XR57

"What the heck is acceleration": a comparison guide.

Recommended Posts

What the heck is acceleration ??

Often you'll hear that power is acceleration. Or, that it's acceleration with respect to mass, if people are trying to be specific. That's wrong. The idea that spare tonnage helps acceleration and/or undoes the effect of mass, too, is wrong.

Here's the correct acceleration equation, provided you haven't exceeded your limits on mass:

88520065_trueaccelerationwhileundertonna

So not only is power more complicated than that, but Crossout's so-called "acceleration" stat actually measures your time-to-top-speed, whatever that top speed may be, instead of a fixed 0-to-60. Ergo, to find your true acceleration, you multiply the fake stat by your top speed. Your cabin's top speed and engine multiplier can even affect acceleration through speed-caps, if you have more speed than your movement parts can handle.

Bear in mind that this only represents your acceleration in a vacuum: within an atmosphere, builds of greater mass will face less drag force (think of it like sinking forward, through the air). However, they also have more to lift uphill.

Math-wise note that the penalty from parts needs to be put in as a negative. Also note that while technically this equation divides by 0 whenever the power sum equals 1, that would require two colossus engines minimum to reach, so this never happens.

Citations:

Spoiler
  • Here's the citation for the cabin-over-parts power factor (uses 100 for 100% instead of 1, and phrases "parts" as "parts penalty," and is outdated in other respects).
  • Here's the citation for the speed factor of the equation (although it contains an incorrect power equation).

Codrivers being multiplied by engines, i.e. within the same parenthesis as "cabin speed" instead of (CS×(1+E))+CD, is just me assuming the wording is precise; the perks claim to increase the speed of the cabin, not just the vehicle as a whole, so this should mean that things which multiply the cabin speed also multiply such changes.

The rest, is common sense. Crossout physics can be weird, but generally force is mass times acceleration; thus, acceleration is force divided by mass, leaving the mass in the denominator. I generally factor it out anyways. Meanwhile tonnage is just empty space, and empty space doesn't help your acceleration. You can test this very easily by comparing steering wheels to regular ones, as they differ only in added tonnage (at least while driving straight). There's never a difference in acceleration. Having some extra tonnage for if you lose a wheel early is a good idea though.

Now if you're quick, you're probably wondering "Wait a minute, what the hell is cabin power measured in?"

And the answer is, "nobody knows." Or at least, not so much in Crossout; you get these fat little bars in the tooltip and nothing else, that aren't even all the same total size (last one is a pixel longer). Even if you datamine for the power values, they... don't quite look like real-life power values. 

But not to worry! Because if you're just dividing one true-acceleration, by another true-acceleration, the units will cancel out no matter what they are so long as they're the same, leaving you with a percentage. In other words, you can still compare any two builds, and easily see which has more acceleration without getting a real-world number, which would vary depending on the drag force you're facing, which scales with the velocity you're traveling at, mass distribution, and so on. Furthermore, power bars are typically proportional to mass limit, meaning you have an easy way to count them:

  • Common cabins gain 1 & 1/12th a bar per 2000 ML (eyeballed off Docker, checked against others).
  • Rare cabins gain 1 bar per 2000 ML (easy to eyeball off several cabins).
  • Epic medium cabins match the ratio of rares, except for Favorite, Howl, and The Call.
  • Epic heavies are all nonstandard, except for the Humpback.
  • Epic lights all have 5 bars, more than their mass limits would normally suggest.

How do I compare cabins ??

If you don't want to compare build-to-build, and instead compare individual cabins, just start taking out common factors. Suppose each cabin has an identical mass, engine, and wheelset, then remove all but the highlighted sections below:

242257782_trueaccelerationwithcabinfacto

To explain, if we're pitting two of these fractions against eachother in an inequivalency, and if we know the cabins are the only thing that're going to be different, then the unhighlighted sections are factors you can eliminate from either side. This leaves you with the speed×power of one cabin, versus the speed×power of another, on builds of matching mass, engine, and movement parts, whatever those parts may be. All you have to do is multiply and then compare answers. Evidence of this process's validity can be conveniently found with the Bat and Hot-Rod cabins, which at equal mass match in both their acceleration curve and speed×power product but also in neither speed nor power independently.

How to compare:

Suppose you want to compare the Sprinter and Huntsman, both being 8 energy cabins:

  • The Sprinter has 6000 ML, which divided by 2k then multiplied by 1&1/12th confirms it has 3.25 power bars (as you can roughly see from the tooltip). Multiplied by 90kmph, that's 292.5 "Bkmph" of true acceleration.
  • The Huntsman has 7000 ML, which divided by 2k then multiplied by 1&1/12th confirms it has 3.791666 power bars (a little harder to see in the tooltip). Multiplied by 75kmph, that's 284.375 "Bkmph" of true acceleration.

