Contradicting weapon damage info

#1

Hi!

Is there a way to discern the absolute damage per bullet at 0m distance in the game? While trying to look up damage numbers with HP5 vs Kpist for example I get the following:

-Wiki says HP5 has greater damage than Kpist, but the picture in wiki shows larger damage bar on Kpist than HP5, as does the in-game description.
-Wiki says HP5 has lower rate of fire than Kpist, but picture in wiki shows it has higher rate of fire, as does the in-game description.
-a weapon test video a guy made last july concluded HP5 to do more damage on tanks than kpist, due to higher damage per bullet (??)

Have the weapons been updated since then or something else I’m not getting?

Understanding Weapon Damage
#2

I’m going to have a stab at an answer even though I didn’t go through the material you are writing about.

In Generation Zero, it’s quite hard to measure what you are proposing since it depends what you are shooting with and also what you’re shooting at.

Different ammo types cause different damage depending on where the shot lands on the enemy. If you’re shooting with AP rounds on armour, you’ll do more damage than if you’re using hollow-point or soft-point ammo (with all else kept the same). The inverse will be true if you’re targetting an enemy soft spot (aka weak point). FMJ rounds is a balance between these two, so you’d have three main ammo types with three different damage output depending on what you’re shooting at.

So, to compare different guns with each other you’d really need a 2D matrix, comparing what you’re shooting with and what you’re shooting at.

#3

As far as HP5 and Kpist go, wiki shows the original (launch time) stats. Back then, HP5 did more damage per bullet than Kpist but had less rounds and a lot more recoil.

At some point (not sure when since i didn’t notice it right away but my guess would be either in June’s or August’s Update '19), devs switched things around.

Now, Kpist has higher damage per bullet and more recoil than HP5 (if you look in-game stats). Why devs switched things around at some point and didn’t say a word about it - that i don’t know.

#4

Ah! Thank you! I was so confused!

So the current in game descriptions hold true. Quite logical really.

#5

@Aesyle how would the comment I wrote affect those stats? Are you assuming some base-line values for each weapon and ammo-type? If you, say, have a damage/bullet for Kpist AP, then the actual damage that bullet does depends on where it lands on the enemy, so the “damage taken” number on the machine would depend on where the bullet hits, right?

#6

@bcatrek To my understanding it is just like you said. The weapon has some base damage, that is then adjusted for bullet stats, which I assume could be somewhat simplified to damage multiplier and armor penetration, where the armor piercing bullets would have high penetration and lower damage multiplier, and soft point/hollow point being the opposite high damage multiplier and low penetration. Full metal jacket in the middle.

Additionally the bullet firing velocity would affect how much of the damage would be reduced as a factor of distance. For example AG5 has lower base damage but higher bullet firing velocity, so it while it has lower base damage, it would lose less damage over longer distances due to higher firing velocity.

This all finally is affected by the point in enemy where the bullet lands taking into account the armor of the location after finally calculating damage.

So the final factors to my understanding would be

  1. Weapon (base damage)
  2. Bullet (damage multiplier and armor penetration)
  3. Distance (reduced damage over distance as a factor of simulated bullet velocity calculation)
  4. Enemy hit location (Armor reduction of the location)

…it could be that the hit location further has some sort of damage multiplier to account for a weak point instead of non-weak points just having relatively high armor rating, but not sure about that

#7

Murmo explained it well, though, damage calculation in GZ is quite complex and without we seeing machine HP as set numbers (well, we can when having machine blueprint and looking them in Tech View, the overall health percentage and individual components health percentage is shown), it is still very hard to calculate how much damage different weapon setups do.

Besides the 4 points already listed, there are additional values contributing to the damage calculation:

  • quality of a weapon (1*, 2*, 3*, 4*, 5*, 6*)
  • quality of an attachment (barrel extension)
  • player char skills (Make 'Em Count, Armor Damage, Trigger Happy, Component Damage and Explosives Expert)
  • in-game difficulty level (Adventurer, Skirmish, Guerilla)
#8

Hi :slight_smile:

Does anyone know for sure what the Damage meter on the weapons info indicates?
Is Damage measured pr. shot or in DPS?
Can it be used at all to help you choose between different weapons?

Example:
A question I’m currently pondering is whether to make any use of my newly acquired 5* N16.
My go-to loadout has so far been (experimental) KVM 59, PVG 90 and a Kpist for backup in my inventory. I tried switching the Kpist for the N16 for a while, but it just doesn’t feel right. The Kpist is more precise, faster both at firing and operating, and it even has a higher Damage indicated. Machines seem to go down faster indeed with the Kpist. Are they saying the 9x19 mm round really does more damage than the 5,56x45 mm? Or does it mean something else?
In another comparison, the AG4 does more damage (I assume pr. shot) than the KVM 59. It’s not realistic, but completely fair in terms of balancing gameplay. BUT, with the 5,56 weapons it’s the opposite. The KVM 89 has a higher damage than the N15 and the AG5. Why?
I’m not saying the weapons need to be re-balanced, but the indicators sure are confusing…

#9

The next post is my empyrric testing and experience. If hunting rifles are indication it’s damage per bullet on the gauge.
I won’t include experimentals due to behaviour changing mechanics and/or huge boost of power due to being experimentals, though essentially they are “5* + effects”. Also, these changes don’t reflect on the gauges, may be except rate of fire - stopped to look at these long time ago.
First factor is hidden damage multipliers on ammo. SP got the biggest damage boost per bullet on components - Solo Guerilla FNIX Hunter can be felled in around two mags of either .243 and .270 on condition that every bullet goes blue spark and rifle is 5* (tickpod -> shotgun -> right “breast” -> left “breast” if bypassing vent grate, shooting “eye” I deem impractical, but it’ll do most damage). And seems to be get lowest resulting damage on chassis. HP of .44 also do high damage, but it’s somewhat slightly less.

