is still really good at dealing 100dmg, still competitive INCLUDING Reload as you will see, so it is definitely not "unuseable..." you just have to use it in... a very specific circumstance. That M1907 Factory, on the other hand, is something that I didn't consider before but ought to be worth looking at now.
Veritable has attached the following file:

  • "Veritable" started this thread

Posts: 848

Date of registration
: Dec 8th 2013

Platform: PC

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 12

  • Send private message

2

Saturday, November 5th 2016, 8:47am

100dmg to 500dmg Charts

Please see the attached images. The M1916 benefit from CONSISTENCY. Guaranteed 3BTK, slow-but-sure shooting, and you can rely on pretty much only needing a Short Reload of 2.37s to get back into action, even after a Squad Wipe. No need to fudge around with making sure that you can load a 5-rounds-Stripper-Clip vs. the slow single-bullet-reload.

Outlier: Auto-8 .35 Marksman does just over 100 damage at this Stance (50m ADS Not Moving) if firing all 5 rounds. Then you benefit from the fastest Shooting Time of 0.8333333333s, 2nd fastest Recovery Time of 0.1666666667s, and a fairly competitive Reload Time of 3.217s. So, if you absolutely need to kill 1 guy and 1 guy ONLY....
Veritable has attached the following files:

  • "Veritable" started this thread

Posts: 848

Date of registration
: Dec 8th 2013

Platform: PC

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 12

  • Send private message

3

Saturday, November 5th 2016, 8:50am

Detachable vs. Internal Magazine Case Study: M1907 Trench vs. Mondragon Storm

These 2 ended up with almost the same Aggregate Times. I thought it might be interesting to do a more detailed look at them to see how they end up with the same "performance," despite being so different.

Key differences:

M1907 Trench - bad ADS Not Moving hitrates, 5HK damage model, 299RPM, 20rnds detachable magazine.

Mondragon Storm - decent ADS Not Moving hitrates, 3HK damage model, 257RPM, 10rnds internal magazine fed by 2x 5rnds stripper clips or can be topped off with single bullets.

As you can see in the attached Graph, at the 200dmg Target the M1907 is much faster, but the Mondragon flips the table at 300dmg, while both are almost tied at 400dmg. Let's break down each instance to see how that came to be.

-----

200dmg Target

Shooting Times

M1907 - Hitrater + Damage says it needs 3x 5RB + 1x 3RB to achieve the required 200dmg. That is 18 rounds fired, which Shoot-and-Recover Calculator says takes 3.6s.

Mondragon - It needs 2x 5RB + 1 more fired, thanks to its higher Hitrate and more damaging bullets. That is 11 rounds fired, although at a slower RPM, but is still quicker at 2.55s.

Recovery Times

As neither are Factory nor Marksman / Optical variants for this ADS Not Moving scenario, both have bad SIPS and SDEC for this case. Despite the higher RoF, the M1907 still had more SIPS to recover from due to it having fired more often.

M1907 - 1.2s

Mondragon - 0.7333333333s

Reload Times

So far, the M1907 is behind, but here in Reload is where it made up the difference then pulled that big gap.

M1907 - 18 rounds fired, but it has a magazine capacity of 20 rounds. Thus, just 1 Short Reload will do the trick. 2.3s is all you need.

Mondragon - 11 rounds fired, which needed a Full Reload of 2x stripper clips plus 1 bullet. 3.766s + 2.3s = 6.066s.

Aggregate Times

M1907 - 3.6s + 1.2s + 2.3s = 7.1s

Mondragon - 2.55s (better!) + 0.7333333333 (still better!) + 6.066s (awwwww) = 9.349333333s

-----

300dmg Target

Shooting Times

M1907 - 5x 5RB + 2RB, 27 rounds fired, 5.4s.

Mondragon - 3x 5RB + 1RB, 16 rounds fired, 3.716666667s

Recovery Times

M1907 - 1.8s

Mondragon - 1.066666667s

Reload Times

M1907 - 27 rounds fired, 1x Full Reload needed at 3.5s to add 20 rounds and then + 1x Partial Reload to add the remaining 7 at 2.3s, total 5.8s.