Divide the Sprinter's product by the Huntsman's and you'll see that it accelerates about 102.875% as well, or 2.875% more well, at equal mass. Plus, it has less mass: 350kg less. Adding a single 130kg avia wide slope will make up for the difference in health, and add a potential shield, albeit for 42 more powerscore. By the time you've raised the Sprinter to the Huntsman's weight, it'll have both more speed, acceleration, and HP to boot, making it all-around better. The Huntsman has only a larger footprint and more health per unit of powerscore. Thus concludes the comparison.

You might have noticed "1&1/12th" was another eliminable factor, but that's just for this example; were you to compare between rarities, or even just certain cabins within the epic rarity, that wouldn't work. It's better to just go for bars every time.

Here're some scatterplots, illustrating the acceleration of each cabin with respect to top speed, at specific target HP values:

Spoiler

Finding nonstandard power values:

Spoiler

Finding the common-cab power/ML ratio:

  • Docker seems to match the Jawbreaker's power, granting it 13/12ths a bar per 2k ML; lines up with other greys.
  • To double check, the Sprinter's final vessel is 1/4th full by this metric; visually matches the Bat's final quarter-vessel.

Finding nonstandard epic power values:

  • Bastion's final vessel is between the Huntsman and WWT1's (19/24ths and 7/8ths, or 21/24ths). That's likely 20/24ths, or 5/6ths.
  • Echo's final vessel is between the Duster and Sprinter's (a sixth and a fourth). That's likely around a fifth. In terms of 24ths, it could only be 5/24ths.
  • Icebox's final vessel is less full than Docker/Jawbreaker's. Likely 11/24ths.
  • Favorite's final vessel is more full than a Sprinter/Bat. Likely 7/24ths.
  • Howl's final vessel less full than the Icebox. Likely 10/24ths.
  • The Call's final vessel is the same as a Bear's, 3/4ths, or 18/24ths.
 

Target health 500, supposing armor adds 2 kilos per HP (Y multiplied by 100):

2067242348_cabinproductsovermassat500hp0

Y axis values have all been multiplied by 100 for visibility. Steppe spider was placed at 50kmph on the X axis, due to that being its leg speed.

Lightweight epic cabins such as the Ghost and all faster ones, are quite high. The Call is too with at least one drone active. The Duster is actually fairly low compared to the Sprinter and Growl, due to poor HP.

Target health 1,000, supposing armor adds 2 kilos per HP (Y mult by 200):

1629736143_cabinproductsovermassat1000hp

Y axis values have instead been multiplied by 200 for visibility, and to preserve the HP/scale ratio. 

Light cabins have gone down a little bit. Heavy cabins have gone up a little bit, moreso the epics. The Growl is no longer overtaking the Sprinter or any of the 80kmph cabins.

Target health 1,500, supposing armor adds 2 kilos per HP (Y mult by 300):

1195743218_cabinproductsovermassat1500hp

Y axis values have instead been multiplied by 300 for visibility, and to preserve the HP/scale ratio. 

Once again, light cabins have gone down while Heavies have gone up, though still not enough to rise above. The 90kmph cabs have met the 100s though. Neither the Growl or Sprinter accelerate faster than the Pilgrim here, and the Duster is now the lowest value on the sheet. It's at 2960 kg, about three-quarters its mass limit, in just armor, with 9 energy of equipment left to add. Plus you still need wheels, frames, etc.

It's important to note that adding a flat amount of weight to all the datapoints on the graph, is going to harm the lighter cabins proportionally more than the heavy ones. Drop another 5800kg of non-armor weight on each point, and nothing will accelerate faster than the Echo. And that's only six leg's worth of weight with 400 to spare. Typhoons weigh 2200 a pop. Ammo crates are 200 each. An apollo generator, colossus, kapkan and doppler add up to 2346 more weight, more than a typhoon. All that with the weight of the legs is 12346 (almost had it), and that with no frames and only one box of ammo. Throw that onto the third graph and the Humpback will accelerate faster than every light and medium cabin (although it doesn't have the energy for this). The Steppe Spider... won't, but you get the point. Here's the third graph again, with the flat addition, scaled up to 1000 for visibility:

1788860395_cabinproductsat1500withabunch

Yup. That's Echo up top, highest speed×power product in the game unless you add Han's 5kmph to the more powerful heavies. Fast cabins are certainly good, but they don't do heavy jobs better than heavies do. Although... they also don't really do much worse, to be honest. All these light cabins are well over their mass limit, of course, but it's a little shameful that mass limit is the only thing stopping them. Furthermore, I've been gradually upscaling the Y axis with each image, causing the heavy cabins to travel up. In reality though, if you pit a heavy cabin on a heavy build, against a light cabin on a light build, and that light build is going to have waaay more acceleration.

calculator link

How do I compare engines ??

