For adding the title, I use 1.1 as the cannon coefficient, making the new non-joust-coefficient 1.1781.

The M3-A title is unique (not in the game sense) in the sense that if you take the title you know that you will be filling it with a cannon. So you don't need to add a general utility coefficient for the cannon, you can directly analyze the jousting numbers with whatever cannon you opt to install.

I'm sure it has been read and referenced, but I didn't post MathWing 1.0 until early 2014, so wave 7 may be the first wave that they could have used the method before the design got locked in. And I don't know how comfortable they would be using someone else's formula that they didn't create or fully understand, let alone be able to manipulate into using for new ships.

For adding the title, I use 1.1 as the cannon coefficient, making the new non-joust-coefficient 1.1781.

The M3-A title is unique (not in the game sense) in the sense that if you take the title you know that you will be filling it with a cannon. So you don't need to add a general utility coefficient for the cannon, you can directly analyze the jousting numbers with whatever cannon you opt to install.

If there ever were an explanation for why these ships need a cannon, it is this right here. Every ship is within a point of the calculated value or above. Tansarii point veteran and A'shera inch their way above the spacer this time around, but all are good value depending on how much you want to spend on your scyk. *Keep in mind, the assumption for range 1 is that the scyk will have an alternate HLC shot, which is an optimistic case as the scyk's primary gets only 3 dice at range 1--mileage may vary*

Some of these numbers are suspiciously close to their printed costs, which has me wondering if someone at FFG started reading this thread.

I'm sure it has been read and referenced, but I didn't post MathWing 1.0 until early 2014, so wave 7 may be the first wave that they could have used the method before the design got locked in. And I don't know how comfortable they would be using someone else's formula that they didn't create or fully understand, let alone be able to manipulate into using for new ships.

I'll edit the post with the correction to the coefficient and results. I understand that part of the equation now.

As for FFG actually using it, I doubt it, but it was funny getting [incorrect] results that are <0.02 points from their printed costs.

Also note that you could argue that the dial coefficient would be different if you had a HLC vs primaries. I.e. you want to be able to slow-roll.

Also note that you could argue that the dial coefficient would be different if you had a HLC vs primaries. I.e. you want to be able to slow-roll.

Well, the scyk is missing the 1 forwards, but 5-kturn option and other slower movement options (has both 1-hards and 1-banks) seem to suit being at range. At the very least, I think that the dial coefficient shouldn't be lower than it currently is.

Could you explain exactly how you get to the jousting value on, say the x wing ?

Could you explain exactly how you get to the jousting value on, say the x wing ?

Same as with any other ship, it's all detailed in the 2nd 3rd post. Pertinent section snipped here with values from the X-wing:

PS1 jousting power (raw stat line value):

P _jousting = {Expected Damage Output} * {Expected Durability}

{Expected Damage Output} = 1.70

{Expected Durability} = 1.202

So:

P _jousting = 2.0504

The value is then related to the power by:

jousting value = 12*( P _jousting ^{(1 / 1.85)} + (1/150)*(P _jousting ^{(1 / 0.8)} - 1) )

X-wing jousting value = 17.8

That's at PS1. The X-wing costs 21 points at PS2, which (using my metrics) has a PS1 equivalent cost of:

X-wing PS1 cost = 21/(1 + 1/24) = 20.16

So the jousting efficiency is:

PS1 value / PS1 cost = 17.8 / 20.16 = 88%

Could you explain exactly how you get to the jousting value on, say the x wing ?

Two main equations set forth in post #3 for finding the value of any test ship:

P _jousting = {Expected Damage Output} * {Expected Durability}

and

jousting value = 12*( P _jousting ^{(1 / 1.85)} + (1/150)*(P _jousting ^{(1 / 0.8)} - 1) )

{Expected Damage Output} = {Mean damage from the Test Ship} / {Mean damage from a tie fighter}

The mean damage calculation makes weighted assumptions about how often the attacker has a focus, the defender has a focus, the range, and the agility of the defender (meta-dependent assumptions). Post #3 explains in more detail, but there is also a list for the damage outputs for most of the relevant cases.

For the x-wing example, you can grab from the table the standard defense meta damage output for 3 base dice, 1.7058. The meaning of this number is that the x-wing's damage output is expected to be 1.7058 times the damage output of a tie fighter.