Mondragon - 16 rounds fired, 1x Full Reload at 3.766s to add 10 rounds and then + 1x Stripper Clip + 1x Single Bullet at 3.433s, total 7.199s.

Aggregate Times

M1907 - 13s

Mondragon - 11.98233333s

The M1907 had to shoot far too often to achieve the Damage Target, giving it a bad Shooting Time, and then additionally pushing it into needing a Partial Reload which negated a lot of its Reload advantage.

-----

400dmg Target

Shooting Times

M1907 - 7x 5RB + 2RB, 37 rounds fired, 7.416666667s

Mondragon - 4x 5RB + 1RB, 21 rounds fired, 4.883333333s

Recovery Times

M1907 - 2.466666667s

Mondragon - 1.4s

Reload Times

M1907 - 37 rounds fired, same as above 1x Full Reload + 1x Partial Reload, 5.8s

Mondragon - 21 rounds fired, 2x Full Reload + 1 single bullet, 9.832s

Aggregate Times

M1907 - 15.68333333s

Mondragon - 16.11533333s

Again the Mondragon shoots-and-recovers faster, then the M1907's detachable magazine Reload claws back the difference and then some. For this particular case, though, the Mondragon mostly got to use Full Reloads and thus the M1907 Reload advantage was slimmer. Thus the close-call in the Aggregate.

-----
Veritable has attached the following file:

This post has been edited 1 times, last edit by "Veritable" (Nov 5th 2016, 9:46am)


  • "Veritable" started this thread

Posts: 848

Date of registration
: Dec 8th 2013

Platform: PC

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 12

  • Send private message

4

Saturday, November 5th 2016, 10:02pm

I think a blurb on the M1907 Factory is in order as well, as it performed MUCH BETTER than I would have expected. So much so that originally I discarded it from my radar, deciding that there are better things to spend my War Bonds on. Now? I'm sure I can spare 200 on it, and maybe I should.

Since the M1907 do not have a Marksman / Optical variant for this ADS Not Moving scenario, this Factory version's SIPS / SDEC values paired with its 299RPM, is the only such gun that has higher Optimal Click Rate due to being Factory. So far, it is the only one I found that exhibit behaviour similar to running NoBar / NoGrip in BF4.

In the graph below, I pit it against the vaunted Mondragon Optical, where it finished behind in the Aggregate chart.