Do NOT simply take the product of speed and engine power when looking to compare engine acceleration. The part and engine power values are NOT separable. All you can factor out is mass and the cabin:

1794538209_trueaccelerationfractionwithe

After extracting those factors, you should be left with (1+ENGINE SPEED) over (1-PARTS-ENGINE POWER). This contains two different sets of variables (one for cabins, one for movement parts) meaning we can't directly compare engines with an inequivalency like with cabins before. However, with an equivalency, we can instead pick two engines, and then solve for the "parts" variable, to see what part sum is required for the two engines to match in acceleration benefit.

How to compare:

Suppose you want to compare the colossus and oppressor engines, both having reload-rate perks and the two highest power bonuses available barring the golden eagle:

  • The colossus adds 7% speed and has a 50% power bonus.
  • The oppressor adds 13% speed and has a 30% power bonus.

With the equivalency (1+0.07)/(1-P-0.5) = (1+0.17)/(1-P-0.3), we can see that the oppressor and colossus accelerations match when P equals negative 1.64; that's equal to just over 8 bigfoot wheels, or 20.5 red hovers. With 21, the oppressor yields more acceleration, but with just 20, or 8 bigfoot wheels, the colossus does, plus it has 50 less mass. Unlike cabins, high power engines actually DO have more acceleration than speed-based ones (or the colossus does, at least; not so much the razorback). The oppressor does still have its speed advantage, as well as a tonnage bonus and distinct perk. Thus concludes the comparison.

Another thing to learn from this, is that engines with higher power bonuses will actually have more of an effect on acceleration when paired with less subtraction from movement parts, contradicting the popular myth that higher power engines are best for higher power parts. This makes the colossus especially agile with hovers, where power consumption is minimal and speed is limited. However, greater effect does not necessarily equal higher utility: a lower power build with less acceleration may simply desire acceleration more or more-often than a hover does, which stops accelerating entirely upon hitting 75kmph. But taking the reverse speed into account, going from 75 in reverse to 75 ahead is a change of 150, so that's plenty kmph of uptime for your acceleration to be made use of.

Graphs, for those who'd rather just look at the whole curves instead of solving for intersects:

Spoiler

 

Curves for each engine's acceleration as a function of part-power, up to negative 0.08 (one hover). Orange is colossus, green is golden eagle, blue is oppressor, purple is cheetah, and red is hot red, while all rare variants are expressed as dashed lines, and "engineless" is expressed as a dotted black one:

Spoiler

Epic engines:

632448471_epicengineaccelerationcurvespe

Rare engines:

1421933852_rareengineaccelerationcurvesp

Rare and epic, minus the oppressor and golden eagle:

280144458_multirarityaccelerationcurvesp

You can see how the colossus engine's effect spikes up when power consumption is lower.

Next, the same curves, but plotted in terms of their difference from the "no engine" curve:

Spoiler

Epic engines:

68780818_epicengineaccelerationcurvesper

Rare engines:

407568299_rareengineaccelerationcurvespe

Rare and epic, minus oppressor and golden eagle:

1001440135_multirarityaccelerationcurves

Those prior increases to acceleration, per unit of powerscore, with rare engines' efficiency values being divided by epic:

Spoiler

1449954217_deltaaccelerationperunitofpow

On the dotted line, the respective rare engine's improvement to acceleration is equal to 100% of an epic engine's, per unit of powerscore; they have an equal ratio. At say, 1.2, the rare engine would be equal to to 120% of an epic engine's change, per unit of powerscore. Supposing equal mass.

Rare engines aren't worth it over epics.

The razorback might look fairly high up, but you can only run four bigfoots before its acceleration will drop below the (much-faster) dun horse. By that point, compared to the colossus, it's only got about a 10% greater improvement to acceleration, per unit of powerscore. A meager 10% more effect per powerscore gained means nothing when epics are getting over 80% more improvement per energy cost. Even if epics are a little less PS efficient, energy-wise they give you almost two rare engines for the price of one. The hardcore/hot red line are sort of an exception since they don't cost energy, but even so, you still have a one-engine limit, so it's the same in principle. The only real rare-engine attribute that stands out is the amount of tonnage the dun horse adds; the cheetah only gets 20% more tonnage (per energy spent), but for far more powerscore. That's just one attribute, and I haven't even brought engine perks into the equation. A point of energy itself costs 115-185 PS anyways, going off generator values. Rare engines are just bad.

