Weapon "Epicness" Chart

[InfinityKage]

This is a "Epicness" chart I made to help me decide what weapons to give to my pawns. I wanted to post it for two reason. First is so other people could use it if they wanted to. And second so that I could get some tips on how to make it better and maybe take a look at other charts people may have made.

[attachment deleted by admin due to age]

[realdead_man]

EDIT

I owe you a small apology.

For whatever reason (or user error), my software was not opening the file, now it does.

Weird

I use Softmaker  Office for android+Window

[AngleWyrm]

Improved Epicness If we have just one variable then it makes a single axis of one dimension like a thermometer, and epicness can be read as the length of that thermometer. But what if we have two dimensions, such as DPS and weight? Then we have a two-dimensional quantity. Same with more dimensions. So how do we read/measure a multi-dimensional thing? We make a line from the starting point out to the value in each of the dimensions and measure the length of that line.

The length of that line is the square root of ( x² + y² + z² ... + n² )

[Snafu_RW]

no one can open the file cause it is a pain to install the reader.

"A" for effort though.

I simply dragged it into Excel.. shame it's for a modded game tho

[InfinityKage]

no one can open the file cause it is a pain to install the reader.

"A" for effort though.

Sorry. I thought it was just a regular spreadsheet file.

[InfinityKage]

Improved Epicness If we have just one variable then it makes a single axis of one dimension like a thermometer, and epicness can be read as the length of that thermometer. But what if we have two dimensions, such as DPS and weight? Then we have a two-dimensional quantity. Same with more dimensions. So how do we read/measure a multi-dimensional thing? We make a line from the starting point out to the value in each of the dimensions and measure the length of that line.

The length of that line is the square root of ( x² + y² + z² ... + n² )

You are speaking a language I can not even begin to understand.

[InfinityKage]

no one can open the file cause it is a pain to install the reader.

"A" for effort though.

I simply dragged it into Excel.. shame it's for a modded game tho

It is for a modded game but quite a few of the regular weapons are on there. Plus the formulas are in the file. Simply fill in rows B-F and then copy and paste rows G-I and it should auto-fill.

[AngleWyrm]

You are speaking a language I can not even begin to understand.

Column 'I' (Epicness) "=B2 + F2 + G2 - H2"
Column 'I' proposal "=Sqrt( B2^2 + F2^2 + G2^2 - H2^2 )

[InfinityKage]

You are speaking a language I can not even begin to understand.

Column 'I' (Epicness) "=B2 + F2 + G2 - H2"
Column 'I' proposal "=Sqrt( B2^2 + F2^2 + G2^2 - H2^2 )

I see. And you think this will give a more accurate "epicness"? I'll try it.

[dburgdorf]

I see. And you think this will give a more accurate "epicness"? I'll try it.

Essentially, what AngleWyrm's method does is allow a bit more weight to be given to stats that are more divergent than others between two items.

For example, say you have two weapons, one with stats 3,4,5,2 and the other with stats 2,3,7,2.  (Two of the stats differ by 1, but one stat differs by 2.) Your method simply adds the stat values together, giving each an "epicness" value of 14.  If you instead sum the squares, you get a value of 54 for the first weapon (9+16+25+4), and a value of 66 for the second (4+9+49+4).  And that makes an intuitive sort of sense, since a weapon that is a little bit weaker in some areas but significantly stronger in another probably "should" be considered more epic.

Note #1: For your purposes, the final square root calculation is optional, and probably not even desirable. In the example above, for example, final "epicness" values of 54 and 66 are probably simpler to work with than values of 7.348 and 8.124. 

Note #2: Expanding on AngleWyrm's suggestion, you could get creative and give different weights to various stats by assigning different exponents.  Say the first stat in the example above is significantly more important than the others. So you cube it instead of squaring it. So now, the weapon with stats 3,4,5,2 ends up with an epicness value of 72 (27+16+25+4), and the one with stats 2,3,7,2 has an epicness value of 70 (8+9+49+4). So in this case, the first weapon comes out on top, since even though the second weapon has a much better value for stat #3, the first weapon has a better value for stat #1, which is more important.

