FBW/Nano

[Nagletz 215]

After all these years of spending APB $ and some real money on secondaries, FBW is still most comfort gun for me, despite being free. Next one is the Snub, but it should be more accurate tbh, in marksman more at least.

[Matsutake 16]

Oh-ho-ho, no.  The OCA Nano doesn't need a buff.

In comparison to the FBW, OCA Nano is easier to handle because it's fully automatic, you need only focus on aiming/tracking, and it doesn't suffer from blooming (spraying is straight-up forgiving). The FBW is semi-auto, which in general, are moderately difficult for CQBs, and you gotta aim/track while only firing when you're sure you've got the shot (or just simply hope to get it, but that goes without saying for a lot of guns and the brain's, sometimes inaccurate, tracking-predictions). Constantly firing the FBW is more detrimental to it's accuracy, unlike the OCA Nano. I'd say the FBW is mildly difficult to use, but can be great for falling back on, if you're confident/skilled enough. A buff for the OCA Nano is unnecessary.

[Noob_Guardian 417]

On 2/18/2021 at 11:07 PM, Matsutake said:

Oh-ho-ho, no.  The OCA Nano doesn't need a buff.

In comparison to the FBW, OCA Nano is easier to handle because it's fully automatic, you need only focus on aiming/tracking, and it doesn't suffer from blooming (spraying is straight-up forgiving). The FBW is semi-auto, which in general, are moderately difficult for CQBs, and you gotta aim/track while only firing when you're sure you've got the shot (or just simply hope to get it, but that goes without saying for a lot of guns and the brain's, sometimes inaccurate, tracking-predictions). Constantly firing the FBW is more detrimental to it's accuracy, unlike the OCA Nano. I'd say the FBW is mildly difficult to use, but can be great for falling back on, if you're confident/skilled enough. A buff for the OCA Nano is unnecessary.

You don't need to pretend that the FBW isnt S tier lol. OCA nano might make "B" tier if lucky. Yay low recoil! Now hit more shots and have a much higher equip speed. Most people would pick an FBW over a nano any day, if nano was that good you'd of seen everyone using them like pre-nano nerf. Now it's just something that's "useful" for stunning, if you don't like clicking, and is more of a novelty item. FBW is still more reliable and better to use in most situations.

Edited February 21, 2021 by Noob_Guardian

[Matsutake 16]

3 hours ago, Noob_Guardian said:

You don't need to pretend that the FBW isnt S tier lol. OCA nano might make "B" tier if lucky. Yay low recoil! Now hit more shots and have a much higher equip speed. Most people would pick an FBW over a nano any day, if nano was that good you'd of seen everyone using them like pre-nano nerf. Now it's just something that's "useful" for stunning, if you don't like clicking, and is more of a novelty item. FBW is still more reliable and better to use in most situations.

I'm not pretending FBW isn't S tier, it's meta for sure, but that doesn't necessarily mean that any other weapon is bad or useless enough for it warranting a buff. The OCA Nano's accuracy feels somewhat like an ATAC's--easy to handle--and if it doesn't kill, then it will stun. That makes it strong against Clotting Agent/Kevlar/Medspray, the most annoying mods. OCA Nano is strong. I think it's good that the OCA Nano's equip time is longer and fires juuust slow enough for the trusty, starter fall-back-weapon to shine it's light. After all, OCA Nano does have a larger frame, magazine, and a suppressor (a suppressor that doesn't subtract a round from the magazine... of a machine-pistol).

[LilyRain 674]

On 2/19/2021 at 1:05 AM, MonkaS said:

nano's bloom is pretty small especially if you consider the hitbox of players is the size of the largest and tallest character and not what is being reflected by there model. Its just way more forgiving than the fbw/45/frog ping and fps fluctuations make hitting a min ttk with those guns a lot harder vs a full auto secondary which has slightly worse base accuracy(default crosshair bloom) but also has a smaller max bloom than fbw/45/frog. Also makes tracking easier since you don't have to actually time shots to a rhythm. 

OCA Nano's bloom does NOT increase, at all.

 

Ping and fps fluctuations affect BOTH weapons..

 

I'm interested in seeing how you calculated or tested that, because that is simply not true.

 

Edited February 21, 2021 by LilyRain

[BlatMan 711]

9 hours ago, LilyRain said:

I'm interested in seeing how you calculated or tested that, because that is simply not true.

 

EDIT: Add +1 to modifier cap.

 

.45: https://apbdb.com/items/Weapon_Pistol_Colby45AP

Accuracy Radius: 20 cm

Shot modifier cap: 1.50

20 * (1+1.5) = 50

 

FBW: https://apbdb.com/items/Weapon_Pistol_FBW

Accuracy Radius: 19 cm

Shot modifier cap: 1.50

19 * (1+1.5) = 47.5

 

FR0G: https://apbdb.com/items/Weapon_Pistol_Frog_DA

Accuracy Radius: 19 cm

Shot modifier cap: 1.50

19 * (1+1.5) = 47.5

 

Nano: https://apbdb.com/items/Weapon_Pistol_OCANano

Accuracy Radius: 24 cm

Shot modifier cap: 0.85

24 * (1+0.85) = 44,4

 

But, the max bloom on the OCA Nano is not a factor since it recovers before firing the next shot, which can be calculated by:

 

(Fire Interval - Recovery Delay) * Recovery Per Second

(0.15 - 0) * 6 = 0.9

 

Per Shot Modifier is only 0.2, while recovery between shots is 0.9. 

 

You know what would be a great idea. Add a link to APBDB in game. It would be so much better for new players.

Edited February 21, 2021 by SquirrelFace

[LilyRain 674]

1 hour ago, SquirrelFace said:

 

.45: https://apbdb.com/items/Weapon_Pistol_Colby45AP

Accuracy Radius: 20 cm

Shot modifier cap: 1.50

20 * 1.5 = 30

 

FBW: https://apbdb.com/items/Weapon_Pistol_FBW

Accuracy Radius: 19 cm

Shot modifier cap: 1.50

19 * 1.5 = 28.5

 

FR0G: https://apbdb.com/items/Weapon_Pistol_Frog_DA

Accuracy Radius: 19 cm

Shot modifier cap: 1.50

19 * 1.5 = 28.5

 

Nano: https://apbdb.com/items/Weapon_Pistol_OCANano

Accuracy Radius: 24 cm

Shot modifier cap: 0.85

24 * 0.85 = 20,4

 

But, the max bloom on the OCA Nano is not a factor since it recovers before firing the next shot, which can be calculated by:

 

(Fire Interval - Recovery Delay) * Recovery Per Second

(0.15 - 0) * 6 = 0.9

 

Per Shot Modifier is only 0.2, while recovery between shots is 0.9. 