-----

100dmg Target

Shooting Times

M1907 - 9x fired, 1.8s

Mondragon - 4x fired, 0.9166666667s

Recovery Times

M1907 - 0.3s

Mondragon - 0.1333333333s

Reload Times

M1907 - 2.3s

Mondragon - 4.001s

Aggregate Times

M1907 - 4.4s

Mondragon - 5.051s

-----

200dmg Target

Shooting Times

M1907 - 18x fired, 3.6s

Mondragon - 8x fired, 1.85s

Recovery Times

M1907 - 0.6s

Mondragon - 0.2666666667s

Reload Times

M1907 - 2.3s

Mondragon - 4.567s

Aggregate Times

M1907 - 6.5s

Mondragon - 6.683666667s

-----

300dmg Target

Shooting Times

M1907 - 27x fired, 5.4s

Mondragon - 12x fired, 2.783333333s

Recovery Times

M1907 - 0.9s

Mondragon - 0.4s

Reload Times

M1907 - 5.8s

Mondragon - 6.633s

Aggregate Times

M1907 - 12.1s

Mondragon - 9.816333333s

-----

400dmg Target

Shooting Times

M1907 - 37x fired, 7.416666667s

Mondragon - 17x fired, 3.95s

Recovery Times

M1907 - 1.233333333s

Mondragon - 0.5666666667s

Reload Times

M1907 - 5.8s

Mondragon - 7.766s

Aggregate Times

M1907 - 14.45s

Mondragon - 12.28266667s

-----

500dmg Target

Shooting Times

M1907 - 46x fired, 9.216666667s

Mondragon - 21x fired, 4.883333333s

Recovery Times

M1907 - 1.533333333s

Mondragon - 0.7s

Reload Times

M1907 - 9.3s

Mondragon - 9.832s

Aggregate Times

M1907 - 20.05s

Mondragon - 15.41533333s

-----

As it turns out, the Mondragon actually has above average Reload Times, because it is on par or even at times slightly faster than the other 10-rounds-internal-magazine gun, the Cei-Rigotti, and then since it shoots more damaging bullets you tend to shoot less often... and thus have to reload less.

As for the main advantage of the M1907? Fastest Partial Reload, and very good Recovery Time for the detachable-magazine-gun-that-is-not-M1916.
Veritable has attached the following file:

Posts: 62

Date of registration
: Jan 11th 2014

Platform: PC

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 5

  • Send private message

5

Monday, November 7th 2016, 1:05am

Hi. I was asking questions about shot recovery times and accurate firing rates and Miffyli pointed me in this direction.

My first question is this: why are you using spread values instead of recoil values? Isn't recoil the larger and longer variable here? I'm looking at the Mondragon Storm and Selbstlader M1916 Factory right now and their recoil values are 3 and 5 times larger than their spread values. However I don't have a full understanding of recoil, and the Miscellaneous Information page says, "Recoil decrease is NOT same as in Battlefield 4. More information on this later". There is a value listed for each weapon's recoil decrease, but it's in "Units", so I don't really know how to use it unless you tell me that actually means "degrees/sec".

While we're talking recoil and spread let me ask you this. I see how you're calculating the time a weapon takes on it's decrease from spread and perhaps recoil, but how much time does the increase take? For instance if the Mondragon jumps 0.6 degrees on firing, how much time did it take to go from 0 degrees to 0.6 degrees? I would think a good recovery time stat would include the time taken for recoil increase and recoil decrease while spread would be negligible.

This post has been edited 1 times, last edit by "Ballistic" (Nov 7th 2016, 1:50am)


  • "Veritable" started this thread

Posts: 848

Date of registration
: Dec 8th 2013

Platform: PC

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 12

  • Send private message

6

Monday, November 7th 2016, 8:30am

My first question is this: why are you using spread values instead of recoil values? Isn't recoil the larger and longer variable here?

Hitrater does take H-Recoil into account. It doesn't take V-Recoil into account.

Yes, to be perfectly honest, V-Recoil is probably a huge factor in throwing your gun off target. However, since it is absolutely predictable (in BF1 Medic weapons' cases, at least, since FSM is 1x for all), it is discarded in my studies.

As for H-Recoil vs. Spread Increase Per Shot, here is my take as to why SIPS is more important. You can SEE Recoil, because that is what causes your gun's sight's aiming point to physically jump around. You are unlucky so you got hit with a massive dollop of 0.32 degree of H-Recoil when shooting your Mondragon Optical. You will SEE that happening, SEE that your aim point is now off the target, and maybe you will stop shooting and instead work to pull the aiming point back onto target.

SIPS, on the other hand, is invisible on your screen. This is the thing that causes you to miss when you swear your aim is spot-on. Good thing it is completely predictable: how much SIPS you will gain per shot, and thus how much more inaccurate your 2nd shot will be... 3rd shot will be... and so on; and how long you have to wait to get rid of them, and get your gun back to Base Spread.

-----

The "Recovery Times" are for Spread only, not H-Recoil. No idea how Recoil Recovery works so I'm not touching it. Like I said above, since Recoil is visible, you can "recover" that by seeing how much your aiming point has jumped off the target, and move it back yourself. SIPS is invisible, and you cannot do anything about it, other than waiting out the Recovery Times.

Zer0Cod3x

Can't get a title

(1,327)

Posts: 1,530

Date of registration
: Dec 23rd 2013

Platform: Xbox One

Location: The Land of Multitudinous Kangaroos

Reputation modifier: 12

  • Send private message

7

Monday, November 7th 2016, 2:00pm

how much time does the increase take?

