Using my Bullet Damage Calculator tool, I performed an analysis of Nanoweave Armor, how it behaves against different weapons at different ranges. The main intent of the analysis is to determine how useful Nanoweave Armor actually is, and how often upgrading it will result in a noticeable increase in survivability. The algorithm of the analysis is extremely sketchy, as it doesn't take into account how often which weapons are used. Weapons that participated in the comparison, sorted by damage tier: Gauss SAW and Reaper DMR ACX-11 Gauss Rifle Mercenary Bandit Carv and Cycler TAR, H-V45, GR-22, TRAC 5, Solstice GD-7F and Serpent 2nd generation SMGs In retrospect, I probably shouldn't have included ACX-11 and Bandit, but included a generic shotgun. Oh well. What even is nanoweave armor?Nanoweave Armor reduces incoming small arms damage by a percentage, rank / cost / effect: Rank 1 - 1 cert: 7.5% Rank 2 - 10 certs: 10% Rank 3 - 50 certs: 12.5% Rank 4 - 150 certs: 15% Rank 5 - 1000 certs: 20% Reminder: all classes except for Max and Infiltrator have 500 HP and 500 shields (infiltrators have 400 shields), for a total of 1000. Due to to the extreme cost of the Rank 5, it's often inquired whether it is worth it. Check out the results of my analysis to find out: ResultsHow to read results: Example: CQC: 1m to 20m Nano 1: 62% Reads as: upgrading to Nanoweave Armor Rank 1 will result in increasing your BTK value by 1 in 62% of fights between 1m and 20m. This takes into account both different weapons and different ranges. CQC: 1m to 20m Nano 1: 62% Nano 2: 2% Nano 3: 22% Nano 4: 57% Nano 5: 21% In CQC fights, Nano rank 2 is practically worthless, though it's forgivable since it costs only 10 certs. Nano rank 5 is not as powerful as some players would wish. Medium range: 20m to 50m Nano 1: 50% Nano 2: 32% Nano 3: 27% Nano 4: 22% Nano 5: 50% At medium range, all nanoweave ranks are useful, and rank 5 is surprisingly effective. Long range: 50m to 85m Note: SMGs didn't participate in this range group Nano 1: 91% Nano 2: 17% Nano 3: 40% Nano 4: 24% Nano 5: 56% All ranges: 1m to 85m Note: SMGs did participate in this range group Nano 1: 59% Nano 2: 15% Nano 3: 25% Nano 4: 27% Nano 5: 40% As you can see, Nanoweave Armor Rank 5 is not as weak as some people would think. Aye, within 10m, when most weapons do full damage, Nano 5 is not effective, but at ranges where bullet damage starts to decrease, it becomes very useful. As I said, this analysis is very sketchy, maybe later I will find a way to streamline and automate the process, and we'll be able to take stuff like CoF and recoil into account.
Thank you for this. I may reconsider taking off Nanoweave, since I used it for my LA Shotgun. If you're saying it doesn't make much a difference at CQB, then I should be trying a different Suit Slot then?
Well that's some very interesting data and a great job Iridar51. Now how about the clases we should wear Nanoweave? I prefer on medic, engi and sometimes light assault.
Id be curious to see how this game plays if NWA was removed for like a week....see how it skews TTK and stuff.
Yeah, this is a hard one to present. I did something like this for myself back when Nanoweave was having its headshot protection taken away. The best non-interactive presentation I could find was a matrix of bullet damage vs Nanoweave rank, with the values being the BTK. Once you have that, you can highlight the specific damage range you want and fit it against the falloff model. Even then it's very clunky to work with. But at the very least I think it's worth splitting this up by damage model (e.g. 200@10 - 167@65), for two reasons: if I'm fighting TR, the 200 & 167 damage ranges aren't as important because they don't have much access to those. Same with NC and the 125 & 143 damage ranges. But more importantly, it shows some interesting points that your analysis misses. Consider: SMGs are actually resistant to Nanoweave (kinda). Within the minimum damage range, NW rank 1 always helps. Each weapon does exactly 1000 within that minimum, so even adding a single HP matters. SMGs however have very tiny minimums, and can run Silencers to drop it even more. The SMG still takes an extra bullet to kill, but that applies whether you have NW or not. Depending on the SMG you might actually need NW4 before you actually see a difference in CQC. Now for any single tier drop damage model (e.g. 200-167, or 143-125. The kind you see on most LMGs or ARs) NW 1 has no effect beyond that range. The extra bullet is always able to overcome the bonus from NW1, so that's the end of that. For weapons with multiple tier drops though you get little 'advantage zones'. As the damage degrades towards the next tier (e.g. a 167-125 carbine like the Merc approaching 143 damage at around the 47 meter mark), you approach the border where BTK would increase anyway. For these weapons, NW (even NW1) provides a few extra meters for that higher BTK. So against the Merc, NW1 increases BTK under 10m and again between 42-47 (roughly). Outside of those two zones? No effect.
Nice work here. To be honest I don't think CoF and Recoil matter. Those are missed shots and NWA doesn't effect misses, only what actually hits. Though I would like to see it broken down by weapon type. For example, as NC I don't have to worry about 200 dmg weapons.