{Expected Damage Output} = {Mean rounds to destroy the Test Ship} / {Mean rounds to destroy a Tie fighter}

Expected durability is a bit more complicated. It is related to the mean shots to destroy a ship, completely independent of the test ship's damage output. The meta-dependent assumptions this time are defender focus availability, attacker action economy, range, and attacker base power. Explicitly include critical damage on hull that result in double damage. After mean rounds to destroy is calculated, make an adjustment for critical damage on hull that were not double damage as +1/3rd damage. Again, details are in post #3, but there is also a list for expected durability of each regular ship.

Again, for the x-wing example, the expected durability for standard attack meta is 1.202. The meaning of this number is that the x-wing under fire will last 1.202 times the number of rounds a tie fighter would.

These two numbers describe all you need to know about joust value of the x-wing. Just plug numbers into the equations and you have a 17.8 joust value.

Zero and Bob, you should truly consider teaching on the side.. I've read just about everything you post and not a single post, topic, even sentence for that matter of yours isn't extremely well thought of and thoroughly laid out in detail.. I truly appreciate you folks dedicating your intelligence and clear education to our interests !! Oh yeah thanks haha

Hey MJ, do you think there's a couple of designers at FFG that are specifically trying to come up with abilities that will make your head explode when you math them?

EDIT: Third glass of wine, I shouldn't try to type anymore tonight.

Query: What's the jousting value on a theoretical 26 point Level 2 ship with 3 attack, 2 agility, 6 hull, 0 shields, and can attack twice each turn?

Query: What's the jousting value on a theoretical 26 point Level 2 ship with 3 attack, 2 agility, 6 hull, 0 shields, and can attack twice each turn?

It would have a durability of {EDur} = 1.357 (same as tie bomber).

If that 3 attack is a primary weapon, a good approximation would be to have 2x{EDO of a 3 dice attack} which is making an optimistic assumption about the same action economy being available for both attacks. {EDO} = 1.7058*2

JV comes to a lofty 27.94

However, because I assume that means you are talking about a bomber with cluster missiles, you won't be getting range bonuses, so the damage is not quite that high, it would be {EDO} = 1.592*2

The JV comes to 26.89. (PS 1 cost being 24.96, that is a 107.72% joust efficiency). The optimistic assumptions being made in this case would be that you never run out of cluster missiles, are never denied your cluster missile attack (from not having a TL or being at range 3), and that focus/reroll economy will be the same for both attacks and as good as any other ship. These may or may not be reasonable assumptions, and remember that without ordnance, the bomber has a 14.2 JV, so hopefully your early shots counted. If you want a more in-depth analysis, some of those assumptions could be removed with a better tailored model.

Query: What's the jousting value on a theoretical 26 point Level 2 ship with 3 attack, 2 agility, 6 hull, 0 shields, and can attack twice each turn?

It would have a durability of {EDur} = 1.357 (same as tie bomber).

If that 3 attack is a primary weapon, a good approximation would be to have 2x{EDO of a 3 dice attack} which is making an optimistic assumption about the same action economy being available for both attacks. {EDO} = 1.7058*2

JV comes to a lofty 27.94

However, because I assume that means you are talking about a bomber with cluster missiles, you won't be getting range bonuses, so the damage is not quite that high, it would be {EDO} = 1.592*2

The JV comes to 26.89. (PS 1 cost being 24.96, that is a 107.72% joust efficiency). The optimistic assumptions being made in this case would be that you never run out of cluster missiles, are never denied your cluster missile attack (from not having a TL or being at range 3), and that focus/reroll economy will be the same for both attacks and as good as any other ship. These may or may not be reasonable assumptions, and remember that without ordnance, the bomber has a 14.2 JV, so hopefully your early shots counted. If you want a more in-depth analysis, some of those assumptions could be removed with a better tailored model.

26 is the cost of a Scimitar with Extra Munitions and 2x Cluster Missile, which is where I got it.

You can fly three of those in a fleet with Captain Jonus.

Looks like 15 expected damage per turn, for the first 4 turns or until the enemy kills Jonus, which isn't as easy as it sounds when facing that kind of incoming fire.