 

You know what would be a great idea. Add a link to APBDB in game. It would be so much better for new players.

Your methodology is lacking, too simplistic to be correct

 

- I like how you ignored recoveries for all weapons but the nano's

- I also like how you ignored modifiers other than the shot modifier cap

[BlatMan 711]

7 minutes ago, LilyRain said:

Your methodology is lacking, too simplistic to be correct

 

- I like how you ignored recoveries for all weapons but the nano's

- I also like how you ignored modifiers other than the shot modifier cap

I don't understand what your argument is. You said the nano has no bloom, which you are correct since it fully recovers it's bloom before firing the next shot. You also asked about the calculations for max bloom, which I provided.

 

Here's the  bloom per shot when fired at max rate of fire, for each of those pistols.

Per Shot Modifier - (Fire Interval - Recovery Delay) * Recovery Per Second

 

Colby .45 AP: 0.5 - (0.2 - 0.05) * 3 = 0.05

Obeya FBW: 0.2 - (0.2 - 0.1) * 1 = 0.1

FR0G series: 0.2 - (0.2 - 0.1) * 1 = 0.1

OCA Nano: 0.2 - (0.15 - 0) * 6 = -0.7

 

Since the Nano is negative, it means it fully recovers it's bloom. The Colby .45 blooms the slowest, the FBW and FR0G are tied for the fastest.

 

Total bloom after a whole mag:

 

Colby .45 AP (1.5) : 7 * 0.05 = 0.35

FR0G series (1.5): 10 * 0.1 = 1

Obeya FBW (1.5): on the 15th shot. (15 * 0.1 = 1.5)

[LilyRain 674]

7 minutes ago, SquirrelFace said:

I don't understand what your argument is. You said the nano has no bloom, which you are correct since it fully recovers it's bloom before firing the next shot. You also asked about the calculations for max bloom, which I provided.

 

Here's the  bloom per shot when fired at max rate of fire, for each of those pistols.

Per Shot Modifier - (Fire Interval - Recovery Delay) * Recovery Per Second

 

Colby .45 AP: 0.5 - (0.2 - 0.05) * 3 = 0.05

Obeya FBW: 0.2 - (0.2 - 0.1) * 1 = 0.1

FR0G series: 0.2 - (0.2 - 0.1) * 1 = 0.1

OCA Nano: 0.2 - (0.15 - 0) * 6 = -0.7

 

Since the Nano is negative, it means it fully recovers it's bloom. The Colby .45 blooms the slowest, the FBW and FR0G are tied for the fastest.

 

Total bloom after a whole mag:

 

Colby .45 AP (1.5) : 7 * 0.05 = 0.35

FR0G series (1.5): 10 * 0.1 = 1

Obeya FBW (1.5): on the 15th shot. (15 * 0.1 = 1.5)

That's good ♥

 

- You can now see that Colby .45 AP and Fr0g will NEVER reach their Shot Modifier Caps before reloading, not even with macro-level performance.

- At this moment, only FBW could ever hit its Shot Modifier Cap (even though in practice, the opponent would be 2.5 times dead by then, but keep this on the side for now).

 

Let us examine your first calculations:

.45: 30 cm
FBW: 28.5 cm

Fr0g: 28.5 cm

Nano: 20,4 cm

 

Imagine .45 and Fr0g had enough ammo or for simplicity, let us go with the FBW.

 

A final effective accuracy of 28.5 cm when just shooting (no crouching, no aiming down sights) is quite high. That's right in between Carbine and PMG's initial accuracies, the weapon never reaches this. This is an indication that something is off..

 

I am waiting for MonkaS' response so I'll reveal the answer a bit later. Can you figure out where the error is in you first attempt?  

 

Hint: It isn't a problem of inserting numbers into a calculator, more so on logical application. Explore the stats of other weapons, they'll reveal something interesting.

[BlatMan 711]

I see the error. I forgot to add +1 to the modifier cap. Corrected it. Still, Nano has the lowest bloom. The FBW can reach max bloom, but that's on it's last shot so you'll never fire at max bloom.

[MonkaS 215]

On 2/21/2021 at 2:22 PM, LilyRain said:

OCA Nano's bloom does NOT increase, at all.

 

Ping and fps fluctuations affect BOTH weapons..

 

I'm interested in seeing how you calculated or tested that, because that is simply not true.

 

Depends on the oca nano variant I assure you there is bloom when the gun is fired.

 

They effect semi auto more because of how apb handles fire rate you can actually click to fast

 

Equip a 45/frog/fbw and Snipped.    - Azukii [this is sarcasm just check apbdb for the max bloom]

 

[LilyRain 674]

On 2/22/2021 at 8:19 AM, MonkaS said:

Depends on the oca nano variant I assure you there is bloom when the gun is fired.

 

They effect semi auto more because of how apb handles fire rate you can actually click to fast

 

Equip a 45/frog/fbw and Snipped.    - Azukii [this is sarcasm just check apbdb for the max bloom]

 

No, this is not true

 

All OCA Nano variants are based on "OCA Nano". They only differ through having non-accuracy-affecting mods and the weapon's model:

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

OCA Nano: Base model with no mods.

'Assassin': Base model with Magazine Pull 3   →   Faster Reload Times + less Magazine Capacity (accuracy stats not affected)

'Chrome': Base model with Mobility Sling   →   Faster Marksman Movement Speed + slower Equip Time (Mobility Sling doesn't have a downside coded to negatively affect Marksman Modifier accuracy from the added speed when used, because APB is an incomplete game with minimal logic   →   accuracy stats not affected)

'Connoisseur': Base model with SMG Silencer   →   30% less recoil and 10% less Hard Damage to vehicles (recoil in APB only shakes the weapon, it doesn't expand/contract the accuracy-cone itself   →   Accuracy stats not affected)

'Connoisseur' [non-silencer version]: Base model with Mobility Sling   →   Same as 'Chrome' above

'Glow': Base model with Extended Magazine 3   →   More Magazine Capacity + Slower Reload Times (accuracy stats not affected)

'Gold': Base model with Tagger mod   →   Tags opponents on successful hits (accuracy stats not affected)

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

» You'll always get the same total effective accuracy per applied conditions with any Nano Variant. 

