Not the first time I see Gryphons praised but from my experience Gryphon AI is absolutely suicidal which does not pair well with the Gryphon's weak tank.

Yeah Gryphons really depend on overwhelming firepower. If it doesn't have that, it's toast. Basically a glass cannon.

Having said that, what I do is I put a single HVD on it, with ITU. I'm not sure if it helps the AI with range, but it'll generally stay at standoff-range. It sometimes does decide to charge in, especially with full assault mode on (which admittedly is how I run it most of the time), but that seems to work well. Plus that helps picks off targets.

The main problem with the armor fudge is how to implement such an armor fudge factor. For example, if I just increase armor HP by a factor of 4, then that also increases damage reduction. I'll discuss this in a bit more detail in my reply to Vanshilar below, but I think a reasonable rough estimate could be given by implementing armor "regeneration" to compensate for the ship turning at a rate such that the TTK is increased by a factor of 2, so maybe 1/6th of the starting armor / second. This is actually not even enough, since the most effective combos took the ship out at 17 seconds now, but it'll probably illustrate the effects.

No, regenerating armor will distort the results by favoring weapons good against armor, and disfavoring weapons bad against armor. Also, once armor is gone, it's supposed to be gone, not to come back to block more damage. I would say it's easier to simulate it by having a wider band of armor cells.

Attached is a screenshot of the Dominator and its armor cells (in the lower left corner). As far as I can tell, the size of the armor cells is about 17.5 pixels wide (noting that my display naturally rescales sizes to about 80%, thus the weapon range is important for measurement purposes). So assuming that a shot always hits in an armor band that's 6 cells wide means that you assume all shots will hit in the center half of the Dominator. In practice, not only will shots hit across the entire face of the Dominator, but some shots will be so far off that they miss.

Fortunately, the face of most ships can be approximated as a line, since you're really just hitting the perimeter of the ship most of the time. Thus you can just approximate it as a wider armor band. And thus to accommodate that, the normal distribution for the width of the weapon shot also needs to widen. But these are relatively easy to do.

Unfortunately, it seems like different ships have different armor cell sizes. I'm not sure how that's calculated. The Dominator's armor cells seem to be around 17.5 pixels wide, for example, while the Starliner's is around 28 pixels wide. Obviously, the smaller the armor cell size, the more protection it provides. I don't know how it's determined though, but that might be worth looking at to see which ships have bigger or smaller armor cells (smaller armor cells are better).

Thanks for the thoughtful feedback and criticism. This model really should have probably been validated a bit more, see above. Probably a problem stemming from it being just for fun and not being a real research project but this is also one of my weaknesses as a researcher that I tend to get carried away with models and fumble with the "boring" parts TBH. Comparing to simulation results is important. But there are some questions I have about the simulation: is the enemy turning? Is it retreating? Does it have point defense?

Actually I think the hardest part is already done. Damage to shields is easy to estimate. Damage to hull is also easy to estimate. It's always been how damage to armor is calculated that's difficult to simulate, and also how to conceptualize the effect of maneuvering, weapon spread, etc. Modeling this as a band of armor being hit by a weapon with a distribution (i.e. normal distribution in this case) neatly solves those issues. The width of the armor band encapsulates the width of the ship and how much it rotates, and the width of the normal distribution encapsulates maneuvering and weapon spread (where if it's wider than the armor band, it's considered a miss). These parameters can be estimated from combat results.

I'm not sure what hit strength vs. hull means. Can you elaborate? From what I understood from the previous thread, for the damage that goes through to hull, the multiplier is not applied, so that's how the model calculates damage. The multiplier is only applied to the proportion blocked by armor.

Any time a weapon hits a ship (i.e. not to shields, but to the ship itself), the hit strength calculation is applied, using the local armor at the point of impact. It doesn't matter if there is any armor remaining or not; even if none is remaining (i.e. it's hitting bare hull), then it's assumed that there is still a residual amount of 5% of the base armor rating for the purposes of this hit strength calculation. And once the summed armor value of the local armor goes below 5%, it again assumes 5% remaining. So that minimum of 5% always exists. Weapon multipliers for the purposes of hit strength as if they're hitting armor (i.e. /2 for kinetic, *2 for HE, /4 for frag) also apply here. This is step #2 above.

When the damage is actually applied to those cells, yes, to hull it always applies as 100%. But that's the damage that has already gone through the hit strength calculation -- that's step #3 above, which is after the damage reduction applied in step #2. This prevents people from doing things like, taking a bunch of Vulcan cannons (500 DPS, 25 frag hit strength), firing a Reaper into the rear of an Onslaught, and then wailing into the hull of the ship with the Vulcans. Well, they can, but it ends up doing 75 DPS to hull (due to the minimum 15% for the hit strength calculation) instead of the 500 DPS stated on the weapon stat card.

For the Locust, because of the hit strength calculation, the damage to hull is going to be 50/(50+75) = 40% of the original damage. So for 2 Locusts firing into hull, the model should be showing that the ship loses 1600 hull per second during the volleys. That should be easy enough to validate by setting shieldregen and shieldmax to 0 and then seeing what happens after armor is gone (assuming no armor regen, of course).

So by the calculations time to kill is 16 sec. In the simulation the time for this combo was 22-28 sec. But that also includes weapons missing and projectile travel time and the enemy rotating I presume.

Actually it doesn't include weapon missing nor travel time, since it's based on how many hits were actually registered; Detailed Combat Results doesn't count misses (although it would be great if it could). You can see for example that there were 212 to 237 Locust hits among the 3 tests, and since each Locust volley is a total of 80 shots, this means the ship died toward the end of the 3rd Locust volley. (All Locust shots hit due to its good tracking.) That's where my time estimates come from.

[attachment deleted by admin]