Just wanted to know how monstrous that fleet would be before factoring in mobility

Zero and Bob, you should truly consider teaching on the side.. I've read just about everything you post and not a single post, topic, even sentence for that matter of yours isn't extremely well thought of and thoroughly laid out in detail.. I truly appreciate you folks dedicating your intelligence and clear education to our interests !! Oh yeah thanks haha

Thanks! My primary PhD adviser frequently says the same thing. I actually did teach a freshman engineering class one semester, it was an educational experience and I generally got very good feedback. I work full-time so serious teaching isn't really in the cards. I would be more interested in teaching power electronics, audio amplifiers, transduction and acoustics than I am MathWing though.

Hey MJ, do you think there's a couple of designers at FFG that are specifically trying to come up with abilities that will make your head explode when you math them?

Well, you could ask the Scum and Villainy podcast to ask them that question when they interview Alex next time! But I seriously doubt that's one of their main design objectives. I think they just want to make a high quality and balanced game.

26 is the cost of a Scimitar with Extra Munitions and 2x Cluster Missile, which is where I got it.

You can fly three of those in a fleet with Captain Jonus.

Looks like 15 expected damage per turn, for the first 4 turns or until the enemy kills Jonus, which isn't as easy as it sounds when facing that kind of incoming fire.

Just wanted to know how monstrous that fleet would be before factoring in mobility

Ordnance is still fundamentally a one-off so I don't think that trying to shoehorn it into the conventional jousting model is the correct approach. You really have to look at the increased damage that you get from that one attack, and convert that into how many more points worth of the opposing squad you can erase from having a higher burst damage. The exception would be if a ship had so many missiles and torpedoes that it never ran out of ordnance and therefore never took a primary weapon shot, but even with TIE bombers that is generally rare. Maybe we will see that happen with wave 7, for 26 points you can get Scimitar + Extra Munitions + Cluster Missiles + Proton Torpedoes. 4 secondary shots is a lot.

I plan on doing a thorough post / whitepaper on the Missile / Torpedo topic eventually. I would like to do it soon, but I don't have an ETA.

Zero and Bob, you should truly consider teaching on the side.. I've read just about everything you post and not a single post, topic, even sentence for that matter of yours isn't extremely well thought of and thoroughly laid out in detail.. I truly appreciate you folks dedicating your intelligence and clear education to our interests !! Oh yeah thanks haha

Thanks! My primary PhD adviser frequently says the same thing. I actually did teach a freshman engineering class one semester, it was an educational experience and I generally got very good feedback. I work full-time so serious teaching isn't really in the cards. I would be more interested in teaching power electronics, audio amplifiers, transduction and acoustics than I am MathWing though.

Hey MJ, do you think there's a couple of designers at FFG that are specifically trying to come up with abilities that will make your head explode when you math them?

Well, you could ask the Scum and Villainy podcast to ask them that question when they interview Alex next time! But I seriously doubt that's one of their main design objectives. I think they just want to make a high quality and balanced game.

26 is the cost of a Scimitar with Extra Munitions and 2x Cluster Missile, which is where I got it.

You can fly three of those in a fleet with Captain Jonus.

Looks like 15 expected damage per turn, for the first 4 turns or until the enemy kills Jonus, which isn't as easy as it sounds when facing that kind of incoming fire.

Just wanted to know how monstrous that fleet would be before factoring in mobility

Ordnance is still fundamentally a one-off so I don't think that trying to shoehorn it into the conventional jousting model is the correct approach. You really have to look at the increased damage that you get from that one attack, and convert that into how many more points worth of the opposing squad you can erase from having a higher burst damage. The exception would be if a ship had so many missiles and torpedoes that it never ran out of ordnance and therefore never took a primary weapon shot, but even with TIE bombers that is generally rare. Maybe we will see that happen with wave 7, for 26 points you can get Scimitar + Extra Munitions + Cluster Missiles + Proton Torpedoes. 4 secondary shots is a lot.

I plan on doing a thorough post / whitepaper on the Missile / Torpedo topic eventually. I would like to do it soon, but I don't have an ETA.

My approach would be to weigh the health of the defender, and look at one-time damage increases as being worth it if they remove more than their cost from the opponent's fleet.