Hopefully, this all makes a bit of sense.

[InfinityKage]

I see. And you think this will give a more accurate "epicness"? I'll try it.

Essentially, what AngleWyrm's method does is allow a bit more weight to be given to stats that are more divergent than others between two items.

For example, say you have two weapons, one with stats 3,4,5,2 and the other with stats 2,3,7,2.  (Two of the stats differ by 1, but one stat differs by 2.) Your method simply adds the stat values together, giving each an "epicness" value of 14.  If you instead sum the squares, you get a value of 54 for the first weapon (9+16+25+4), and a value of 66 for the second (4+9+49+4).  And that makes an intuitive sort of sense, since a weapon that is a little bit weaker in some areas but significantly stronger in another probably "should" be considered more epic.

Note #1: For your purposes, the final square root calculation is optional, and probably not even desirable. In the example above, for example, final "epicness" values of 54 and 66 are probably simpler to work with than values of 7.348 and 8.124. 

Note #2: Expanding on AngleWyrm's suggestion, you could get creative and give different weights to various stats by assigning different exponents.  Say the first stat in the example above is significantly more important than the others. So you cube it instead of squaring it. So now, the weapon with stats 3,4,5,2 ends up with an epicness value of 72 (27+16+25+4), and the one with stats 2,3,7,2 has an epicness value of 70 (8+9+49+4). So in this case, the first weapon comes out on top, since even though the second weapon has a much better value for stat #3, the first weapon has a better value for stat #1, which is more important.

Hopefully, this all makes a bit of sense.

I get it. Thanks for the explanation.

[SpaceDorf]

No matter how you measure it .. shotguns win

[InfinityKage]

No matter how you measure it .. shotguns win

Dat range tho. I like to try to get my enemies more dead before they are right on top of me.

[AngleWyrm]

Note #1: For your purposes, the final square root calculation is optional, and probably not even desirable. In the example above, for example, final "epicness" values of 54 and 66 are probably simpler to work with than values of 7.348 and 8.124. 

Note #2: Expanding on AngleWyrm's suggestion, you could get creative and give different weights to various stats by assigning different exponents.  Say the first stat in the example above is significantly more important than the others. So you cube it instead of squaring it. So now, the weapon with stats 3,4,5,2 ends up with an epicness value of 72 (27+16+25+4), and the one with stats 2,3,7,2 has an epicness value of 70 (8+9+49+4). So in this case, the first weapon comes out on top, since even though the second weapon has a much better value for stat #3, the first weapon has a better value for stat #1, which is more important.

• Agreed, there isn't anything to be gained by taking the square root. That's done when all the items have the same unit of measure, to convert it back to that unit, which isn't the case for this spreadsheet.
• A minor improvement to the suggestion for giving more or less weight of consideration to the various items: Multiply them by a scaling factor. So for example if we want range to be twice as important as the other items then multiply range by two before squaring: (importance * item)^2

[InfinityKage]

Note #1: For your purposes, the final square root calculation is optional, and probably not even desirable. In the example above, for example, final "epicness" values of 54 and 66 are probably simpler to work with than values of 7.348 and 8.124. 

Note #2: Expanding on AngleWyrm's suggestion, you could get creative and give different weights to various stats by assigning different exponents.  Say the first stat in the example above is significantly more important than the others. So you cube it instead of squaring it. So now, the weapon with stats 3,4,5,2 ends up with an epicness value of 72 (27+16+25+4), and the one with stats 2,3,7,2 has an epicness value of 70 (8+9+49+4). So in this case, the first weapon comes out on top, since even though the second weapon has a much better value for stat #3, the first weapon has a better value for stat #1, which is more important.

• Agreed, there isn't anything to be gained by taking the square root. That's done when all the items have the same unit of measure, to convert it back to that unit, which isn't the case for this spreadsheet.
• A minor improvement to the suggestion for giving more or less weight of consideration to the various items: Multiply them by a scaling factor. So for example if we want range to be twice as important as the other items then multiply range by two before squaring: (importance * item)^2

Hmmm... Well... How would you do it? If it were your chart?