As a side note, the same goes for heat-based weapon modules, quite obviously. The effect/powerscore ratios between respective epic and rare modules tend to be around 1, whereas epics go up in effectiveness for no increase to energy consumption, while getting a perk to boot. For something like a radar detector though, enough range is "enough" regardless of if more can be obtained more efficiently. But for mobility? The more the merrier.

calculator link

How do I compare movement parts ??

Looking at the first set of curves from the previous section, you can see that the higher your current penalty, the less change each additional deduction makes. This prevents you from ever subtracting all your power. However, it also means the first wheel lost yields the least acceleration return, ignoring mass.

Beyond that, most movement parts carry distinctions far greater than mere differences power deduction. Even if you're only looking at wheels, you've only got one epic wheel to choose from, and at least a quarter of the rare wheels are garbage. I wouldn't recommend exposing any with less than 140 HP. Note that gun mount and lunar wheels effectively have twice their displayed health though, due to the 50% damage passthrough they possess, at the cost of parts behind them taking half the incoming fire. Also note that the 17 and 12% wheels are actually both rounded down in the tooltip a half point: check out crossout.db, or here

If you're instead concerned with Icarus VII (blue hovers) versus Icarus IV (red), IV are worse. Minimal power consumption is what maximizes hover synergy with colossus, but IV loses that. People also will sometimes put them on small tri-hovers for safety, but remember, "the higher your current penalty, the less change each additional deduction makes"? The reverse is true also: IV's additional power penalty is far more pronounced when you've got fewer total hovers equipped.

 

Results and trivia:

 

 

  • The Docker, while boasting an impressive speed×power product for a common cab (on par with the Jawbreaker), is trash. Due to weight, it accelerates slower than a mere 7-energy Guerilla, which is itself trash.
  • The Guerilla, though technically more energy efficient than a Duster, does not save even half a big G's worth of powerscore; when aiming above 7 energy, even 8-energy cabins will have more efficiency.
  • The Huntsman is overall inferior to the Sprinter, barring only its health/powerscore ratio and perhaps footprint. Superior to the Guerilla except in terms of mass.
  • The WWT1 cabin has a noticeably higher speed×power product than the Sprinter, but it's offset by weight. The speed is convenient for hardened tracks and colossus hover setups, and it has more HP/PS.

Sprinter versus Duster is a tossup. The Duster's only serious advantage is the extra point of energy it has. Actually using this energy on a high powerscore item can have a substantial effect at low PS, but with a low-cost colossus engine, it's seemingly comparable to a Sprinter+hot red combo. Both have 8 energy remaining, and near identical top speeds: 101.7 on the Sprinter verses 101.65 on the Duster. However the Sprinter+hot red will accelerate 15.4% faster at equal weight with four shivs, or 21% faster with six (note that shivs subtract 12.5%), and is overall a whole 310 kg lighter, with 50 more durability for only 75 more powerscore, favoring its health/weight ratio over health/powerscore. The colossus engine itself has a typically better perk though, and works much more well as a shield. However, neither of these engines are necessarily the best suited for these cabins; they simply line up the speed and energy, to narrow the differences down while providing another angle to look at the cabins from.

  • The Bat has the highest speed×power product of all rare cabins down to 75kmph, despite also having a greater top speed. Matches the Hot-Rod's product, with more speed and health, but also extra mass.
  • The Pilgrim is the fastest rare cabin to have a higher product than the Bat, but comes with 750 more mass AND 10 less health. Essentially free ramming weight for less top speed; decent with capped parts.
  • The Jawbreaker has an entirely superior footprint to the Pilgrim, but with no more speed or power than a mere Docker, for additional weight and only 5 more HP. Has a proper 10 energy and Hans's speed perk.
  • The Carapace has a higher product than all rare cabins except the Pilgrim and Trucker, with more health than the either and more energy than the latter. 50kmph top speed limits it to legs and tracks however.
  • The Trucker has an obscenely high product, particularly with Stone-deaf's 5kmph: plows through crowds, but... slowly. Lacking a point of energy, for only 15 HP more than a Jawbreaker. Likely to get degunned.

Bat versus Growl rather clearly goes to the Growl. It has a lower speed×power product, but also less than half the weight. Add about 70 PS of armor and it'll have more health, as well as about equal acceleration due to the low weight, as well as a whole 100kmph top speed plus an extra point of energy just because. With small tracks the extra speed becomes irrelevant but, there's still the energy. All the bat gets is slightly more health per unit of powerscore/number of parts, and an enormous underside to hide fuel tanks and generators with.

  • The Echo cabin has the highest speed×power product of all cabins in the game without Hans being used, as well as more top speed than any heavy cab—just enough for a colossus hover, with a matching perk.