Zero and Bob, you should truly consider teaching oresults, ide.. I've read just about everything you post and not a single post, topic, even sentence for that matter of yours isn't extremely well thought of and thoroughly laid out in detail.. I truly appreciate you folks dedicating your intelligence and clear education to our interests !! Oh yeah thanks haha

Thanks! My primary PhD adviser frequently says the same thing. I actually did teach a freshman engineering class one semester, it was an educational experience and I generally got very good feedback. I work full-time so serious teaching isn't really in the cards. I would be more interested in teaching power electronics, audio amplifiers, transduction and acoustics than I am MathWing though.

Hey MJ, do you think there's a couple of designers at FFG that are specifically trying to come up with abilities that will make your head explode when you math them?

Well, you could ask the Scum and Villainy podcast to ask them that question when they interview Alex next time! But I seriously doubt that's one of their main design objectives. I think they just want to make a high quality and balanced game.

26 is the cost of a Scimitar with Extra Munitions and 2x Cluster Missile, which is where I got it.

You can fly three of those in a fleet with Captain Jonus.

Looks like 15 expected damage per turn, for the first 4 turns or until the enemy kills Jonus, which isn't as easy as it sounds when facing that kind of incoming fire.

Just wanted to know how monstrous that fleet would be before factoring in mobility

Ordnance is still fundamentally a one-off so I don't think that trying to shoehorn it into the conventional jousting model is the correct approach. You really have to look at the increased damage that you get from that one attack, and convert that into how many more points worth of the opposing squad you can erase from having a higher burst damage. The exception would be if a ship had so many missiles and torpedoes that it never ran out of ordnance and therefore never took a primary weapon shot, but even with TIE bombers that is generally rare. Maybe we will see that happen with wave 7, for 26 points you can get Scimitar + Extra Munitions + Cluster Missiles + Proton Torpedoes. 4 secondary shots is a lot.

I plan on doing a thorough post / whitepaper on the Missile / Torpedo topic eventually. I would like to do it soon, but I don't have an ETA.

My approach would be to weigh the health of the defender, and look at one-time damage increases as being worth it if they remove more than their cost from the opponent's fleet.

A few pages back I did something like that, relating the removed joust value of a defender to a single volley from a given primary at a given range. Doing the same for a proton torpedo, I then calculated the difference. I am not satisfied with the results and need to tweak model assumptions to gain insight into the value of the ordnance.

Hi,

MJ thanks for your work again. It really helps us start to figure out the game better. (I must say, I not always sure I'm reading it right, but it seems to make sense).

I was thinking. Would you be interested in calculating the non-linear C3PO Luke Fat Han?

Also, is Soontir's evaluation accurate? Does he gain a lot more value from 3 effective actions?

What about the cost of Ints + Auto? This might be hard to value since it goes up with good flying and is virtually 2 points thrown away when you're a terrible pilot.

How does 58 Dash gain so much mathematical value from the Engine? What does the Engine represent? Not getting shot at an extra 25% of the time on a total of 58 points out of 100 in a list?

Could we also get a "dummies" chart for what a good efficiency would be?

Is it about 88% for a non-turret and 70-75% for a turret?

Zero and Bob, you should truly consider teaching on the side.. I've read just about everything you post and not a single post, topic, even sentence for that matter of yours isn't extremely well thought of and thoroughly laid out in detail.. I truly appreciate you folks dedicating your intelligence and clear education to our interests !! Oh yeah thanks haha

Thanks! My primary PhD adviser frequently says the same thing. I actually did teach a freshman engineering class one semester, it was an educational experience and I generally got very good feedback. I work full-time so serious teaching isn't really in the cards. I would be more interested in teaching power electronics, audio amplifiers, transduction and acoustics than I am MathWing though.

Hey MJ, do you think there's a couple of designers at FFG that are specifically trying to come up with abilities that will make your head explode when you math them?

Well, you could ask the Scum and Villainy podcast to ask them that question when they interview Alex next time! But I seriously doubt that's one of their main design objectives. I think they just want to make a high quality and balanced game.

26 is the cost of a Scimitar with Extra Munitions and 2x Cluster Missile, which is where I got it.

You can fly three of those in a fleet with Captain Jonus.

Looks like 15 expected damage per turn, for the first 4 turns or until the enemy kills Jonus, which isn't as easy as it sounds when facing that kind of incoming fire.

