Damage chances (to keep upgrading MU or not)

[murcielagoes 331]

Don't merge this D:
 
Disclaimer: This is neither a debate or a suggestion on buffing alt (which is why it's in the game discussion) and also filled with math :P
 
Part 1, This is without practical evidence.
 
Before moving on, this topic's purpose is to determine if there's a "goldilocks" (just right zone) zone for micro-upgrade for a turret such as railgun and this is not including the alteration shell stabilization, before reaching the point below this paragraph in my point of view, the ranges of damage widens for each micro-upgrade step (for e.g m3 5/20 gets over 2900-3200  as the gap between min and max dmg is smaller, but at m4 i get as low as 2200 dmg, meaning the gap between min and max dmg widens a lot more and giving more chances for lower numbers to appear that didn't appear as much for for lower MUs but gives higher damages a chance)
 
If we take the time to observe, the turrets for example magnum, railgun (with alt for this case) has a case of getting more max dmg increase than min dmg increase for upgrades.
 
For this topic, i'll use railgun as an example, reason being is that i'm more experience with it than magnum (but magnum also has a close min-max dmg as railgun with alt to relate with this topic)
 
To keep micro-upgrading or not, micro-upgrading is a essential part of progressing as a way to keep up with the m4s, the phrase "m4" (fully MUed) sounds fascinating which is why players tend to aim for that goal for each of their turret, hull and module.
 
Starting this off, (all these damages for railgun are with high caliber ammo alteration).
 
M3 dmg difference M4
135.05 min - 260.23 max
 
M4 (20/20)
Max dmg: 2240
Min dmg: 1120
Dmg difference = 1120
 
M3.75 (15/20)
Max dmg: 2174.94
Min dmg: 1086.23
Dmg difference = 1088.71
 
M3.5 (10/20)
Max dmg: 2109.88
Min dmg: 1052.46
Dmg difference = 1057.42
 
M3.25 (5/20)
Max dmg: 2044.82
Min dmg: 1018.71
Dmg difference = 1026.11
 
M3 (0/20)
Max dmg: 1979.77
Min dmg: 984.94
Dmg difference = 994.82
 
Now by using standard deviation for this what i did to get the mean was for e.g 2240-1120 = 1120/2 = 560 + 1120 = 1680 thus using 1680 as my mean
 
M4

 
M3.75(15/20)

 
M3.5(10/50)

 
M3.25(5/20)

 
M3

 
For part 2, my hypothesis for the next part is if my mean (for e.g 1680) is accurate or not from when i do the practical investigation.

[Maf 32,328]

I highly doubt that there's any reason to not MU a turret fully. This could be relevant back when MUs didn't give an equal bonus per step (and the later MUs gave only a tiny bonus for a very high price), but now each step gives the same parameter increase, so why would a lower step be better than a higher one?

[wolverine848 13,097]

I highly doubt that there's any reason to not MU a turret fully. This could be relevant back when MUs didn't give an equal bonus per step, but now each step gives the same parameter increase, so why would a lower step be better than a higher one?

cost?

 

I thought each next step costs more than the one before. So less ROI.

 

Eventually goal would be to fully MU - but - that would be after most other stock equip you want is already purchased.

having options and min 35% protection can be more beneficial than 15 more points of damage per shot for example.

[Maf 32,328]

Eventually goal would be to fully MU - but - that would be after most other stock equip you want is already purchased.

having options and min 35% protection can be more beneficial than 15 more points of damage per shot for example.

Well, I suppose that makes sense. A choice between having a single powerful weapon or multiple slightly weaker ones.

[murcielagoes 331]

the point of this topic was to show if turrets like magnum and railgun with such a huge gap of min and max dmg is a worth for MUing as you'll get a higher risk of getting those unwanted low damages, so its either making a decision of wanting a turret to reach a full maximum, or be a more stable railgun shell which stays at the area of the damage you want to give