It doesn't matter.

The game prevents you from shooting whilst spread increase occurs. Thus, there is never a situation where you actually have to take it into account.

There's more info on that here.


Although, I'm sure Miff's memory reader could probably tell you if you really wanted to know.
something something Model 8 bestgun


How to ice an A-91

Next, wanna try adding a guy that you KNOW is bad, and just testing to see that? Example: PP-2000 (god I so wanna love this gun, and yet...)

Example: PP-2000 (god I so wanna love this gun, and yet...)

PP-2000 added. Y'know, it's not that bad....

Yes, it comes in last so far, but that is mostly because I'm making it shoot at 100m ADS - Not Moving as one of the criteria. Even then, between 50-100m Not Moving, when you include Useability, it is only 1.37% worse than the MTAR-21. Within 50m then it even beats the A-91.

Have a look, vs. the A-91 Carbine:




Using it with Muzzle Brake and Compensator is a wash in terms of overall performance. Comp is SLIGHTLY more accurate, while MB is SLIGHTLY more easy to use. Their overall scores are basically tied, with MB just ahead. I guess either can be recommended.

But... You can't be counting for the fact that it takes 9 bullets to kill at "long" range... Don't you dare tell me my A-91 is worse than a 9 BTK 650 RPM mediocre PDW.

Also. Just go heavy barrel. The recoil is low enough.

Well, technically...

Comparing a PP2K with HB and an A-91 with comp and stubby (as you suggested in an earlier post), at 50m not moving, the A-91 is only better by 4 damage per hitrate. While at 75m and 100m, surprisingly the PP2K does better than the A-91 (I'm pretty damn surprised as well).

And 10m and 50m moving the PP2K also does more damage per hitrate than the A-91. At 25m the A-91 is only better by about half a bullet's damage as well.

In addition, the PP2K has a much larger mag size and substantially less recoil. And it looks hella awesome. So comparing the A-91 to a PDW is of some worth after all, as the PP2K is better (technically, not practically) than the A-91.

Mind blown.

I... I...

*cries in a corner*

Zer0Cod3x explained it very well. If you look at the raw numbers right here on Symthic Comparison, you can see how that happened:

A-91 vs PP-2000 | BF4 Weapon Comparison | Symthic

A-91's "23%" RPM advantage only afforded it 1 extra round.

Reload times are wash.

Velocities are wash.

V-Recoil are wash (and this is HBar on PP2k vs. A-91 without).

Hipfire and ADS - Moving are better on the PP2k, but it's a PDW and not the surprising part.

The surprising part is that, as equipped (and we see above that PP2k HBar has almost same V-Recoil as A-91 without HBar so why not?), the PDW performs better at 50 - 100m than a bloody Carbine. Why?

H-Recoil Spread, 0.525 vs. 0.45, advantage PP2k.

SIPS, 42% better on the PP2k.

And here is the most important part. ADS - Not Moving Spread, 0.35 vs. 0.2, 43% improvement.

Without HBar then of course the PP2k loses, which is why when I add all the attachments together for an Overall Ranking, it would slot below the A-91. Run HBar on it, though, then... I'm sorry

@Veritable
@Zer0Cod3x
I... I...
But...
Wha...
I AM HAVING AN EXISTENTIAL CRISIS IN SCHOOL BECAUSE OF YOU TWO.

FUCK YOU NERDS AND YOUR FANCY NUMBERS

SEXY RUSSIAN BULLPUPS FTW.

In all seriousness, thank you both so much for giving me the numbers. I still don't want to accept them. You have led the horse to water. I still need to drink.


