|
The random delay between attacks has been known about since early beta. There was a pretty famous thread where a guy's zealot swung first in a zealot vs zealot fight and ended up losing, thus discovering this random delay (this is before the map editor was released to the public).
For the vast majority of the units in the game, this random delay is much too small to matter. I know everyone wants SC to always be 100% consistent (fyi, BW had much more randomness on high ground damage calculations), but these random delays should never be enough to be a real deciding factor in a game, and they aren't. They are there primarily for cosmetic purposes.
Why they decided to give the reaper and BC a much bigger random window than the other units is beyond me, and it should probably be reduced.
|
Not sure there're bugs attack rate of BC n Reapers, or Blizzard just ninja nerf them 
|
On July 17 2012 17:05 AmericanUmlaut wrote:Show nested quote +On July 17 2012 16:35 Remi wrote:On July 17 2012 16:19 kazie wrote:On July 17 2012 15:49 pmp10 wrote:On July 17 2012 15:40 kazie wrote:
you're completely disregarding the random attack delay. BC and reaper D8 are the only 2 attacks that have a different random attack delay from the default. real attack speed of a BC is 0.1625 to 0.4125 which is 0.2875 average
probably same with d8. That doesn't change the problem that tooltip states incorrect values. tooltips are correct in that blizzard chose to state base values, and that random delays are public knowledge. you can disagree with their decision i guess. only thing i would say needs to be changed is liquipedia. it should at least have an attack speed page explaining the matter. if op went to another wiki like sc2pod, he would have known the cause of this. Random delays doesn't seems to effect other terran units in any meaningful way, as their test results match theoretical values, I see no reason why BC and reapers should be different. As was previously stated by another poster, most units' attack delays are +X/-X, where both values are the same. That means that the average delay is 0, and over a large number of attacks the units' DPS is unaffected. BCs' delay is -.0625/+.1865, which means that the average delay (assuming all values are equally possible) is .0625. Given a base attack speed of 0.23, that means the actual average attack speed is 0.2925, a 21.4% increase. That roughly matches the results given by the OP.
Cool explaination, but that is a really odd way to have the BC attack speed done. Any guesses as to why they do it like that for the BC?
|
On July 18 2012 01:04 HardlyNever wrote:
Why they decided to give the reaper and BC a much bigger random window than the other units is beyond me, and it should probably be reduced.
I think the main problem isn't that there's a large window, just that it doesn't average out to be very close to the actual number. All units are this way, but BCs moreso, due to their higher on average random delay and also very short attack period to begin with (it's a very significant difference at around %22). Reapers are just dumb because the fastest they can ever attack, even with the shortest random delay they still have a longer period than the tooltip states.
|
I think the OP's results are significant, and should be fixed by Blizzard. It's like having your marines stutter step, and not firing a shot once a while due to random delay.
Blizzard shouldn't indicate the rate of fire is 0.225 and have the actual rate of fire significantly higher at 0.28.
|
On July 17 2012 19:22 BronzeKnee wrote:I find it odd that you decided to add armor to the Nexus and Battle Cruiser when doing the damage test. My first reaction is you are trying to hide something, and my second after thinking about it is that it magnifies the results of your test. Because it takes longer (ie more shots) for the Battle Cruiser to do the stated damage you end up with more overall random delays, and thus you could find that the Battle Cruiser does less and less DPS over time. So I ran two tests in the unit test map. (The first test against the Hydra begins at 43 seconds and ends at 45, the second against the Nexus begins at 1:45 and ends at 2:21) Replay: http://drop.sc/223255First, the BC against a Hydra (low hp and no armor) with no upgrades yields the following: It takes the BC 11 shots to kill the Hydra and it takes the BC 3 seconds to kill the Hydra (and there is actually one more shot on the way toward the Hydra when it does). So 3/11 = 0.2727 attack speed So in that case the BC actually does damage faster than stated!Second, lets look at the BC vs 1000 Nexus shields with no shield upgrades: It takes 125 shots to kill the Nexus shields and it takes the BC 36 seconds to do so (and again there is one more shot on the way to Nexus when 1000 damage is done). 36/125 = .288 attack Again the BC actually does damage faster than stated!So while in your scenario the BC does 22% less damage, in most real scenarios it will do much closer to it's stated DPS, and in some scenarios it even appears to do more damage, and thus I think you are misrepresenting the facts by picking unlikely scenarios. However, your tests and mine do show problems with the damage system in SC2.
