#I'm doing this instead of FORTRAN.
1 messages · Page 1 of 1 (latest)
@undone finch Making a thread because GPH can't handle more than 20 words without hemorrhaging.
@serene geyser , you too, because you'd probably be interested in hearing my input.
i think there's a case to be made for being the best tank in the game period
It would be nice to define the context you're referring to, when someone mentions "tank." I mean, it's mentioned later -
it bears repeating, but best tank is one that survives and contributes the most damage/helps other survive and deal more
so there's your argument. 👍
Personally, I would disagree, because "tank" only means "How much can you take before you keel over," and with that definition, I'd like to try and make a connection between "eHP" and "tankiness" as realistic as possible.
Oh great yat sen tanks 50% better than agir against an average of opsi bosses
I'm going claim that this "average of OpSi Bosses" is NOT unrepresentative. We want to care about eHP in high-pressure situations where it's possible for our ships to die at all, which is where I bring these bosses into light. But of course, I'm missing other situations. (W14/15) (EX)
Agir tanks 5 to 10 times better than yat sen in certain battles like real EX
EX was mentioned, which I think is a terrible presentation at all to say that the eHP sheet is nonrepresentative. I'm not sure anyone uses EX seriously as a way to measure the tankiness of a particular ship. I think it's obvious that the reasoning behind it is that EX's "high hit" is so obscenely high that you're not going to see it in W14/15/OpSi, which are classical "endgame" considerations.
China dodge 90% of attacks from low hit enemies
So if your definition of "low hit" is "Not EX," then yes, you're right that Chinawall is ineffective against high-hit enemies. I'd think a more useful definition of "low" or "high" hit would be in the relative range such that EX is excluded from our considerations by EX's very nature.
SO!
(1): I decline the usefulness of the sheet in EX situations.
(2): I posit the usefulness of the sheet in non-EX situations.
(3): eHP, as a measure, has not yet been bijectively determined to "tankiness," as a feeling. So I posit that the sheet is useful as a guideline of general tankiness(or whatever), as opposed to a one-all-be-all.
you also need to pay attention to deviation numbers though
In fact, this statement catches the intention of (3) in an attempt to exactify the variance that you'd see between battles. That's another reason why the bijection isn't clear.
unless you're telling me that mebot's list is off by a magnitude of 50%
However, the sheet IS off on these calculations. I think by something like 10-20% , because of how I choose to average EVARate. *Fixed in eHP3
so the calc becomes meaningless
So like, if you want to take this out of context, then sure. But I believe the intent is: "If you're trying to calc eHP for EX situations, then the calc is meaningless," which...sure, I agree with. If you want me to make an EX eHP chart, then I can do that. The eHP theory can account for the obscenely high hit of EX.
However, I'd argue that this EX chart is less useful than the one I currently have because of (2).
(1): I decline the usefulness of the sheet in EX situations.
(2): I posit the usefulness of the sheet in non-EX situations.
(3): eHP, as a measure, has not yet been bijectively determined to "tankiness," as a feeling. So I posit that the sheet is useful as a guideline of general tankiness(or whatever), as opposed to a one-all-be-all.
heh
Maybe there are other tl;dr's that might be more useful though.
@hard fable come back 
uhhhh, sure.....
what is a High Level Harmonic eHP
I think it's vs eHP of only the Abyssals, Arbiters, and METAs.
are the arbiters hard or normal, and are they at max adapt?
suppose adapt doesn't matter
At max adapt - and only harbiter.
(1) understandable 
(2) High Level Harmonic eHP seems a bit low-hit to be representative of current endgame content like CM and new showdowns. And then there's ram damage in chapter 15.
(3) 
I just brought up EX as an extreme counterexample of
i don't think she's gonna outtank the china wall lel
but Agir does far outtank ning against the current easy mode EX too, which is 120 hit 100 luck
Recent META Showdowns have been kicking up the LCK and HIT?
(I haven't updated the ShowDown bulletlist in a long time)
That's pretty high
It looks like - the last 4 specifically
are heavy-hitters.
I should include all of these into the deliberations, and update the definition of "high-level" eHP.
No CM stats, though?
Takao is 150 hit 0 luck
almost all of EX Eugen's attacks are 100/100/100 or 100/90/80 so i think it's fair to say it's balanced because common things range between 100/80/60 and <100/<=100/120
If I wanted to be exact, I'd have to grab the bulletmines for all of these.
and my 125 oath agir tanked for 145s while 120 love ning tanked for 90s in the same fleet (speed), two battles flipping front and back
both with rudder toolkit +10
I wouldn't claim this either. I'd assume that the context of this statement excludes EX, which most of everything does anyways.
Bringing up EX is an edge case, imo.
I wouldn't claim "China wall is always tankier than Agir"
real EX is an edge case but easy EX is fair game because people do auto it
Also, the difference between 120 and 125 tankiness is about 16% .
From Love to Oath is...6% stat increase, right?
I did the math for it teehee
Okay, so I'm going to fudge the two numbers together and say that Ning Hai was underestimated 20%.
Extrapolating that...
We get 108 seconds
ehe
Including the correction becuse she's an EVA tank.
It'll be 108 +- 60 seconds
hilarious
Anyways - would you like to see more actually high HIT/LCK enemies in the eHP chart?
idk, I (sushigummy) only use it to estimate the level my farming main tank needs to be
for 15-1 or 13-1
How effective is it in doing that for you?
hand wavily effective
Epic
i fix my main fleet at bisz uni volga, assuming volga always first-heals the main tank, i want the main tank to be at least 80% of a level 120 portland
other people may find the chart to be more useful if it included higher hit enemies
opsi isn't late-endgame anymore
By however definition of "endgame" someone wants to keep.
For example, I'm too lazy to try for scores in CM/EX/META, so the highest level I'm going to care about is OpSi/W14/15.
and against Strength, the hardest-hitting opsi boss, surviving past 50s isn't really useful anyways
she shields after 50s
and then average players either can't break the shield at all or spend almost 2 salvos breaking it, leaving half a salvo of damage at the very end
You still want your ships to survive the battle, though, so you don't have to spend credits to repair them (I wait for fleet repair lmao)
redeploy your fleet for free, arbiter is only once a month
I'm probably going to do this
soon™️
Or just in eHP3 smh
At risk of this being like the PvP sheet's joke
eHP3 is something "normal people" can't see yet, right?
Bc, at the very least, I can't currently see it
Unless it's not called eHP Comp 3, as I expected
it's in alpha development
It's here and exists, but doesn't have enemy bullets.
I'll give it out to people if they ask for it, but I'm not going to "publish" it until...well, until it gets done.

