Thread history

From User talk:Lorak990
Viewing a history listing
Jump to: navigation, search
descTime User Activity Comment
06:31, 20 June 2013 Aloe (Talk | contribs) New reply created (Reply to Changing the AV calculation on LoTS Officers and Crew)
01:06, 20 June 2013 Doomcat (Talk | contribs) Comment text edited (little note at the end)
01:05, 20 June 2013 Doomcat (Talk | contribs) New thread created  

So, I wanted to put this idea out there with someone who really knows what I'm talking about without necessarily taking this to a full discussion the LoTS forums. The current AV calculation on the Officers and Crew pages are useful for comparing the officers to each other and the crew to each other. However, the AV numbers there don't really compare to equipment pages AV numbers. I propose changing the officers AV calculation from AV = atk + def *.2 to AV = (atk*2 + def*.4)*5/4. I derived this new AV formula because Ship Power per officer = atk * 2 + def *.4 and DPS of ship power = 5 * ship power and finally, 4 DPS = 1 armor atk. This change will make the officer's AV number equivalent to the equipment lists AV numbers. Similarly, I propose changing the crew AV calculation to AV = (atk*1.44 + def*.36)*5/4. I've created an example of the officers listing with the new AV calculation here.

What are your thoughts? Do you think it would make things easier or more confusing? Alternatively, we could consider switching the AV column out for a DPS column, which might actually more more sense.

Doomcat (talk)01:05, 20 June 2013

For officers/crew, I'd switch out AV for Ship Power, and note the formulae you have above, with the caveat that Ship Power is multiplied by the Ship Power bonus, and the DPS also contains ship proc damage. Purely calling it DPS is misleading as it doesn't factor in proc damage at all.

I'd switch out AV for DPS for items, because it's just the current stuff * 4 and avoids excessive fractions and our own definition. I guess we should still call it AV, because it doesn't factor in procs.

Aloe (talk)06:31, 20 June 2013