» Automatic weapons have macros built within them, they are naturally more prone to going as far as their stats allow them compared to semi autos.

» SquirrelFace showed the calculation above that shows why Nano doesn't bloom (more proof down below).

 

---------------------------------------------

On 2/22/2021 at 12:01 AM, SquirrelFace said:

I see the error. I forgot to add +1 to the modifier cap. Corrected it. Still, Nano has the lowest bloom. The FBW can reach max bloom, but that's on it's last shot so you'll never fire at max bloom.

You have the mind of a Problem Solver! The +1 strategy works when shifting the position of say, a mathematical-function on a plane in order to compare it with another. Sadly we can't do that in APB because you will change the weapon's stats to represent something that it isn't, ultimately yielding incorrect results. Your nano-accuracy calculation of 44,4 cm at 10 meters is too high (proof down below). 

 

e.g: Take the STAR 556 with its of Accuracy Radius at 10m of 18 cm and Per Shot Modifier of 0.6. If you apply the +1 strategy and multiply them directly (because the modifier is less than 1) like you did earlier:

 

18cm * (0.6+1) = 28.8 cm

There is no way STAR's accuracy rises that much from just 1 shot, it just never happens. Likewise, its worst possible accuracy would also have an incorrect value this way.

---------------------------------------------

Thing is, Per Shot and Shot Modifier Caps aren't multiplicative like say, the Marksman Modifier.

 

If they were, a weapon like the Raptor with a Per Shot Modifier of 0.1 and a Shot Modifier Cap of 0.4 would become more accurate so long the trigger is held, due to multiplying by a factor that is less than 1.

 

The correct way to calculate is to first multiply Accuracy Radius at 10m with the accuracy modifier(s) that correspond(s) to the state of the Player (crouching, mid air, marksman aiming, walking, etc..) and then ADD the Per Shot/Modifier Cap depending on the state of the weapon.

 

»»» Calculation «««

 

Therefore, calculating the worst possible accuracies for FBW and Nano when the player is just standing still would be:

 

FBW (15 Shots) » 19 cm + 1.5 = 20.5 @ 10 meters.

Nano » 24 cm + 0 (Nano can't gain Per Shot Modifier as SquirrelFace showed) = 24 cm @ 10 meters.

 

 

 

Of course, FBW after 6 shots would be more accurate than both » Accuracy Radius at 10m + {[Per Shot Modifier-((Fire Interval - Recovery Delay) * Recovery Per Second))] * Number of Shots}

                                                                                                       » 19 cm + {[0.2 - ((0.2s - 0.1s)*(1/s))]*6} = 19 cm + 0.6 = 19.6 cm

 

»»» In-game Verification «««

 

- To verify the results, spawn a car and park it next to a wall and my choice the Vegas 4x4. To maintain position during testing, I used the Field Supplier Character Mod to swap weapons.

- As the 4x4 is 2 meters wide, 9 meters from the core of the 4x4 is 10 meters to the wall.

- Once done testing with the wall, I placed the images in Microsoft's PowerPoint, inserted a zero-fill-circle shape that fills Nano's accuracy. I then Copied & Pasted the same shape over FBW's results to make sure the circle has the same-size for direct comparison.

 

 

Note: Bullets don't necessary hit where they land on the wall to mitigate an old-cheat, but they are guaranteed to fall somewhere within the accuracy-circle.

It is apparent that FBW sits better within the same circle, indicating that FBW is indeed more accurate than Nano.

 

You may do the same calculations and verifications with Fr0g and Colby .45, you'll find that Fr0g does 20 cm and Colby .45 does 20.35 cm at 10 meters respectively, both of which are still more accurate than Nano when standing still.

 

But were my calculations themselves accurate? Let's find out

 

By parking the Vegas 90° Counter Clockwise with its core above the line between 2 adjacent floor-tiles, I took an image as soon as the distance to the Vegas increased by 1 meter. It can be seen that each tile on the floor equals 1 meter:

 

I used this knowledge to translate the distance from the Vegas's core to its tail onto the wall (this translation is necessary since my original distance to the car is 9 meters & 10 meters to the wall):

 

 

With this step done, it is now safe to copy & paste the circle from the beginning of the 2.5 meter portion to the end (in red)

 

With 5.3 circles (twice that in circle's radius, ~10.6) representing 2.5 meters in game, we can back-trace to see how accurate I was:

 

Circle's Radius (Nano's Accuracy in cm @ 10 meters) = (Distance in meters/Number of Half-Circles) * (100 cm/1m)

 = (2.5/10.6)*100 = 23.6 cm

 

This means that the total error of pasting ~5.3 circles as well as estimating distances in-game amounts to a total error of 0.4 cm (error = 1.67%). It hardly ever gets any more accurate than this.

Nano's accuracy @ 10 cm is indeed 24 cm, not 44 cm. It is now safe to say that calculating and verifying in this way is the correct & proves that Nano is NOT more accurate than the other, mentioned secondary pistols.

 

Bonus: BUT WAIT, MOST PEOPLE DON'T FIGHT STANDING STILL!!

 

Indeed, however in practice, Nano's other modifiers don't help it better close the gap in accuracy. It has the same exact Run Modifier as FBW's and Fr0g's (1.3). To make things worse, the Fr0g's 'Thumbnail' variant has Reflex Sight 2, which drops its Run Modifier to 1.2 further gaining more accuracy compared to Nano (it also kills faster, 0.8s vs 1s). While Colby .45's run modifier is at 1.5, the gap comes a bit closer but since it was too far ahead with its much better base accuracy, it still doesn't lose in accuracy.

 

With the Run Modifier applied, Nano has an effective accuracy of 31.2 cm that doesn't build up overtime, whereas the rest:

- FBW starts at 24.7 cm and builds up to 26.2 cm

- Fr0g also starts at 24.7 cm (22.8 cm for Thumbnail) but builds up to 25.7 cm due to having 10 bullets in the mag compared to FBW's 15 (23.7 cm for Thumbnail).

- Colby .45 starts at 30.0 cm and builds up to 30.35 cm

 

To make things even worse for Nano, its Marksman Modifier of 0.8 won't help it compete in accuracy. Colby .45 has a modifier of 0.75 (and also kills faster, wonderful). While FBW and Fr0g have modifiers of 0.9, which are more than enough to secure the already established margin (They also kill faster, even if by a small 0.05s).