If you anticipate getting 3 or more kills per spawn, I can't see any reason to run NW over ASC. That's just me though.
Well yeah, that's why I included different ranges in my analysis. Nah, I was speaking in a larger context than simply nanoweave, more along the lines of "weapon simulator". I think Kobalt does 200 dmg? Any way, per the request of the viewers, here's the excel table I used: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B3K---LaaDClN01sSEdRSkNjOFU/edit?usp=sharing You will notice three worksheets: Nanoweave Armor #1 - contains the table with bullet damage at different ranges. Also a lot of other stuff, pay no attention to it. Nanoweave Armor #2 - contains two tables: 1) the table with BTKs at different ranges. 2) The table called "objective value of nanoweave", forget about it for now. Nanoweave Armor #3 - contains the table with deltas of the BTK table. You will only see 1s and 0s in that table. If cell's value is 1, then upgrading to this level of nanoweave will result in increase in BTK at that range. If cell's value is 0, upgrading to this level of nanoweave will do nothing for you at that range against that weapon. (assuming full health and no partial hits). Note, that upgrades already achieved by the previous level of nanoweave count in a specific way. For example, Nano 4 and Nano 5 against Gauss SAW within 20m. Having Nano 4 will reduce the BTK of this weapon only at 19 and 20m. So Nano 4's row will contain to cells with the value of 1. Having Nano 5 will reduce the BTK of this weapon at all ranges within 20m, however, reduction in the BTK at 19 and 20m is already achieved by Nano 4, so Nano 5's row will contain 18 cells with the value of 1. So the number of 1s in the row represents the value of upgrading from previous level of nanoweave, not the objective value of having this rank of nanoweave. This is what has been requested. Now, how did I receive the numbers I posted in the OP? I calculated the number of 1s in each row for Nano 1, then divided the result by the number of weapons, and then divided again by the length of the range (20, 30 and 35m), thus receiving average value of upgrading to rank 1 of nanoweave. Repeated for all other ranks and ranges. In retrospect, I did the analysis above in a wrong way. It is relative, meaning I compared nanoweave ranks to each other, and then graded them based on how each nanoweave rank measures up against the previous rank. What I should've done, is calculate the objective value of each nanoweave rank, and then compare them to each other. That's why I created another table in the worksheet Nanoweave Armor #2, called "Nanoweave armor objective value", which shows by how much each level of Nano increases the BTK at a certain range. I'm going to do redo the analysis the proper way, and post results in this thread later. What I'm pondering, though - do you think I should continue using BTK? Or should I switch to the more objective value of TTK difference? This would be more fair, because it takes into account weapon's RoF, and rid us of weird situation like this: Nano 5 increases BTK of both Gauss Saw and Armistice by 2, but the TTK of the Gauss SAW will increase by 0.24s, while the Armistice's by 0.14s, because it takes that much less time for the Armistice to fire off 2 additional rounds. From the standpoint of BTKs, Nano 5 has the same effect on both guns, from the standpoint of TTKs, Nano 5 is much more effective against Gauss SAW.
NW obviously does affect only landed shots, but I think Iridar meant to give a more realistic presentation and I applaud that. You can't just put down numbers, you have to tell people what would happen if they face an average person who is prone to miss. If it makes sense, NW's value as a suit item is indirectly doubled against a target who will land less shots. With no NW, the same target will down you more easily. With NW, he will have to work a lot harder for longer. I am not sure I can explain, let me just say I agree with Iridar's approach. I'm tired of pure paper work and number crunching without accounting for real situations and practical application, on average. EDIT : "Weapon Simulation" seems to be a good term LOL Yes please do that too. And THANKS for your hard work.
I remember seeing people posting weapon usage stats, that would show the most frequently used weapons for each faction, anyone know where I can find this stuff?
I guess I'm terrible at reading results. To clarify, what benefit do I gain when using Nanoweave in a CQB environment?
Depends on how close you think "CQB" is. Within minimum damage range, all you need is NW1. That varies from weapon to weapon: LMGs & ARs are going to be around 10m, SMGs are nearly 0. Shotguns are a special case: regular shot doesn't really care about NW, and you need NW5 to protect yourself from Slugs. Outside that range, you need enough NW to be more than the bullet damage of a weapon. NW3 will be enough to protect you from a 143 damage weapon (but only for a few meters, you're still going to want NW4), you'll need NW4 to protect you from 167s and NW5 for 200.
Same as everywhere - enemies will have a tougher time killing you. Having nanoweave will often result in increasing the number of bullets required to kill you by 1 or 2 bullets. However, results show that you will see little to no benefit from Rank 2 and Rank 5. The only weapons that REQUIRE the nano rank 5 to survive for two additional bullets are Gauss SAW and other 200 damage weapons, which are only available to NC. So to an NC player who looks to increase his survivability in CQB I wouldn't recommend spending a 1000 certs on nano rank 5, rank 4 would be sufficient for most of the time. That doesn't mean that rank 5 is altogether useless, of course. Fighting doesn't always happen within 20m, and I didn't account for shotguns, that are often encountered in CQB, nor for the possibility of the leg shots.
