(Re-opened post) BFG-9000 VS Raygun

[Ancalagon]

You can guide the redeemer rocket too.

[Varis Alpha]

On 2017-08-19 at 1:06 AM, Scotty said:

BFG theoretical max damage: 4280hp

COD gun theoretical max damage: 2500hp (according to a wiki page anyway)

 

Apparently the BFG cannot deal this theoretical max damage number in practice due to how Doom RNG works (anyone know how this mechanic affects the BFG exactly, and what the max practical damage is?) but even then, the gap is so massive that this is a complete no contest.

even so, hitting a target point-blank is guaranteed to at least exceed 3000 HP's worth of damage, since you can OHKO a Spiderdemon at this range with success always, which happens to have 3000 HP. so it's still higher than the other gun's theoretical max damage anyway.

Edited August 20, 2017 by Viscra Maelstrom

[Lila Feuer]

On 8/18/2017 at 1:15 PM, Fonze said:

I was totally on-board with this statement up until the end of this quoted segment. After that you lost me. No need for quite so much aggressiveness :)

Haha, yeah I was up for over 24 hours when I made that post so I was feeling a little cranky, and outspoken.

[vita]

6 hours ago, Viscra Maelstrom said:

you can OHKO a Spiderdemon at point-blank range with success always, which happens to have 3000 HP

Unless you're talking about ZDoom that fixed the flawed hitscan detection, it's not true.

[wallabra]

12 hours ago, InsanityBringer said:

Of course, the Redeemer can only ever have one rocket packed inside of it.

In my lands, son, it has two rockets. Two is enough for anything, even for a massive que...er...a buffed up player class.

 

Spoiler

 

[Varis Alpha]

5 hours ago, 38_ViTa_38 said:

Unless you're talking about ZDoom that fixed the flawed hitscan detection, it's not true.

i did not know about this, thanks for the correction.

[MrCacod3mon]

On 8/19/2017 at 9:46 AM, Gustavo6046 said:

Oh, sweet! I think we have a winner.

 

But I think you forgot one weapon...

don't mind it has an open crack... that was Epic's fault and merely visual lol

 

__________________________________

DA MATHS

 

The redeemer's practical damage at point-blank, , is of 1500, and it's estimated range, , is of

 

(extracted from available Epic UnrealScript source code) where 29 . The default lifespan, or max age, is of , therefore when the current age (which is actually the seconds remaining of life, and not the other way around) is something tiny, like , equals to  Unreal units.

 

Knowing that  we can calculate that the max range of the Redeemer, if it were in Doom, would be of approximately  units, Wow, that's a lot! Now, the effective damage is of around

where 100 is the average player health in Unreal and UT. The average of any numbers is always .

 

Many thanks to the Doom Wiki:

We can simply sum up these values, divide them by the number of monsters, and multiply them by

 

( Math Tip! The Real Effective Damage Factor, or , is equal to where is the health of the monster of index , in a list of size of monsters that appeared throughout the whole game, and is the number of such monsters. Unfortunately that is a bit too complex, and would probably involve reading Doom2.wad using some custom utility, which I could do in Python, but not in my favorite languages since libraries like Omgifol are rare.)

 

So the average of the healths in the table is , which is (phew, almost triggered my phobia). Therefore we can multiply this number with and compare the result with the BFG's damage...

 

Ladies and gentlemen, the approximate damage of the Redeemer in Doom is...

 

which is approximately times the damage inflicted by a BFG. Seems small, huh? I think the problem is that we divided the average player health from a multiplayer game, UT, by the average MONSTER health from Doom, which is way larger.

 

So let's fix this.

 

Let's square the number of monster types in Doom for our calculation:

 

Which means we will divide by 18 twice to account for the low player health in UT.

 

 

Yup, this is around the Shotgun Guy health and should be correctly equivalent to the thinny UT players which are not very easy, nor very hard to kill, for good reasons. (Although logically we could also multiply the normal average monster health by the average of the 1998 singleplayer Unreal's monster healths, which would be accurate, I'm tired of doing monster sums - Unreal has a giant bestiary!)

 

So let's redo our maths!

 

 

Seems large. But maybe it's too large. Once again, though, it's theoretical maths. After all, we all know that practically, with this thing, I don't have to aim!! (shitty Russian Overkill reference to the mod's weapon that ripped sprites from the UT Redeemer lol)

That is something better then what i can do!!!

[baja blast rd.]

@MrCacod3mon, you can quote parts of posts by highlighting a section and clicking the 'quote this' popup. Deleting stuff from the quote also works. As does using the @ feature, as I did here. It's not the best idea to quote enormous posts in their entirety, which I'm just pointing out in case you ever do it in a thread that has value. 

 

Edited August 22, 2017 by rdwpa

[MrCacod3mon]

@rdwpa

ok i figured it out

[greennick78sh]

*for anybody wondering about the raygun, it does 1000-2000 damage by default but can be upgraded 3 times to deal up to 10000 damage, no cool bfg9000 cone though.

[Captain POLAND]

I think you can't simply make the assumption that 1 HP in one game = 1 HP in another game. Even games made by the same company... for example, in Starcraft, a Terran Marine has 40 HP (45 or a bit higher with upgrades in Starcraft 2), whereas in Warcraft 3, a Footman has 420 HP. Are we really supposed to believe that a man in medieval-style plate armor is 10.5 times tougher than a soldier in futuristic space armor?

 

If you really want to compare the power of fictional weapons, you have to be able to compare both to something in real life. For example, if you could calculate how many joules of energy are released by the explosion of a rocket that is comparable to the rockets fired by the rocket launcher in Doom, then you could compare that damage to the BFG's damage to get some idea of how powerful it is. Then do the same for something in CoD or another game, and only then compare the numbers. But that's a lot of work and I don't feel like wasting time on it.

[wallabra]

14 hours ago, Captain POLAND said:

If you really want to compare the power of fictional weapons, you have to be able to compare both to something in real life.

 

Not always! Just compare to the amount of health points an average human target in either game would have. That's a good enough common link through real life, and skips trying to measure energy output through interpretation as complicated real life processes, such as high explosion, atomic fission, or bodily water content evaporation.   :)

[El Jeff]

The BFG9000 will win in this fight, but if it was the thundergun vs the BFG the thundergun will win because it's an infinite damage wonder weapon

[SplinkWizard]

The Raygun seems a bit more versatile compared to the BFG.