 

Edit: Nano's Equip Time is also substantially higher.. quite the drawback on a secondary weapon.

 

Fun Fact: Nano's accuracy becomes equal to Colby .45's when both are in mid-air without marksman, but that's as far as Nano can compete in accuracy.

 

---------------------------------------------

CONCLUSION

---------------------------------------------

 

- Whether through calculations, in-game testing or words of non-lying top-tier SweatLords (because some trolls lie), the saying "no reason to use Nano in a competitive setting" is true.

- If you are willing to sacrifice BOTH accuracy and time-to-kill just to be more relaxed through less clicking, that's your choice and it is perfectly fine but know that you are playing with more disadvantages.

- If you were told by someone that Nano is more accurate than FBW, Fr0g and .45 (which happen to also have better peak performance), you were lied to.

Now you can make an informed decision when choosing one of these weapons.

 

 

[MonkaS 215]

42 minutes ago, LilyRain said:

 

 

- Whether through calculations, in-game testing or words of non-lying top-tier SweatLords (because some trolls lie), the saying "no reason to use Nano in a competitive setting" is true.

- If you are willing to sacrifice BOTH accuracy and time-to-kill just to be more relaxed through less clicking, that's your choice and it is perfectly fine but know that you are playing with more disadvantages.

- If you were told by someone that Nano is more accurate than FBW, Fr0g and .45 (which happen to also have better peak performance), you were lied to.

Now you can make an informed decision when choosing one of these weapons.

 

 

congrats you wasted your time you didn't shoot the fbw fast enough for a proper comparison none of those images even the 15 round one has the fbw at max bloom. also you might want to say what res your using so I or anyone else can try and reproduce it.

Edited February 22, 2021 by MonkaS

[LilyRain 674]

11 minutes ago, MonkaS said:

congrats you wasted your time you didn't shoot the fbw fast enough for a proper comparison none of those images even the 15 round one has the fbw at max bloom.

Interesting words but I won't trust that coming from the person who said "Depends on the oca nano variant I assure you there is bloom when the gun is fired."

 

But then again, like I said, your choice is your choice. Enjoy your Nano-memes

monkaS

Response to MonkaS' edit: The resolution is 1920x1080

Edited February 22, 2021 by LilyRain
Replying to late-Edit by MonkaS

[MonkaS 215]

2 minutes ago, LilyRain said:

Interesting words but I won't trust that coming from the person who said "Depends on the oca nano variant I assure you there is bloom when the gun is fired."

 

But then again, like I said, your choice is your choice. Enjoy your Nano-memes

monkaS

there was a oca nano variant that was included in an event that had ir or cj on it which made it have a higher max bloom.

[LilyRain 674]

10 minutes ago, MonkaS said:

there was a oca nano variant that was included in an event that had ir or cj on it which made it have a higher max bloom.

Nice try..

 

- Weapons that are only accessible in events still exist on APBDB (e.g information on STAR 556 'Love-Gun' will be available after Valentine's is over). If such a Nano does exist, please do specify its special name as nothing in there under secondary nor event weapons shows a resemblance to Nano (e.g ALIG has a mockup called CASE, from which we derive things such as CASE 'The BoLo'. This weapon can be found under Primary Weapons, Light-Machine Guns when the name is not clear). Do that then we can see the weapon more closely (for whatever that will change), because:

 

Fun fact #1: Even if a Nano with Improved Rifling 3 exists, it still won't gain bloom per shot as Improved Rifling doesn't even affect rate of fire.

 

Fun fact #2: Even if a Nano with Cooling Jacket 3 existed (7% faster fire rate → Fire Interval of 0.15s becomes 0.1395), Nano STILL won't gain bloom per shot. The weapon literally has 0.000s Recovery Delay and recovers 6.0cm per second...  Good luck trying to increase that with only 0.2cm per shot modifier.. You'll need a Nano that shoots 30 shots per second to just balance its recovery. Please do let me know when Cooling Jacket 90 becomes a thing.

Fun fact #2 part 2: The description of "Substantially worsens minimum accuracy" that pertains to cooling Jacket (multiplier of 1.4 in Cooling Jacket 3's case), is outdated. The multiplier now affects max bloom just like Improved Rifling (both mod-effects have type 65). Since it was established that Nano can't gain bloom per shot, it won't end up having a higher max bloom.

 

- Weapons that are only accessible in events have no meaningful appearance in such advisory discussions (e.g that beam-accurate Laser STAR).

 

- Please affirm your stance as a less-accurate Nano won't invalidate what I showed nor drives your point of view forward, it actually supports my stance. What is the goal behind resting on a Nano that is less-accurate than the AVAILABLE Variants that you were trying to recommend and fell short?

-------------------

 

"congrats you wasted your time you didn't" even say something that is remotely functional.

[Noob_Guardian 417]

On 2/22/2021 at 7:10 PM, LilyRain said:

---------------------------------------------

CONCLUSION

---------------------------------------------

 

- Whether through calculations, in-game testing or words of non-lying top-tier SweatLords (because some trolls lie), the saying "no reason to use Nano in a competitive setting" is true.

- If you are willing to sacrifice BOTH accuracy and time-to-kill just to be more relaxed through less clicking, that's your choice and it is perfectly fine but know that you are playing with more disadvantages.

- If you were told by someone that Nano is more accurate than FBW, Fr0g and .45 (which happen to also have better peak performance), you were lied to.

Now you can make an informed decision when choosing one of these weapons.

 

 

I really appreciate the time you went through to do this Lily. It had confirmed some of my own thoughts on the nano and weapons showing that the nano was worse off in higher tier/competitive settings than other pistols (not that actually using one couldn't confirm it because it's easy to know when its the weapon and not the player, but you know, stats are nice).  Regardless of what people claimed about it doing "just fine".

 

On 2/22/2021 at 8:00 PM, MonkaS said:

there was a oca nano variant that was included in an event that had ir or cj on it which made it have a higher max bloom.

Do you mean like the Beacon events? which had like... full auto explosives and stuff? I honestly don't know if any of those were added to the DB or not but that's not an "actual" balanced weapon in the game more of a trolly polly annoying/fun thing they did.

 

Merged.