Just wanted to know how monstrous that fleet would be before factoring in mobility

Ordnance is still fundamentally a one-off so I don't think that trying to shoehorn it into the conventional jousting model is the correct approach. You really have to look at the increased damage that you get from that one attack, and convert that into how many more points worth of the opposing squad you can erase from having a higher burst damage. The exception would be if a ship had so many missiles and torpedoes that it never ran out of ordnance and therefore never took a primary weapon shot, but even with TIE bombers that is generally rare. Maybe we will see that happen with wave 7, for 26 points you can get Scimitar + Extra Munitions + Cluster Missiles + Proton Torpedoes. 4 secondary shots is a lot.

I plan on doing a thorough post / whitepaper on the Missile / Torpedo topic eventually. I would like to do it soon, but I don't have an ETA.

Also hey! Are you a music tech person too? =)

I hacked together a value for the Boost action that is dependent on the PS/EPT, and ship size - it's buried in the details thread somewhere. It's just an approximation, but in general Engine is absurdly good on higher PS ships, especially large base ships that can cover even more distance with it. The HLC Dash numbers of course assume that he will always get a shot, which he won't.

MathWing 3.0 will be more accurate and will vary on a per-ship basis, with using some secret-sauce analytics.

Could we also get a "dummies" chart for what a good efficiency would be?

Is it about 88% for a non-turret and 70-75% for a turret?

Depends on what else the ship can bring to the table, or has working against it, so there is no one-size fits all. But for "vanilla" ships that lack much special, then you're probably looking at ~95%+ for non-turreted, and ~75%+ for a R1-3 non-donut hole turret. The turrets also depend if you're talking a huge ship that has other nice upgrade slots, or just a plain vanilla Ion Cannon Gold.

Also hey! Are you a music tech person too? =)

NA - electrical engineering. Power amplifiers, control systems, and underwater transducers. My wife is a classical musician though!

MathWing 3.0 will be more accurate and will vary on a per-ship basis, with using some secret-sauce analytics.

Which makes me curious: I know you want to keep the processes behind Mathwing 3.0 secret so you can use it yourself in future, but will you be showing the results it gives?

MathWing 3.0 will be more accurate and will vary on a per-ship basis, with using some secret-sauce analytics.

Which makes me curious: I know you want to keep the processes behind Mathwing 3.0 secret so you can use it yourself in future, but will you be showing the results it gives?

Good question. It will likely be a while before it's done anyway, and without getting into the details, it may never be fully operational on X-wing anyway. It's really a design & playtesting tool that relies on both theory and data mining. X-wing isn't really built for the level of data collection that I would want even on vassal. That's about all I'll say on it without giving away the farm.

So, maybe, maybe not. Alternatively I might get distracted thinking about starting a business in the area of my field instead, which would probably be more constructive. If I was independently wealthy I would quit my job and do both eventually, and have 2 separate companies.

Maybe I just can't find the page, but have you run any numbers for autothrusters? It seems like they are really good, but how do their numbers affect ships that can use them?

Maybe I just can't find the page, but have you run any numbers for autothrusters? It seems like they are really good, but how do their numbers affect ships that can use them?

I haven't published any numbers on them yet.

Just wondering. What would be the numbers for tarn mison with r7 astromech? Have those been run?

Just wondering. What would be the numbers for tarn mison with r7 astromech? Have those been run?

I seem to get asked this every 3 months!

Yup, right on schedule!

I still don't have a numerical answer. I will eventually break down and calculate it, but it is not in the immediate backlog right now. I'm working on polishing of a comprehensive analysis of Missiles and Torpedoes first.

Just wondering. What would be the numbers for tarn mison with r7 astromech? Have those been run?

I seem to get asked this every 3 months!

MajorJuggler, thank you for the time you've put into this! I really like looking at ships objectively rather than subjectively.

I have two questions for you:

1) Is Tarn Mison w/ R7 points efficient?

What's the numbers on Tarn + R7?

I haven't run specific numbers for him (with R7), so as a placeholder I called his ability worth 2 points.

Yup, right on schedule!

I still don't have a numerical answer. I will eventually break down and calculate it, but it is not in the immediate backlog right now. I'm working on polishing of a comprehensive analysis of Missiles and Torpedoes first.

The trouble is that R7 scales with the attacker , rather than the defender, making the math quite different than the norm.