lol dat math
|
On July 18 2012 01:23 StrifeCro wrote:Show nested quote +On July 17 2012 19:22 BronzeKnee wrote:I find it odd that you decided to add armor to the Nexus and Battle Cruiser when doing the damage test. My first reaction is you are trying to hide something, and my second after thinking about it is that it magnifies the results of your test. Because it takes longer (ie more shots) for the Battle Cruiser to do the stated damage you end up with more overall random delays, and thus you could find that the Battle Cruiser does less and less DPS over time. So I ran two tests in the unit test map. (The first test against the Hydra begins at 43 seconds and ends at 45, the second against the Nexus begins at 1:45 and ends at 2:21) Replay: http://drop.sc/223255First, the BC against a Hydra (low hp and no armor) with no upgrades yields the following: It takes the BC 11 shots to kill the Hydra and it takes the BC 3 seconds to kill the Hydra (and there is actually one more shot on the way toward the Hydra when it does). So 3/11 = 0.2727 attack speed So in that case the BC actually does damage faster than stated!Second, lets look at the BC vs 1000 Nexus shields with no shield upgrades: It takes 125 shots to kill the Nexus shields and it takes the BC 36 seconds to do so (and again there is one more shot on the way to Nexus when 1000 damage is done). 36/125 = .288 attack Again the BC actually does damage faster than stated!So while in your scenario the BC does 22% less damage, in most real scenarios it will do much closer to it's stated DPS, and in some scenarios it even appears to do more damage, and thus I think you are misrepresenting the facts by picking unlikely scenarios. However, your tests and mine do show problems with the damage system in SC2. lol dat math
lol indeed... I was lost and had to reread it 3 times and like WTF??!
|
On July 17 2012 18:55 darkness wrote:Show nested quote +On July 17 2012 18:36 eScaper-tsunami wrote:
Random delay actually explains a lot of things that's been happening to me... I go into probe vs probe battles getting a slightly faster attack off at the beginning but end up losing the fight..... thank you random delay, now I know to NEVER fight probe vs probe despite knowing the opponent's probe had the slightly slower first attack... I fail to understand why we need any random factor in a strategic game. Also one more thing, 'Random' is sometimes f*cked up. You may spawn as a race more than 3 times in a row. That's flawed imho although there's really small chance something like this happens. Like... 1/12 to be one race 4 times in a row?
Actually, that's incorrect. The chance for spawn any race 4 times in a row is 1/27.
+ Show Spoiler +The first roll doesn't matter, it just determines what race you are rolling for, and then the remaining is 1/3x1/3x1/3
If you want a specific race four times in a row that would be 1/81.
And yeah, I've personally rolled Protoss five times in a row in team games before as Random.
Edit: Fail Spoiler.
|
On July 18 2012 01:49 Varanice wrote:Show nested quote +On July 17 2012 18:55 darkness wrote:On July 17 2012 18:36 eScaper-tsunami wrote:
Random delay actually explains a lot of things that's been happening to me... I go into probe vs probe battles getting a slightly faster attack off at the beginning but end up losing the fight..... thank you random delay, now I know to NEVER fight probe vs probe despite knowing the opponent's probe had the slightly slower first attack... I fail to understand why we need any random factor in a strategic game. Also one more thing, 'Random' is sometimes f*cked up. You may spawn as a race more than 3 times in a row. That's flawed imho although there's really small chance something like this happens. Like... 1/12 to be one race 4 times in a row? Actually, that's incorrect. The chance for spawn any race 4 times in a row is 1/27. + Show Spoiler +The first roll doesn't matter, it just determines what race you are rolling for, and then the remaining is 1/3x1/3x1/3 If you want a specific race four times in a row that would be 1/81. And yeah, I've personally rolled Protoss five times in a row in team games before as Random. Edit: Fail Spoiler.
Their RNG is definitely not the best. I've rolled Terran 11 times in a row in team games, and same race 5-6 in a row is not uncommon. This is actually pretty common as depending on the seed chosen, RNG can have distinct patterns.
|
On July 18 2012 01:52 ragz_gt wrote:Show nested quote +On July 18 2012 01:49 Varanice wrote:On July 17 2012 18:55 darkness wrote:On July 17 2012 18:36 eScaper-tsunami wrote:
Random delay actually explains a lot of things that's been happening to me... I go into probe vs probe battles getting a slightly faster attack off at the beginning but end up losing the fight..... thank you random delay, now I know to NEVER fight probe vs probe despite knowing the opponent's probe had the slightly slower first attack... I fail to understand why we need any random factor in a strategic game. Also one more thing, 'Random' is sometimes f*cked up. You may spawn as a race more than 3 times in a row. That's flawed imho although there's really small chance something like this happens. Like... 1/12 to be one race 4 times in a row? Actually, that's incorrect. The chance for spawn any race 4 times in a row is 1/27. + Show Spoiler +The first roll doesn't matter, it just determines what race you are rolling for, and then the remaining is 1/3x1/3x1/3 If you want a specific race four times in a row that would be 1/81. And yeah, I've personally rolled Protoss five times in a row in team games before as Random. Edit: Fail Spoiler. Their RNG is definitely not the best. I've rolled Terran 11 times in a row in team games, and same race 5-6 in a row is not uncommon. This is actually pretty common as depending on the seed chosen, RNG can have distinct patterns.