 

On 2/22/2021 at 7:52 PM, MonkaS said:

congrats you wasted your time you didn't shoot the fbw fast enough for a proper comparison none of those images even the 15 round one has the fbw at max bloom. also you might want to say what res your using so I or anyone else can try and reproduce it.

https://imgur.com/gallery/ZY0HwNe
 

Here's the test, i used the size of the vent for the circle so resolution doesn't matter, as the vent will remain the same size "ingame" regardless of the resolution's depiction of it, so it's roughly "the same" size, regardless of the camera angle/size and how it looks. Top one is FBW, fired max fire rate (free spinning mouse wheel). The one on the right was 15 shots, the one on the left was 30. The second is nano 13 each (because i have the faster reload one). Nano recoil was easier to control, and FBW did bloom.

 

Though it does appear that the FBW is less accurate, it could be just a case of zoom, statistics will prove whether the FBW or the NANO is more accurate, as shown below.

 

I will say gameplay wise you'd be stupid to full auto an fbw without being sub 10m anyways out of its 30m range. Most people kill you in under 10 fbw shots, or stop firing after a few shots, sprint up, then fire again recovering its bloom in no time.

 

I also decided to chime in with stats. Hopefully @LilyRain if you could be so kind, can you check the math on one or two of these make sure i did this right, since I've never actually calculated these before.

 

I'll use this for reference.

 

» Accuracy Radius at 10m + {[Per Shot Modifier-((Fire Interval - Recovery Delay) * Recovery Per Second))] * Number of Shots}

                                                                                                       » 19 cm + {[0.2 - ((0.2s - 0.1s)*(1/s))]*6} = 19 cm + 0.6 = 19.6 cm" for reference

 

Thanks lily for this above calc, however it seems more useful to calculating the bullet before it hits "max bloom" rather than the max bloom size, which is easier to calculate as shown below.

 

 

.45 max bloom accuracy

 

MM Mode - standing still

@10m: 20cm x 0.75 = 15+1.5 shot cap = 16.5cm at 10m max

           20 cm x 0.75 = 15 + {[0.5 - ((0.2s - 0.050s)*(3/s))]*4} = 15.2. Without calculating recovery it would hit max bloom on the 4th shot

 

out of MM - still

@10m out of mm: 20cm + 1.5 = 21.5cm

 

Walking out of mm

@10m:  20cm + (20cm x 0.2 walk mod (1.2 for reference))  = 24+1.5 shot cap = 25.5 while walking.

 

Walking in MM mode. - (It seems that it doesn't matter if the walking mod is applied before or after zoom modifier)

@10m: 20 x .75 = 15 + (15 x .2) + 1.5 = 19.5cm

@10m: 20 + (20 x .2) = 24 x .75 = 18 + 1.5 = 19.5cm

 

FBW max bloom accuracy:

 

MM Mode - Standing still

@10m: 19cm x .9 = 17.1 + 1.5 = 18.6cm

           19 cm + {[0.2 - ((0.2s - 0.1s)*(1/s))]*6} = 19 cm + 0.6 = 19.6 cm Maybe i did this wrong but max should still be 18.6, is the reason you added the .6 because the -.6 on the calculator? If so then...

 

For reference -

@10M 19cm x .9 = 17.1 +(0.2 - ((0.2s - 0.1s)*(1/s))*3) = 17.27

                                                                         *4 = 16.9+.2 = 17.1

@10M 19cm x .9 = 17.1 +(0.2 - ((0.2s - 0.1s)*(1/s))*5) = 16.8

                        Even at 15 shots im getting 15.8+1.3 = 17.1....

Im confused .-. haaaaalp Fixed and explained better in lily's comment below

 

out of MM - Still

FBW (15 Shots) » 19 cm + 1.5 = 20.5

 

Walking out of MM

@10m: 19cm + (19.2 x .2) + 1.5 = 24.3

 

Walking in MM

@10m: 19cm x .9 = 17.1 + (17.1 x .20) + 1.5 = 22.02

 

 

Nano max bloom accuracy:

 

MM Mode

@10m: 24 x .8 + 0 = 19.2 cm

 

Out of MM - still

@10m: 24 cm + 0 = 24 cm

 

Walking out of MM

@10m: 24cm + (24 x .2) + 0 = 28.8

 

Walking in MM

@10m: 24cm x 0.8 = 19.2 + (19.2 x .2) + 0 = 23.04

 

In conclusion (ignoring my math failure) it appears that the nano is less accurate than the FBW and .45 overall. I did not include run speeds as that only effects the first bullet "as you fire" while running. It's why the 1st shot of the .45 often misses, its not an accurate representation of bloom/accuracy in game aside from that "first shot". Also note that due to recovery, weapons seem to never fire "on" max bloom" unless the recovery delay is slower than the ROF. So weapons will be somewhat "more accurate" while firing than their "max bloom" indicates, even if it's a .1cm accuracy difference due to recovery.

 

Edited February 23, 2021 by Noob_Guardian

[LilyRain 674]

3 hours ago, Noob_Guardian said:

Here's the test, i used the size of the vent for the circle so resolution doesn't matter, as the vent will remain the same size "ingame" regardless of the resolution's depiction of it, so it's roughly "the same" size, regardless of the camera angle/size and how it looks.

That's a good base & smart approach, makes things a bit faster indeed  

 

3 hours ago, Noob_Guardian said:

I also decided to chime in with stats. Hopefully @LilyRain if you could be so kind, can you check the math on one or two of these make sure i did this right, since I've never actually calculated these before.

 

3 hours ago, Noob_Guardian said:

» Accuracy Radius at 10m + {[Per Shot Modifier-((Fire Interval - Recovery Delay) * Recovery Per Second))] * Number of Shots}

                                                                                                       » 19 cm + {[0.2 - ((0.2s - 0.1s)*(1/s))]*6} = 19 cm + 0.6 = 19.6 cm" for reference

 

Thanks lily for this above calc, however it seems more useful to calculating the bullet before it hits "max bloom" rather than the max bloom size, which is easier to calculate as shown below.

I'm glad you mentioned this! The formula indeed shows the total gain in bloom as the weapon continues to fire. The resulting number entails the effective accuracy AT THE INSTANT RIGHT BEFORE THE NEXT SHOT, so as you say, the User must be conscious whether max bloom was actually reached or take another step to determine how far stats permit the weapon to bloom (which you have calculated flawlessly). Fortunately, these secondaries recover fast enough before that happens (FBW barely gets away with it as it hits the limit on the 15th shot) so I didn't do that but It can easily happen on weapons like the STAR 556 and N-tec.