Epic cabins all cost at least 790 more powerscore than a Duster with a gas generator, which already has near maximum speed and identical energy to mediums. Unless you're going beyond 12 energy, with epic cabs you're generally just paying for some acceleration, health/armor, and a perk, with the perk being what sets most epic cabs apart. For that reason, epic cabin usefulness has less to do with the cabins themselves and more to do with the weapons and movement parts they can be used on, making those more worth examining.

Furthermore, there's no powerscore limit in clan wars. Heavy cabins can actually use their carrying capacity without fear of harsh matchmaking, hence the popularity of heavy cabins there, despite the general unpopularity of the Trucker, Docker, and Guerilla everywhere else. Light epic cabs also don't gain an extra point of energy, making the heavy cab loss less significant at the epic level.

Overall I would say the Echo, Growl, and the Duster, and Sprinter are "A tier" cabins when used within the correct ranges. The Bat, WWT1, Huntsman, and most epic cabins I would call "B tier." The Pilgrim, Hot Rod, and the remaining epic cabins are in "C," with the remaining rare cabins being in "D," save for the Trucker, which belongs in the bottom tier alongside the Docker and Guerilla. Only the bottom tier is outright bad, but even the top tier isn't overpowered in my opinion. Putting powerscore towards epic weapons for weapon HP is usually a priority over cabin investment; I wouldn't say any cabins are above "good" in matches where powerscore matters.

Epic engines, much like cabins, are selected largely for their perk and movement part synergy. In terms of mobility though, engines with higher power actually have a more pronounced effect when there's less of a penalty to offset. This makes colossus hovers maximally mobile, particularly when paired with the Echo cabin. Rare engines are pretty much trash; they offer a little more benefit per unit of powerscore, but significantly less per unit of energy. Hardcore/hot red technically don't cost energy either way, but there's still your one-engine limit getting spent. The only attribute that stands out is the dun horse's tonnage bonus, but once you take perks into account, epics are far more worth it.

Edited by XR57
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 5
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Really useful thread. Some things I didn't pay attention but felt ingame, like the power of light cabs. Recently made a Cheetah Harpy racecar (dun have Torero) and that thing pulls 5tons at 120 kmh np.

One thing that can't be quantified tho is the shape and welding points of cabs. In that department, Huntsman is reallly great, with two flat planes at different heights and two deep wheel wells. While WWT is horrible and pretty much can't be armored, leaving it entirely to sealclubby hover stuff.

Engines in general are trash for what engines are supposed to do. There's no reason to go for rare engines, and if it was just about the engine stats, you wouldn't see many people putting energy in Colossus either.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you for your observations.

 

I've found it curious how during 2018-2019 the devs increased the cabin power of all the light Epic cabins "to increase their acceleration" despite the fact the higher top speed should make up for that. Not only do the Epic Light cabins have highest top speeds (100km/h) they also have the highest cabin power to mass limit ratio.

 

This also proves us that slower cabins within their respective mass limits (Humpback vs Echo & Quantum vs Torero) are genuinely underpowered. Not only they are slower but also accelerate slower despite having relatively more cabin power.

 

I don't know, a simple solution would be to measure the acceleration against a fixed number, like 100km/h instead of measuring it against the cabin's own top speed.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Clebardman said:

One thing that can't be quantified tho is the shape and welding points of cabs. In that department, Huntsman is reallly great, with two flat planes at different heights and two deep wheel wells. While WWT is horrible and pretty much can't be armored, leaving it entirely to sealclubby hover stuff.

At least in the lower paragraphs, I tried to take it into account. Jawbreaker would be F-Minus tier if not for its footprint; technically a Docker with a gas generator has the same energy, 40 less powerscore, and 106 less kg of mass for only 5 less HP. Without the footprint I'dve placed the Jawbreaker below even that and the Gurellia. Though there's also the higher max energy-potential the Jawbreaker has.

3 hours ago, Spedemix said:

mass limits

I think I'll go add some scatter plots to the speed section, displaying acceleration at mass-limit ordered by speed, and then acceleration at some target HP ordered by speed, supposing some fixed health-to-weight ratio on armor.

3 hours ago, Spedemix said:

I don't know, a simple solution would be to measure the acceleration against a fixed number, like 100km/h instead of measuring it against the cabin's own top speed.

Very much this, specifically the 100kmph value. This would keep the acceleration of light cabins while raising it for anything slower. Go suggest it, mine don't make it through. But beware that this doubles as an Echo buff. No issue within the common and rare tiers though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, XR57 said:

Very much this, specifically the 100kmph value. This would keep the acceleration of light cabins while raising it for anything slower. Go suggest it, mine don't make it through. But beware that this doubles as an Echo buff. No issue within the common and rare tiers though.