There's no proof behind this, and I definately don't have a large enough sample size, but my personal experience is that it tends to pick the race that I've played the least, as of recent.
|
|
|
On July 18 2012 01:55 Varanice wrote:Show nested quote +On July 18 2012 01:52 ragz_gt wrote:On July 18 2012 01:49 Varanice wrote:On July 17 2012 18:55 darkness wrote:On July 17 2012 18:36 eScaper-tsunami wrote:
Random delay actually explains a lot of things that's been happening to me... I go into probe vs probe battles getting a slightly faster attack off at the beginning but end up losing the fight..... thank you random delay, now I know to NEVER fight probe vs probe despite knowing the opponent's probe had the slightly slower first attack... I fail to understand why we need any random factor in a strategic game. Also one more thing, 'Random' is sometimes f*cked up. You may spawn as a race more than 3 times in a row. That's flawed imho although there's really small chance something like this happens. Like... 1/12 to be one race 4 times in a row? Actually, that's incorrect. The chance for spawn any race 4 times in a row is 1/27. + Show Spoiler +The first roll doesn't matter, it just determines what race you are rolling for, and then the remaining is 1/3x1/3x1/3 If you want a specific race four times in a row that would be 1/81. And yeah, I've personally rolled Protoss five times in a row in team games before as Random. Edit: Fail Spoiler. Their RNG is definitely not the best. I've rolled Terran 11 times in a row in team games, and same race 5-6 in a row is not uncommon. This is actually pretty common as depending on the seed chosen, RNG can have distinct patterns. There's no proof behind this, and I definately don't have a large enough sample size, but my personal experience is that it tends to pick the race that I've played the least, as of recent.
That's my feeling also, but no proof as you said.
|
On July 18 2012 01:56 Detri wrote:
blizzard QA
*slow clap*
I wish they'd hire me (SQA mostly working with automation / database and some UI)... I'd think they'd have significantly fewer bugs. I QA apps that handles transaction up to millions daily and all of them are in infinitely better shape than their RMAH. Oh well.
|
Interesting. The thing is, which is wrong: the attack speed or the tooltip? Or the fact that the random attack delay is not centered around 0?
Only the guys at Blizzard will ever know.
|
.... the nexus had shields in the BC cruiser test, so the BC ovbiously is going to take more atacks to destroy the nexus...
target - Nexus with +3 graded shields.
attacker - Battlecruiser w/o grades for attack.
The marauder one the nexus had 0 upgrades
target - full HP and shields Nexus without any upgrades for armor or shields.
attacker - Marauder without any upgrades for attack or stimpack
Do it again against a unupgraded nexus...
|
On July 18 2012 02:13 Lefiathen wrote:.... the nexus had shields in the BC cruiser test, so the BC ovbiously is going to take more atacks to destroy the nexus... Show nested quote +target - Nexus with +3 graded shields.
attacker - Battlecruiser w/o grades for attack. The marauder one the nexus had 0 upgrades target - full HP and shields Nexus without any upgrades for armor or shields. attacker - Marauder without any upgrades for attack or stimpack Do it again against a unupgraded nexus...
It's in the calculation already. And it doesn't matter how many attack it took since it's the time/attack # that's off
|
Did you consider that the attack rate values are given for Normal speed setting. So that's why you end up with more time between attacks, because Faster game speed is faster than normal?
|
On July 18 2012 02:53 Yoshi Kirishima wrote:
Did you consider that the attack rate values are given for Normal speed setting. So that's why you end up with more time between attacks, because Faster game speed is faster than normal.
it's correct for all other units.
|
On July 18 2012 02:53 Yoshi Kirishima wrote:
Did you consider that the attack rate values are given for Normal speed setting. So that's why you end up with more time between attacks, because Faster game speed is faster than normal.
I'm pretty sure that the measurements are based on in-game time, so it shouldn't matter.
|
On July 18 2012 02:54 Laurens wrote:Show nested quote +On July 18 2012 02:53 Yoshi Kirishima wrote:
Did you consider that the attack rate values are given for Normal speed setting. So that's why you end up with more time between attacks, because Faster game speed is faster than normal. it's correct for all other units.
Thanks.
Also oops, you counted in-game time, so ignore my post.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