 

Below are 2 Excel Graphs I made for Colby .45 (without marksman or any other modifier) to show the difference between just using the formula and knowing how bloom is gained and lost in practice:

 

 

The blue dots are the values you'll get from using the formula.

 

 

This is the same plot, but further shows what physically happens to bloom in real-time. Timer starts when the first shot is released (this adds Per Shot modifier of 0.5cm after the bullet is released). So the entire ramp (/ - \) of the first shot ends when the second shot begins and the net-gain in Per Shot Modifier (after losing some from recovery) will affect the 2nd shot, and so on. Of course, Colby .45 will never hit 21.5cm with only 7 shots in the Magazine.

 

The Highest Accuracy Radius in yellow shows that the reticle goes as far as 20.8, but that is only the gain after firing the 7th shot without recovery. In the real world, it has no practical meaning. You'll get this value from using the formula on 6 shots then just adding a Per Shot Modifier (+0.5).

 

Doing the same figure on say the N-tec would have the ramp ascend more rapidly (like tilting a bridge upwards for a Ferry Ship to pass) and will reach its max bloom way before even half of its magazine gone. Using the formula blindly on the N-tec will overestimate the max bloom value & thus be incorrect. Like you showed yourself, Colby .45 doesn't reach max bloom so for this thread, it is safe to just use the formula as is without worrying about this but it was good of you to mention this.

 

3 hours ago, Noob_Guardian said:

MM Mode - standing still

@10m: 20cm x 0.75 = 15+1.5 shot cap = 16.5cm at 10m max

           20 cm x 0.75 = 15 + {[0.5 - ((0.16s - 0.050s)*(3/s))]*4} = 16.32 - as such it hits max bloom after it's 4th shot - if i use *5 the calculation goes wonky

Looks perfect

- Colby .45's Fire Interval is 0.20s, not 0.16s. 

- Doing the calculation with 0.16s and 4 bullets gives me a value of 15.68 cm. My steps were like this (start at the center of the equation prioritizing brackets then work outwards):

1: (0.16s - 0.05s)*3 = 0.33

2: 0.5 - 0.33 = 0.17

3: 0.17 * 4 = 0.68 (with this, all brackets are done)

Finally, add this to the 15 = 15.68 cm (this doesn't represent .45 as the Fire Interval is different, just showing steps with your numbers)

 

But nothing to worry about. You'll only get different numbers but if you have followed suit throughout, your ultimate conclusion should stay the same!

 

With marksman, 0.2s for the Fire Interval and 5 shots, I get a value of 15.25cm (this value should be the accuracy for the 6th shot in case the user misses 1 out of the required 5 shots to kill)

 

3 hours ago, Noob_Guardian said:

out of MM - still

@10m out of mm: 20cm + 1.5 = 21.5cm

That's the most permissible upper-bound by sheer stats, yes. Perfect

 

3 hours ago, Noob_Guardian said:

Walking out of mm

@10m:  20cm + (20cm x 0.2 walk mod (1.2 for reference))  = 24+1.5 shot cap = 25.5 while walking.

Perfect (regardless if the weapon has enough bullets to reach it)

 

3 hours ago, Noob_Guardian said:

Walking in MM mode. - (It seems that it doesn't matter if the walking mod is applied before or after zoom modifier)

@10m: 20 x .75 = 15 + (15 x .2) + 1.5 = 19.5cm

@10m: 20 + (20 x .2) = 24 x .75 = 18 + 1.5 = 19.5cm

Yes, the walking and marksman modifiers are multiplicative, so their effects will stack on each other. Adding to that the additional accuracy radius from bloom should indeed give the same total effective result

 

I also indeed get 19.5cm, perfect

 

3 hours ago, Noob_Guardian said:

FBW max bloom accuracy:

 

MM Mode - Standing still

@10m: 19cm x .9 + 1.5 = 18.6cm

           19 cm + {[0.2 - ((0.2s - 0.1s)*(1/s))]*6} = 19 cm + 0.6 = 19.6 cm I placed this into the calculator and it came out as 18.6 then + .6 is 19.2 for me, not 19.6cm @LilyRain this was slightly off it seems, because using the above calc just to find max bloom vs accuracy, yours was too high.

Yep, 18.6cm is correct (regardless if the weapon can reach it)

 

I got 19.6cm because that was a 6 FBW shots outside of marksman aim. All my calculations above were comparisons without marksman to give Nano a chance (by now, you know that Colby's .45 with its lovely marksman modifier of 0.75 when standing still would be a no-contest).

 

3 hours ago, Noob_Guardian said:

@10M 19cm x .9 = 17.1 +(0.2 - ((0.2s - 0.1s)*(1/s))*5 = 16.8 - max bloom at 5 shots (i'm pretty sure it blooms further after 5?!? maybe my math is wrong here)

 

Yes, you seem to have multiplied by 5 before having 0.2 be subtracted by the result of ((0.2s - 0.1s)*(1/s)). Doing that will give -0.3 that will pull 17.1 down.

Normally multiplication gets priority over addition/subtraction, that's why 5 is outside the brackets to give it less priority and make the calculation true.

 

FBW has nice numbers that the result of the entire bracket in the center is 0.1 (in other words, FBW gains bloom radius of 0.1cm with each shot, perfectly reaching its max bloom with the last shot). So the whole thing would look like the following after simplification:

 

@10M 19cm x .9 = 17.1 + 0.1*5, giving 17.6cm

 

3 hours ago, Noob_Guardian said:

out of MM - Still

FBW (15 Shots) » 19 cm + 1.5 = 20.5

 

Walking out of MM

@10m: 19cm + (19.2 x .2) + 1.5 = 24.3

 

Walking in MM

@10m: 19cm x .9 = 17.1 + (17.1 x .20) + 1.5 = 22.02

Yes, these are all perfect!  

 

3 hours ago, Noob_Guardian said:

Nano max bloom accuracy:

 

MM Mode

@10m: 24 x .8 + 0 = 19.2 cm

 

Out of MM - still

@10m: 24 cm + 0 = 24 cm

 

Walking out of MM

@10m: 24cm + (24 x .2) + 0 = 28.8

 

Walking in MM

@10m: 24cm x 0.8 = 19.2 + (19.2 x .2) + 0 = 23.04

 

In conclusion it appears that the nano is less accurate than the FBW and .45 overall. I did not include run speeds as that only effects the first bullet "as you fire" while running. It's why the 1st shot of the .45 often misses, its not an accurate representation of bloom/accuracy in game aside from that "first shot".

