@leptis I'm a long time lurker of this site and especially your statistical analysis threads (I partly credit your posts/threads for taking me from a relative casual to a well-informed player making weapon decisions based on the data found on this site). So first of all, EXCELLENT job with your many threads and I just wanted to let you know your research is both read and appreciated!

Anyways, regarding your formula of (ROF*SDmg)/1000 it came to mind that maybe instead of using only the start damage it would be interesting to see the values using average damage from 0m to either the weapon's end drop-off distance or instead a fixed end distance (such 65m as that is the drop-off end for LMGs which obviously have the longest MinDmg range of the weapons you're comparing). Instead of POWER being merely the weapon's maximum damaging potential at close range, it would show the weapon's average damage capability out to either its MinDmg range or a fixed final distance. If that skews the data a little too far, then perhaps breaking them down into individual groups by weapon category then using the general MinDmg range for that specific weapon type as a final point for averaging the data range (example: 55m for carbines and seperately using 65m for LMGs). I'd gladly come up with a formula myself but seeing as I have no college-level math education, while I'm often able to do such math on my own, I'd have difficulty actually showing a formula for how I did it. I'm one of those crazy ones that somehow just knows how to find the answer but I have no clue how to explain what I did to get it haha!

Hopefully that all makes sense, if not I can work on coming up with the formula to describe what I'm talking about when I have the time to figure out how to put it on paper.

It is true that the intuition says DICE balance would be something like:

"All weapons produce equal damage in the same time at XX m fired in YY conditions. CBQ weapons are better at less distance and long-range weapons are better further"

Or perhaps something like

"...equal damage integrating the damage curve between XX and YY", as the Miffyli formula suggested.

It is a hypothesis. DICE has had to set those conditions for the design, but we do not know the algorithm with which it has been done.

However, I do not found yet the relationship because the damage produced is NOT an internal feature of the weapon (it is an integrated weapon and target features) and depends on the hitbox used and the aiming model, which gives you too much variability to the problem.

So I used start damage, because it is something that occurs in the muzzle, and can be taken as an internal feature, besides being the usual way to define a real gun (muzzle energy) .... and the analysis shows that it is relevant because it produces logical order.

But I agree with damage curves should be important in the concept of balance ... but unfortunately I don`t know how .... for now.

In any case, the damage curves are the same for the weapons of the same type with the same ammo. That's why I made the conjeture that the characteristics by class have their own balance between classes of weapons beside characteristics by weapon (SpreadInc, Recoil, SpreadDec....), that have to have its internal balance.