Thank you. Will do.

 

The Echo (and to lesser extent Icebox) is mainly a problem with Hovers. No one's complaining about Echo builds with wheels or Hardened Tracks wrecking everyone and their mother. It's offtopic but the Hovers prob need some further tweak anyway regardless to what is done to the cabin acceleration parameters.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh, another thing I just edited in, @Spedemix; the equation at the top technically only gives you your acceleration in a vacuum. Originally I neglected to write this at the top of the guide but it's since been edited in.

At equal mass, drag force is a common factor that can be removed, but once you compare builds of unequal mass, heavy cabins become... at least less-worse, than they would be in a vacuum. Mass limit comparisons are a little risky. Also drag force typically scales with the square of your velocity (thus producing a terminal velocity, where drag overtakes forward force), so obviously you need to have an equal starting/instantaneous speed in your comparison to factor the drag out.

On the contrary, less weight on lights means they have less to lift uphill. This is generally a more important issue given that heavy enough spider fusions can't even move up certain slopes.

Edited by XR57

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 

GUIDE UPDATED

Now contains scatterplots illustrating the acceleration of each cabin at specific target HP values, with respect to top speed. Spoiler'd within the cabins section. Calculator links also added.

 

@Spedemix Here's the predictable acceleration-at-mass-limit graph, if you want it:

1176663437_cabinproductsovermassatmassli

HOWEVER, higher position on this graph is not necessarily a good thing (I need this to be as much of an eyecatch as the graph is). Take light cabins compared to the Torero, for instance. The Torero has the exact same power and top speed of light cabins, but due to having increased mass limit, comes out lower on this graph. This does not, in any way, make it worse than those cabins, as you can simply choose to not use the mass limit it has. Buffing the mass limit of a cabin would actually lower its position on the graph, despite that action being by-definition a buff.

I still agree that the acceleration stat should measure your time to 100kmph though, just because it makes the game more intuitive, and because I know heavies aren't good, at least not in games with powerscore. But, I want to establish that "acceleration at max tonnage" isn't a tottaly valid stat to compare cabins over, on account of the fact that you aren't forced to use all of your ML. I added a section to the guide though, which I think presents a fairer argument for the same conclusion, properly accounting for a lot of other variables.

Basically, if you ignore their mass mass limit, light cabins perform heavy roles about as well as heavy cabins do. Not actually better, but about as well, which is still an issue. Mass limit alone (also tonnage) is what holds them back. Though if you were to have the acceleration stat dictate your time-to-100kmph instead of time-to-top-speed, you'd possibly get the reverse issue, with heavy cabins performing light roles about as well, held back only by top speed, instead of only by mass limit as-is-currently the case with lights.

Maybe that's fine, but, humor me for a minute.

Suppose you were to go through with the 100kmph suggestion.

Then, suppose you also nerfed heavy cabin power by 20% afterward (maybe mediums by 10).

On something like a carapace, you'd be taking what was once multiplied by 50 and instead be multiplying it by 100, so that's doubling it. Taking off 20% of that 200% (of, not from), would still leave you with 160% of your original acceleration, which is a sizeable buff. With the 60kmph cabins, you'd still be gaining around (100/60)*.8=33.333% more acceleration than before.

Now go glance at the graphs I added in the OP: you can see that in heavy roles, they'd be accelerating 33.333% faster than light cabins. In light roles, they'd be accelerating about 33.333% worse. In medium roles, they'd accelerate about the same, but lights would have more speed, while heavies had more health, both likely a worse mix of the two than medium cabs have (partially due to mediums having a lot of speed). Acceleration would be a middleground stat rewarded to players for putting the right cabs on the right builds, and not just something one or the other class has more of. 

Edited by XR57
  • Like 1
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Very informative, thank you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, really impressive stuff. Really like the calculator you made. I'll add some additional thoughts, they're not really criticisms, just thinking aloud here.

 

8 hours ago, XR57 said:

Take light cabins compared to the Torero, for instance. The Torero has the exact same power and top speed of light cabins, but due to having increased mass limit, comes out lower on this graph. This does not, in any way, make it worse than those cabins, as you can simply choose to not use the mass limit it has. Buffing the mass limit of a cabin would actually lower its position on the graph, despite that action being by-definition a buff.

You're right. I myself noticed a decrease in acceleration when fusioning a cabin for hauler and then building for that mass without changing the net cabin power (for example: six ML 200 can carry Steppe Spider Hauler+Colossus which is the default amount of legs used in Steppe Spider builds, hauler or not)

 

8 hours ago, XR57 said:

Basically, if you ignore their mass mass limit, light cabins perform heavy roles about as well as heavy cabins do. Not actually better, but about as well, which is still an issue. Mass limit alone (also tonnage) is what holds them back. Though if you were to have the acceleration stat dictate your time-to-100kmph instead of time-to-top-speed, you'd  possibly get the reverse issue, with heavy cabins performing light roles about as well, held back only by top speed, instead of only by mass limit as-is-currently the case with lights.