 

Perfection  

 

I'm glad we both reached the same conclusion!

 

You approached this really well. Most remarkable! Well done~~

Edited February 24, 2021 by LilyRain
Added a small paragraph

[Noob_Guardian 417]

Wow thanks for the large reply, i was not expecting that at all.

35 minutes ago, LilyRain said:

 

Looks perfect

- Colby .45's Fire Interval is 0.20s, not 0.16s. 

- Doing the calculation with 0.16s and 4 bullets gives me a value of 15.68 cm. My steps were like this (start at the center of the equation prioritizing brackets then work outwards):

1: (0.16s - 0.05s)*3 = 0.33

2: 0.5 - 0.33 = 0.17

3: 0.17 * 4 = 0.68 (with this, all brackets are done)

Finally, add this to the 15 = 15.68 cm (this doesn't represent .45 as the Fire Interval is different, just showing steps with your numbers)

 

But nothing to worry about. You'll only get different numbers but if you have followed suit throughout, your ultimate conclusion should stay the same!

Okay that makes more sense. I figured it was something akin to that, however I did .8/5 for shots to kill, which is why it was off a little bit, lack of foresight hehe. The layout with the parenthesis makes more sense like that. I was trying to input it all into the pc calculator as one, i should have grabbed some paper too. I redid the math on my end and i got .35 for 7 shots, which would line up, as it gains only .05 per shot and that gets multiplied by the bullets. So that fixed the math and proved like you said that it doesn't hit max bloom unlike what I suggested. Thanks!

35 minutes ago, LilyRain said:

I'm glad you mentioned this! The formula indeed shows the total gain in bloom as the weapon continues to fire. The resulting number entails the effective accuracy AT THE INSTANT RIGHT BEFORE THE NEXT SHOT, so as you say, the User must be conscious whether max bloom was actually reached or take another step to determine how far stats permit the weapon to bloom (which you have calculated flawlessly). Fortunately, these secondaries recover fast enough before that happens (FBW barely gets away with it as it hits the limit on the 15th shot) so I didn't do that but It can easily happen on weapons like the STAR 556 and N-tec.

 

That's what I thought. NTEC bloom has an altered bloom though, the stats for it in ABPDB don't align. (it blooms a lot on 2nd, and even more on 3rd shot) as G1's change to it a few years back. So sadly it's not a straight graph, unlike something like the star, the formula works until max bloom is hit though, which is good to know, and is about 6/7 bullets for the star from experience.

 

35 minutes ago, LilyRain said:

Yes, you seem to have multiplied by 5 before having 0.2 be subtracted by the result of ((0.2s - 0.1s)*(1/s)). Doing that will give -0.3 that will pull 17.1 down.

 

Normally multiplication gets priority over addition/subtraction, that's why 5 is outside the brackets to give it less priority and make the calculation true.

Guess it was a process issue, I tried to use the brackets as psuedo parenthesis in the calculator app. Thanks for narrowing it down. It also makes more sense because In my head i was also like "wait, by this it should be going up by .1 per with recovery but... ?!?! then my brain decided to shut down"

 

35 minutes ago, LilyRain said:

Yes, these are all perfect!  

 

Perfection  

 

I'm glad we both reached the same conclusion!

 

You approached this really well. Most remarkable! Well done~~

Thanks, I figured i'd do the math because I was bored, and you mentioned "you can do the math if you'd like" it to the other guy in another comment or something, I figured why not it'd help prove the point, and if anyone needs extra information on pistols stats, this could be used to do so.... x)

 

It's the only logical conclusion both from my experience and statistics.

 

I'm actually kinda happy we both had a little math freakout haha (your happiness rubbed off on me, i don't know how to feel about that.)

 

[LilyRain 674]

6 hours ago, Noob_Guardian said:

Wow thanks for the large reply, i was not expecting that at all.

You're welcome! This length is fine for me as I used to write tens of pages of Research

 

6 hours ago, Noob_Guardian said:

Okay that makes more sense. I figured it was something akin to that, however I did .8/5 for shots to kill, which is why it was off a little bit, lack of foresight hehe. The layout with the parenthesis makes more sense like that. I was trying to input it all into the pc calculator as one, i should have grabbed some paper too. I redid the math on my end and i got .35 for 7 shots, which would line up, as it gains only .05 per shot and that gets multiplied by the bullets. So that fixed the math and proved like you said that it doesn't hit max bloom unlike what I suggested. Thanks!

Yes, this is exactly it. Excellent work!  

 

6 hours ago, Noob_Guardian said:

That's what I thought. NTEC bloom has an altered bloom though, the stats for it in ABPDB don't align. (it blooms a lot on 2nd, and even more on 3rd shot) as G1's change to it a few years back. So sadly it's not a straight graph, unlike something like the star, the formula works until max bloom is hit though, which is good to know, and is about 6/7 bullets for the star from experience.

Yeah, stats suggests the same behavior in bloom increase till the cap happens a the 6th shot (without marksman, Improved Rifling or Cooling Jacket):

 

I went in and did a slow-mo vid to confirm: https://streamable.com/k62du7

 

There doesn't seem to be any artificial phenomenon around N-tec's bloom (perhaps it got rolled back?). The stats are working fine but what you are sensing as a player isn't wrong either. N-tec indeed had its Shot Modifier Cap and Recovery altered before, numerous times by huge amounts. Additionally, the crosshair is set to show the radius at 10 meters regardless of the weapon being used. With a weapon like the N-tec that works up to 50 meters stock, if the player keeps an opponent that happens to be WAY further than 10 meters (usually the case) within the crosshair, the crosshair is visually deceiving the Player into thinking the likelihood of hitting mid-spray is 100%, which is far from the truth:

 

 

Numbers would be much smaller if marksman and Hunting Sight 3 are considered, but both of these things will naturally disorient people as spraying with N-tec is much less accurate compared to what it used to be. Even in LO's reign on March 7th, 2020, The N-tec's Shot Modifier Cap was raised from 1.6 to 2.4 (overtime, they moved it back to 2.1). But regardless, this change is no joke as the difference really appears when slightly over-spraying the N-tec on ranges much higher than just 10 meters.

