Talk:Sub Armaments

Weapon comparison

[discussion pre-dates the firepower information in the Comparison Table]

I find the article very insufficient. I'm playing TFTD and have decided to finish the game without ever researching sonic weapons. My craft weapon is limited to either D.U.P. or P.W.T. (others have miserable range, which makes them obsolete). I found no valuable comments on the weapons. I'll try to add something if possible. I've added a new column to the table: D×S×A, which is expected total damage caused to a target after shooting all shots from a weapon. Turns out that P.W.T. outdoes D.U.P. by almost 2x. Hope the figures are meaningful and useful to you Commanders. mingos

Did you try following the Weapons vs USOs link? That has more specific narrative-type advice. As far as this table goes, in most cases the DxA/Rt value is the most relevant indication of firepower and effectiveness, unless you are fighting very tough subs where you expect to have a need, and the time to empty your magazines. One caution - I did this table before I found out that the published RoF values, in XCom anyway, are inaccurate. Assuming TFTD has the same game engine, it will also show differences 'under the hood' from the published rates of fire. Spike 12:34, 8 December 2009 (EST)

Yes, I have tried that, but the page has but one brief phrase dedicated to P.W.T. as opposed to Sonic, indicating the superiority of the latter. I have already begun playtesting P.W.T. though. For instance, I used two Mantas, one armed with P.W.T., and the other one with D.U.P. and they are sufficient to sink a Fleet Supply Cruiser. All smaller subs are sunk with just the P.W.T.-armed Manta. Cruisers and smaller subs require a single round (both barrels). I'll try to document my findings on the Weapons vs. USO page. mingos

EDIT: Also, I'd like to remark that the reload times given in th game are incorrect. P.W.T. has a much faster reload time than D.U.P., and if my memory doesn't deceive me, comparable to the Sonic Oscillator.

Excellent! By reload times, do you mean the fire rates during battle (as opposed to the ammo reloading times on the ground)? If so, this is good, it confirms what I was saying about about the actual RoF being not being the same as the game documented. See here Talk:UFO_Interception#Observed_Rates_of_Fire Spike 09:15, 9 December 2009 (EST)

Yes, I meant the actual rate of fire observed in the interception window. My intuition might be deceiving me, of course, but if I'm correct, the numbers in the weapons stats table should be modified as well. I can't really check it with my current game since the aliens stopped using sonic pistols, so reaching the Sonic Oscillator is impossible now, but I'll start a new game to test that after I take on T'Leth (which might be tomorrow if I feel adventurous). mingos

The weapon comparisons that are are here were almost a mimic the one in the UFO pages - and I don't think it worked too well in the original sections. They also need the the neutral-POV mallet treatment.

This topic would be best covered under Weapon Analysis (With links from here pointing to the related article). We do need a section that explains all the ins and outs of the various weapons and compare them against one another and discuss how well they fare vs. the various enemy ships. I mean it's good to know that you need at least 3 - 4 Gas Cannons to take down a Dreadnaught. -NKF 00:45, 10 December 2009 (EST)

Hmm, not sure. Up until now, Weapon Analysis has been used exclusively for tactical weapons, Battlescape weapons. Sub/aircraft weapons have a quite different set of factors and considerations. Personally I think it's best to keep them separate. I agree with you completely though that there is a need for cleanup and probably some kind of consolidation. I would just prefer not to consolidate onto the Weapon Analysis area, because I think it will make that area less coherent. Spike 15:31, 10 December 2009 (EST)

The weapon analysis section was created with their inclusion in mind. But you're right, it does cater more to the troop weapons. Perhaps a separate analysis section for craft weapons would be the best option. -NKF 04:29, 13 December 2009 (EST)

Mostly historical rate of fire discussions

Here is the relevant discussion from Talk:GEOSCAPE.EXE#Craft_type_data

I'm enclined to agree with the rate of fire theory. A countdown is stored in CRAFT.DAT at offset 0x26 and when it hits 0, the UFO fires. It is reset for the next shot with this formula:

tmp = offset10-2*difficultyLevel
nextShot = RAND(0,tmp)+tmp

Edit: Although the attack type does not appear here, I suspect that while a missile is "traveling", the countdown is not changed. As a result, closer ranges means higher rates of fire. Seb76 07:36, 5 July 2009 (EDT)

Note that Seb did not provide the code offset in the executable. Personally I don't think the firing rate is based on range. My tests show a strong correlation with firing rate on Attack Mode (for missiles only), and no correlation with range. I did ask Seb to check if the same algorithm was used for XCom craft but he hasn't replied yet. I can't find where from, but elsewhere I've come to the conclusion that the XCom craft firing rate formula is the same, except it doesn't have the speed-up factor based on Difficulty Level. Zombie it would be great if you could check this, and also check for TFTD. However based on the test data, it looks like it. Or put another way, if we assume XCom weaons use the same formula as the UFOs, then the "firing rate" factors for the XCom weapons are as noted in my draft article. Spike 14:03, 11 December 2009 (EST)

Based on the data below, I'm wondering if the value in code you guys are seeing as a projectile velocity is either

1. The real RoF value (as seen in empirical data below), or
2. It is supposed to be a projectile velocity, but the "travelling" range that it is being used to divide is not the actual current range to the target, but the standard range of the weapon? OK in many typical cases these two values are the same, eg at standoff in Cautious mode or Standard Mode with identical weapons. But not always, eg when closing to range in Aggressive mode with mixed weapons.

Spike 19:12, 24 September 2012 (EDT)

Empirical Data

1. In multiples of the reload time of a Gas Cannon (shown as '1' below), reload times of other weapons are as follows:

Weapon Cau Std Agg
Gas      1   1   1
Ajax    16  12   8
DUP     24  18  12
Gauss    6   6   6
Sonic    6   6   6
PWT     16  12   8 

2. This is exactly the same as the equivalent EU craft weapons.

3. Range has absolutely no effect on these relative rates of fire / reload rates (tested at 8km, 53km, 70km)

This confirms the assumption [that] empirical rates of fire in TFTD exactly match empirical rates of fire in EU. And in both cases, the in game UFOPaedia is significantly wrong.

Spike 19:12, 24 September 2012 (EDT)