Maybe that's fine, but, humor me for a minute.

Suppose you were to go through with the 100kmph suggestion.

Then, suppose you also nerfed heavy cabin power by 20% afterward (maybe mediums by 10).

On something like a carapace, you'd be taking what was once multiplied by 50 and instead be multiplying it by 100, so that's doubling it. Taking off 20% of that 200% (of, not from), would still leave you with 160% of your original acceleration, which is a sizeable buff. With the 60kmph cabins, you'd still be gaining around (100/60)*.8=33.333% more acceleration than before.

Now go glance at the graphs I added in the OP: you can see that in heavy roles, they'd be accelerating 33.333% faster than light cabins. In light roles, they'd be accelerating about 33.333% worse. In medium roles, they'd accelerate about the same, but lights would have more speed, while heavies had more health, both likely a worse mix of the two than medium cabs have (partially due to mediums having a lot of speed). Acceleration would be a middleground stat rewarded to players for putting the right cabs on the right builds, and not just something one or the other class has more of.  

Good observations. Personally I'd just argue the reason why a heavy cabin can never perform the role of a light one well comes down to three major things: Cabin size, top speed (which you already mentioned) and energy

 

  • All the heavy cabins in this game are humongous so it's difficult to create a seemingly nimble buggy with those.
  • Also no matter how fast they'd accelerate they will still always be limited by the 50-70km/h speed limit. So the light cabins will get past them eventually anyway (I know the Echo could still prove to be major problem)
  • Minus one energy is still minus one energy. Nothing will change that.

 

Engines like Cheetah won't be too much of a problem since the top speed addition is based on percentage (20% for Cheetah).

 

Bottom line is: when moving from a lighter to a heavier cabin, you'd trade top speed for mass limit.

 

On 8/2/2019 at 10:54 AM, XR57 said:

All these light cabins are well over their mass limit, of course, but it's a little shameful that mass limit is the only thing stopping them. Furthermore, I've been gradually upscaling the Y axis with each image, causing the heavy cabins to travel up. In reality though, if you pit a heavy cabin on a heavy build, against a light cabin on a light build, and that light build is going to have waaay more acceleration.

There is also another thing to consider within the constraints of Crossout.

 

Due to us being limited to 80 parts in a single craft, heavier vehicles are often forced to use armor with worse weight to durability ratio. The lunatics and firestarters stuff stand somewhere around 2 and 2.2 while Scav and Steppen armor has a factor of 3. In practice this will end up pulling the cabins with high mass limits down in the graph.

 

This comment of "...that light build is gonna have waaay more aceleration" is compounded by the fact in practice light crafts (at least in the endgame) fill their craft with light lunatics armor. The heavy craft can never fill its mass limit by using only Lunatics armor (it'll run out of parts) so you get into diminishing returns of using heavier armor. You end up getting less health for any reduction of acceleration.

 

Lastly, thank you for this:

 

8 hours ago, XR57 said:

Here's the predictable acceleration-at-mass-limit graph, if you want it:

1176663437_cabinproductsovermassatmassli

 

Edited by Spedemix

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Spedemix said:

You're right. I myself noticed a decrease in acceleration when fusioning a cabin for hauler and then building for that mass without changing the net cabin power

Well, yeah. Acceleration is just based off mass, not %-to-mass-limit*. Mass limit and tonnage are just empty space. I guess I never mentioned that for ML, but it's easy to see for tonnage by comparing steering/straight wheeled builds under tonnage.

*Or, if your cabin and wheels had a tonnage value of 0, I think it actually would due to the likely linear penalty. But you know what I mean.

2 hours ago, Spedemix said:

Personally I'd just argue the reason why a heavy cabin can never perform the role of a light one well comes down to three major things: Cabin size, top speed (which you already mentioned) and energy

 

  • All the heavy cabins in this game are humongous so it's difficult to create a seemingly nimble buggy with those.
  • Also no matter how fast they'd accelerate they will still always be limited by the 50-70km/h speed limit. So the light cabins will get past them eventually anyway (I know the Echo could still prove to be major problem)
  • Minus one energy is still minus one energy. Nothing will change that.

Engines like Cheetah won't be too much of a problem since the top speed addition is based on percentage (20% for Cheetah).

I was looking at the Carapace a lot, which has the lowest cabin speed and therefore sees the most change. Coincidentally, it's also rather short (although long/wide), and has a full 10 energy. Maybe it's only due there.