 

6 hours ago, Noob_Guardian said:

Guess it was a process issue, I tried to use the brackets as psuedo parenthesis in the calculator app. Thanks for narrowing it down. It also makes more sense because In my head i was also like "wait, by this it should be going up by .1 per with recovery but... ?!?! then my brain decided to shut down"

Your brain knew something was off, lul. That alone is good enough  

 

6 hours ago, Noob_Guardian said:

Thanks, I figured i'd do the math because I was bored, and you mentioned "you can do the math if you'd like" it to the other guy in another comment or something, I figured why not it'd help prove the point, and if anyone needs extra information on pistols stats, this could be used to do so.... x)

 

It's the only logical conclusion both from my experience and statistics.

 

I'm actually kinda happy we both had a little math freakout haha (your happiness rubbed off on me, i don't know how to feel about that.)

You did much more than that, brought attention to important points for the greater good!

 

Much appreciated  

 

This is one reason why the forums exist, to pursue answers on a common platform and you were a part of that! Feel happy, determined and rest easy as you did something positive towards the current & future community members  

[Nymphi--DoubleDee 83]

On 2/18/2021 at 4:45 PM, SquirrelFace said:

The whole reason G1 made the FBW the starting pistol was because nearly everyone was using it. Kinda weird that they didn't do the same for the N-TEC though.

And maybe because the SNR was waaaaaaaaay too shitty for new players.

 

If you look at the starter gear, it's the best two weapons in the game. 

[vsb 6171]

1 hour ago, Nymphi--DoubleDee said:

If you look at the starter gear, it's the best two weapons in the game. 

yeah the fbw and frags will help new players until long after they're no longer new players

[MonkaS 215]

also forgot to mention is easier to strafe with the nano unless you have always sprint enabled since even glancing at your shift key will cause your character to not shoot.

[Noob_Guardian 417]

On 2/24/2021 at 10:01 AM, LilyRain said:

You're welcome! This length is fine for me as I used to write tens of pages of Research

 

Yes, this is exactly it. Excellent work!  

 

Yeah, stats suggests the same behavior in bloom increase till the cap happens a the 6th shot (without marksman, Improved Rifling or Cooling Jacket):

 

I went in and did a slow-mo vid to confirm: https://streamable.com/k62du7

 

There doesn't seem to be any artificial phenomenon around N-tec's bloom (perhaps it got rolled back?). The stats are working fine but what you are sensing as a player isn't wrong either. N-tec indeed had its Shot Modifier Cap and Recovery altered before, numerous times by huge amounts. Additionally, the crosshair is set to show the radius at 10 meters regardless of the weapon being used. With a weapon like the N-tec that works up to 50 meters stock, if the player keeps an opponent that happens to be WAY further than 10 meters (usually the case) within the crosshair, the crosshair is visually deceiving the Player into thinking the likelihood of hitting mid-spray is 100%, which is far from the truth:

 

 

They never mentioned anything in patch notes about being rolled back. People like RespectThis who have been calling for its reversion for years would have made "THANK GOD" posts all over forums if it had been. It was something from G1 era 2014, it had been the "2nd" NTEC "rework" that occurred, after they nerfed HB on the NTEC, one that a number of people had complained about for years. I had no issue with it, but it was quite the topic of many discussions over the years. If it was removed, it might be something they did so backend/glitch wise/accidentally. We know already how fixing a car spawn made 3 others disappear already lol! Touching some weapon stats could have easily messed it up.

 

Out of marksman does act like what your vid did. In marksman "seems" to have the extra bloom effect (maybe that's the difference? Similar to how S1NA has less recoil in mm than out of mm or similar special weapon effects). However, it seems to have been reduced from how it was before unless it's my eyes playing tricks on me (some of them seemed really smooth and didn't jump in bloom like it used to, then others seemed to have jumped). I wonder if it's that much less pronounced now due to the reversion of the max bloom size, from 2.4 to 2.1. It still seems to be there from the 3-6 shot though, but i barely noticed it compared to how heavily distorted it had been before. I would have thought LO would have mentioned it or someone commented on it if they removed it, plus APBDB mentioning it. Hence my confusion.

 

I do thank you for the test and effort on the topic though.

 

 

Edited February 26, 2021 by Noob_Guardian

[LilyRain 674]

5 hours ago, Noob_Guardian said:

They never mentioned anything in patch notes about being rolled back. People like RespectThis who have been calling for its reversion for years would have made "THANK GOD" posts all over forums if it had been. It was something from G1 era 2014, it had been the "2nd" NTEC "rework" that occurred, after they nerfed HB on the NTEC, one that a number of people had complained about for years. I had no issue with it, but it was quite the topic of many discussions over the years. If it was removed, it might be something they did so backend/glitch wise/accidentally. We know already how fixing a car spawn made 3 others disappear already lol! Touching some weapon stats could have easily messed it up.

Yes, the Curves System affected damage drop off over range, this is why weapons do much less damage and feel kinda useless pretty short just outside their total Drop Off Range.

N-tec also received a damage nerf to kill the viability of Heavy Barrel on it.

 

5 hours ago, Noob_Guardian said:

Out of marksman does act like what your vid did. In marksman "seems" to have the extra bloom effect (maybe that's the difference? Similar to how S1NA has less recoil in mm than out of mm or similar special weapon effects). However, it seems to have been reduced from how it was before unless it's my eyes playing tricks on me (some of them seemed really smooth and didn't jump in bloom like it used to, then others seemed to have jumped). I wonder if it's that much less pronounced now due to the reversion of the max bloom size, from 2.4 to 2.1. It still seems to be there from the 3-6 shot though, but i barely noticed it compared to how heavily distorted it had been before. I would have thought LO would have mentioned it or someone commented on it if they removed it, plus APBDB mentioning it. Hence my confusion.

 

I do thank you for the test and effort on the topic though.

It also acts the same in marksman. Bloom peaks on the 6th shot.

 

But you were right, I searched and found that the Curves System also has an accuracy aspect to it. The information I found does indeed match with the bloom-feel of the weapon.

 

According to the graph, the Curves System makes N-tec a bit more accurate on the first half of a 6-shot burst, up to the 3rd shot and balances out by the 4th. The 5th and 6th shots bloom a bit more:

 

 

This matches with what can be experienced in-game. Any burst longer than 4-shots without allowing the weapon to rest has high chances of getting bullets to miss.

 

Yes, we should expect ~20-30% more accuracy radius (emphasizing less accuracy over range) on the higher-end of bursts when making any calculation.

 

Excellent mention