Secons factor is how many bullets do the most damage. 9mm FMJ are balanced in regard of component damage and kick it produced. The fact that machines fall faster with 9mm SMG than with 6mm assault rifle is that 6mm do less damage on components with comparable firerate and hit rate, though 6mm has batter base AP properties (for example FNC with 6mm FMJ cant penetrate tank’s shoulder hinges from front, but can get into hip electric box virtually from any angle, sp and most hp ammo having trouble bypassing that plate).

Regarding MG - they do same damage per bullet as their assault rifle companion. Problem lay in consistent hit rate on weak spots, since ARs are easier to control - glaring difference between Minimi (even with compenstaor) and FNC with bare barrel.

I didn’t do extencive tests on US guns. All I’ve concluded from issued 3* M16 gunplay that it’s “5.56 burst DMR” - it has almost pin-point (~100m) accuracy for burst, but in full auto it start to float wildly after 4th bullet.
M60 feels less stable than MAG.

3rd factor that makes machineguns superior than assault rifles of same cartridge is difference in damage-per-second vs damage-per-minute. On paper assault riffles are better at potential DPS than MG because they can hit more crit spots in a continuous fire. Key word “continuous”, that is around 4-6 secons depending on who you ask. And then spending 3-5 seconds on reloading. MGs in that department spends double time on reloading, but quadruple+ time on shooting. That will mitigate damage losses on misses and hits on protected spots. As for me AG5 outperforms kvm89 by sheer accuracy difference.
Also same factor makes auto-shotgun have high(est) DPS, but mediocre/below average DPM, due to reload-to-shooting ratios.

Kvm 89 recoil and spread
#10

Same discussion topics merged.

@NJR87, what happened with Forum Search? :thinking:

//Mod

December '20 update - https://generationzero.com/en/blog/december-update-patch-notes

Inventory weapon stats tweaked in the Inventory UI to better align to gameplay feel - weapons have not been rebalanced, we’ve just updated the stats that you see

With that, one change (among many):
Before December '20 update, AG4 and KVM 59 (same quality) had their “damage” on equal level.
Post-December '20 update, AG4 has slightly higher damage than KVM 59.

#11

It happened. Just forgot to read through the search results… :stuck_out_tongue_closed_eyes:
Anyway, thanks for the info. :slight_smile:

#12

I carry with me 2 machine guns kvm59 n60) + grg and pvg. I do not think that there is a weapon that will surpass the experimental 59

#13

Lets see;

  • Rate of Fire - good
    6* Kpist in Overdrive mode has the fastest RoF in the game.
  • Damage per bullet - also good
    After latest update, AG4 has a bit better damage while 6* .50 cal has the best/highest damage per bullet in the game.
  • Recoil - high
    It takes quite a bit of work to keep the sights on target. N60 has less recoil though.
  • Accuracy - poor (due to high recoil)
    There are a lot of weapons in-game that have much better accuracy.
  • Magazine size with 5* mag mod - very large
    Equal to N60.
  • Special ability - situational
    Also, can’t use weapon in close-range without getting zapped yourself.

So, based on all that, many weapons in many aspects surpass 6* KVM 59, where mag size is equal to N60.

#14

My dilemma solved itself, as my game decided to magically drop my exp. Kpist for me… :face_with_symbols_over_mouth:
I can’t believe it. This has never happened to me before… :unamused:

#15

And i scrapped the extra 6* Kpist i had when i bought US Weapon pack DLC since i needed more room in my Plundra. 2x 6* 12G shottys and 6* m/49 got also scrapped at the same time.

The 5.56mm weapons are there for those who like them. I’ve used AG5 for some time and tried N16 out as well and while they are easy to control, damage per bullet just isn’t high enough for my use. AG4 is much better.

KVM 89 is fun weapon and i love the firing sound of it but that’s all i like about it. Similar to AG5 and N16, damage values just aren’t there and 5.56mm is also hard to find outside Himfjäll.

5.56mm is like the underdog in GZ.

Devs changed the weapon stats values to “reflect more to the feel” and i guess that KVM needs to have more damage than AG5/N16 since it’s LMG (which doesn’t make no sense).

Here, i’m confused between the two:

  1. Devs changed the stats in preparation for upcoming weapons rebalance. And weapons currently doesn’t act like stats. Instead they act like stats used to show.
    or
  2. Devs changed the stats to better reflect how weapons actually are since the older stats were wrong when they were added in March '20 update (alongside plethora of other stuff).
#16

Yeah, and part of why I also think it makes no sense is because with KVM 59 vs. AG4, it’s the opposite way around. Weird… Or a mistake?

The exp. KVM 59 with a compensator and iron sights will remain my primary weapon. It works for everything. It’s precise enough to be effective against Runners closer than 70-80 meters, and it can take out 3-5 Hunters without reloading. But, I need a secondary weapon with more precision and faster reloading, mostly for those close encounters with small numbers of machines. Maybe I’ll go double 7.62 and use the exp. AG4 as secondary until I can find a new Kpist… :slight_smile:

#17

I far outweigh the AG5 over the AG4. Worth a play if you’ve not had a good session with it.

#18

@AliasDJA I have tried the AG5 many times, but it never feels right to me. The AG4’s damage is so much higher, and the other properties are only marginally «worse». I love the AG4 with a silencer and the ACOG sight. Very precise with single shot and even short bursts.

#19

Of course each to their own, if you’ve tried it fair enough.

I’m actually the complete opposite :smile:

#20

How about HP5? This is my solid secondary weapon, specifically meant for close-range combat.