Either way, if you did nerf heavy power in conjunction the spedefix, all most players would see is heavy cabs lose power bars. Even it were worth taking them, better to test and let them be "overpowered" for a week so that people aren't mislead.

Engines like cheetah taking a hit from this is perfectly fine. With four bigfoots they already have like 80% of the acceleration a colossus adds due to their 20% further multiplying the effect of their power. Just before eight bigfoots it actually adds more acceleration than the colossus. Knock it out, by all means.

Edited by XR57

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 

GUIDE UPDATED

Added the video below. Contains additional information on health and ramming weight.

 

 

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been trying to reproduce your results in a quest to further optimize my race vehicles after realizing these formulas would mean the Howl would potentially not be the optimal race cabin in a very narrow range of vehicle designs(as the loss in cabin speed would potentially result in a very limited range of designs being able to achieve higher acceleration with a Tusk/Werewolf), and found an inconsistency.

image.thumb.png.5449c6381c446b5a255c9f11

This plot correlates speedometer-indicated speed in captured video footage from a 4800kg, 4x ML 200 Growl, and a 5600kg, 4x ML 200 WWT1. Using your formulas, both should have the same acceleration figures, but this wasn't the case during this test - the growl took 2.5 seconds to accelerate to 40km/h, while the WWT1 took 2.984 seconds to do the same.

Before the hover changes you mentioned in one of your citations, I've recorded fixed-distance acceleration times on different cabin/engine combinations(at a time the speedometer wasn't included ingame), and realized hovers didn't change their acceleration figures based on cabin power, but only under engine power. This would make the Duster the optimal cabin for hover racers under a short period of time at the beginning of the single-stage, no-pitstop era if you were able to ignore the delta-v limitations that led to my hiatus during that period - until these hover changes were included into the game.

I haven't done enough research to confirm or deny that legged/tracked/augered vehicles don't depend on cabin power whatsoever in the current version,  but it might be possible different locomotion methods have different acceleration formulas.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OOF, that was savage :'D

 

edit: Thx for adding me as a friend, but I might be tempted to queue only when you're in battle now (^:

Edited by Clebardman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^^My understanding (with my limited testing) is that the acceleration curve of movement parts with speed cap get altered by the speed cap of cabin. While both of the builds in RA2Lover's graph might have the same power / mass, the higher top speed of Growl results in higher acceleration for the legs because the acceleration curve of the craft does not take the speed cap of the movement part into account and thus scales the curve across the top speed of the cabin itself.

 

Land crafts in the game tend to have an acceleration curve that tapers off as you approach the cabin's speed limit. You can see that tapering in the WWT1 cabin. Growl's top speed goes much further so no tapering (because we never approach the speed cap of the cabin itself). I suspect you could reproduce this result with Goliath or even Armored tracks too once you get the values right.

 

That being said, movement parts do have some differences when it comes certain behaviours.

 

For example Tracks climb uphill little bit faster than wheeled vehicles at any given weight. Cabin power pays no part in this as my earlier posts suggest. That seems to be coded into the tracks themselves.

 

Another example is hovers which ignore the acceleration curve (aka the tapering) of cabins and will always accelerate linearly. They probably do also have the same issue of not taking their own movement part's speed cap into account when it comes to the acceleration profile, but it doesn't matter since the acceleration is already linear, in other words "as good as it gets" at any given power value. Hope I wrote it in a way it makes sense.

  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Very nice guide.

On 8/2/2019 at 4:54 PM, XR57 said:

The rest, is common sense. Crossout physics can be weird, but generally force is mass times acceleration; thus, acceleration is force divided by mass, leaving the mass in the denominator.

I believe Crossout used to follow F = ma physics but they tweaked it with this update

General

  • Reduced dependence of the armoured car's acceleration on the increase in the mass of the car. Increased overall dynamics of armoured vehicles.

so I don't think just leaving the mass in the denominator is correct, it should be the root of the mass or something else.

Edited by untinman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/29/2019 at 10:17 AM, untinman said:

At the time I wrote the guide, the acceleration bar was shown to display power divided by mass. It was then shown that this bar was multiplied by speed.

Both of these things were found after that update, so it was changed to this, not from it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, XR57 said:

At the time I wrote the guide, the acceleration bar was shown to display power divided by mass. It was then shown that this bar was multiplied by speed.

Both of these things were found after that update, so it was changed to this, not from it.


It seems like they forgot to update the acceleration bar with the change and fixed it later to me.

I remember similar thing happened when they updated explosion mechanics.
They forgot to update damage and radius from explosive parts in the descriptions at that time and took months to fix them.

Edited by untinman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.