Posts: 7,779

Date of registration
: Feb 25th 2012

Platform: PC

Location: italy

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 19

  • Send private message

8

Monday, November 7th 2016, 2:59pm

Iirc, spread increase(not decrease) is as fast as the server's HZ, that's how the famas and an94 in bf4 bypassed spread increase in bursts on lower than 30hz servers, dunno about bf1 though(not that you could make use of it on any weapon other than the villar perosa anyway)
"I'm just a loot whore."


stuff mostly unrelated to BF4 that interests nobody



bf4
on 13/05/2016
23rd M320FB user on pc(13/05/16)
rush mode score RANK:2794 TOP:2% OUT OF:215398
obliteration mode scoreRANK:994 TOP:1% OUT OF:159466
handgun medals RANK:2236 TOP:2% OUT OF:143874
longest headshot RANK:9512 TOP:4% OUT OF:257589
recon score RANK:10871 TOP:4% OUT OF:274899
general score per minute RANK:10016 TOP:4% OUT OF:294774

bf3
31/3/2012 4:58:

Headshot distance RANK:493* TOP:0%
Revives per assault minute RANK: 6019 TOP: 3%
Headshots / kill percentage RANK:25947 TOP:13%
MVP ribbons RANK:18824 TOP:11%

*= 6 if we not count the EOD BOT headshots

@kataklism

ARGUMENT DESTROYED 100

ENEMY KILLED [REASON] JSLICE20 100


WRITING SPREE STOPPED 500

link to full-size old avatar:
http://i.imgur.com/4X0321O.gif




Posts: 62

Date of registration
: Jan 11th 2014

Platform: PC

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 5

  • Send private message

9

Monday, November 7th 2016, 6:57pm

Yes, to be perfectly honest, V-Recoil is probably a huge factor in throwing your gun off target. However, since it is absolutely predictable (in BF1 Medic weapons' cases, at least, since FSM is 1x for all), it is discarded in my studies.


So you're saying that since V-Recoil is visible that makes it negligible? For certain automatic weapons I can drag my mouse down while firing and compensate somewhat for V-Recoil, but that's only at closer ranges. For most Medic guns I'm engaging at mid and long range, and I wait (or try to wait) until my aimpoint has completely recovered from the recoil until firing again. I thought that's how most people played. Am I mistaken? Can a human being adjust his mouse exactly 0.8 degrees every 2 tenths of a second consistently?

  • "Veritable" started this thread

Posts: 848

Date of registration
: Dec 8th 2013

Platform: PC

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 12

  • Send private message

10

Monday, November 7th 2016, 7:24pm

So you're saying that since V-Recoil is visible that makes it negligible?

Instead, I account for V-Recoil in a separate "score" in here: BF1 Medic Self-Loading Rifles - "Origin Access" Stats - Gets the Big List Treatment and here: BF4 BTK Burst Length DPS + Useability Combined Ranking into something I call Useability. It doesn't apply to this particular thread, because this one shows TIME in SECONDS, only.

For most Medic guns I'm engaging at mid and long range, and I wait (or try to wait) until my aimpoint has completely recovered from the recoil until firing again.

What you want is RECOIL DECREASE Time. Unfortunately we didn't know in BF4, we still don't know now. If someone can finally work that out, I will gladly add it to the Recovery Time. Until then, I cannot account for it, other than assigning an arbitrary "score" as what I tried to do above.

I thought that's how most people played. Am I mistaken?

As a guy who had ~85% of his primary weapon kills in BF4 from DMRs (~18k kills in ~750hrs; not because I'm any good or I play a lot, but because I don't use ANYTHING ELSE), here is how I "dealt" with M39 HBar + Naked's 1.56 (yes, ONE POINT FIVE SIX) degrees of V-Recoil every 2/10th of a second: if you can see the whole body, aim lower. Start shooting at his knees. You KNOW it's 3HK no matter where you hit, so why not aim lower so you have more of a target for the V-Recoil to travel through?

Can a human being adjust his mouse exactly 0.8 degrees every 2 tenths of a second consistently?

Not saying that I personally can or cannot, but why not? It's consistent, no FSM to throw a wrench into things. With a set V-Recoil value, set in-game mouse sensitivity, set mouse DPI, set RoF, you will pull down at the same speed every time. Why can this not be achievable after practicing?