eHP2 is what I decided to publish to the community, and eHP1 was the actual "chart" chart.
the morse code one?
The 20 line one.
That ECTL really hated because they had no idea what a "slope" was
eHP3 currently is aimed at fixing two issues:
1: Harmonic Mean instead of Arithmetic mean for EVA averages
2: Why are people still trying to argue that HitShields matter at all 
I'll let you know when I figure that one out
I will at least say that consideration for META bosses would interest me somewhat... Idk about "scoring", but it is very noticeable in quite a few recent cases that they tend to vary sufficiently to Arbiters and between each other as to make trying to use Arbiters or previous ones as a measuring stick quite unhelpful
Measuring stick time

In fairness, I wouldn't blame you for wanting to use that measuring stick for a purpose contrary to design, to punish me for making that request 
Blegh, that's my job - so we're genki.
So just no more PvP requests, got it

Nah, you're fine. I'm glad that your request came to me with a number of feasible and measurable variables - in order to produce sensible outputs.
As far as I'm concerned, that was a good discussion.
So feel free to hit me up with another one. You're doing a good job so far.
Am I doing a good job
Yes you are. Thanks for the consistent feedback and nuanced critique from a high-level standpoint
my feedback is consistently good

Damn, now I'm seriously contemplating combing through a representative selection of videos for ordnance data...
I mean, I'm 100% sure it is possible to at least compile a set of damage values doable by every single PvP-viable ship, but where I'm stuck is trying to figure out how to meaningfully scale them to account for geometrical hit rates
Bc, unlike PvE, that is a truly fundamental consideration for us... 
At least as a pure calculation, ye...
It's more I have to think of exactly how to account for speed stacking
Since otherwise we're in the weird place where the straight calculations would recommend something like a 550 HP aux or something when we all sort of intuitively know that it really should be replaced by a Boiler or the Wirbel Luft or something 
@unique vigil Can I have the source for this
as for the complete ver
I'd like an image of the complete version, yeah.
Oh, these are just META stats? I thought they were Challenge Mode stats.
I'm trying to compile those as well. 
Except I have no idea how growth formulas behave
teehee
are you assuming growth in stats
Yes
thats interesting
If they have growth = 0 , the stats'll show that.
the stats could also just be random
then we fucked

Can you doublecheck this for me
(All Hard)
They are in chrono order (I THINK)
I presented them in the order that's shown in expedition_data_template

right
https://azurlane.koumakan.jp/wiki/Extreme_Challenge this page on wiki
i will double check with datamine just in case
and by datamine i mean the spreadsheet
verified for cancer, everything else is probably right too
ACC EVA SPD LCK values are good, so ehehehe
as long as youre happy
I'm interested in identifying at least the correct enemy for enemy_data_statistics and dunegon
Because
It means I get the right bullets.
I done'd it
Wrong, LibraBlank
It's some BS I cooked up to turn my Python output (when copypasted from Jupyterlab) into Excel stuff.
So that's the Challenge Mode dungeons and enemies locked and loaded.
I have Stronghold and Abyssal Boss dungeons and enemies, too. But I'll want to uhh double check them and their stat scalings.
Arbiters, too.
Shoehorning META Showdown...
Maybe W14 and W15 and W13H...
And then I'll have all the bullets ready for eHP3.
I also need to continue figuring out uhh ShieldMining
For EugenRoon etc
seems like a really long project
shieldmining huh
i can provide emotional support 
I did mining for Stronghold and Abyssal and Arbiter for eHP2, but I'm taking my time to doublecheck for eHP3.
Thanks for emotional support
11322
PosFun -- lua function:
slot1 = slot0 * 3
return Vector3(math.sin(slot1) * 3.5, 0.75, math.cos(slot1) * 3.5)
RotFun -- lua function:
return Vector3(0, slot0 * ys.Battle.BattleConfig.SHIELD_ROTATE_CONST + 90, 0)
CldList[{'box': [4, 6, 9], 'offset': [1.02, 0, 1.22]}]
11322
PosFun -- lua function:
slot1 = slot0 * 3 + ys.Battle.BattleConfig.SHIELD_CENTER_CONST
return Vector3(math.sin(slot1) * 3.5, 0.75, math.cos(slot1) * 3.5)
RotFun -- lua function:
return Vector3(0, slot0 * ys.Battle.BattleConfig.SHIELD_ROTATE_CONST - 90, 0)
CldList[{'box': [4, 6, 9], 'offset': [1.02, 0, 1.22]}]
Shieldmining complete
mostly

