Talk:GravityWave
Revision as of 03:10, 8 June 2009 by J Litewski (talk | contribs)
How does it do against DustBunny 3.7 or 3.8? Both of those have signifigantly improved aim and perhaps a bit better movement? --Miked0801 13:43, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
Haven't tested it yet. I'll get it and do a 500 test and post the results. Hopefully the smarter field buffer will help. :) --Jacob Litewski 16:55, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
- Newest test against DustBunny 3.8 is up. --18:15, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
By the way, I highly suggest you try and test against a head-on targeter like HawkOnFire. If you're unable to dodge literally 99.8% of the bullets, then your surfing has a bug probably :) --Rednaxela 19:16, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
- DB 3.5 is a head on shooter. 3.8 is a reduced linear aim per range bot that is pretty much head on outside of 600 or so. So both show a very, very strong gun :) --Miked0801 19:55, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
- Ahh, didn't know. In that case, I'd call those DB 3.5 scores quite poor for a surfer... If a surfer is getting that kind of score against head-on targeting... then quite a lot of bugs to work out I'd say --Rednaxela 23:52, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
- Well, I was running the tests using an almost unmodified BasicSurfer core. I've been slowly modifying it the more I've been learning. Before some of the minor mods I did, DB 3.5 was wooping GravityWave (I believe it was DB 80% GW 20%). Right now I'm working on a tiny distance bug that DustBunny exploits if GravityWave gets within 300 pixels. That should up my score a bit. --Jacob Litewski 02:10, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
- Ahh, didn't know. In that case, I'd call those DB 3.5 scores quite poor for a surfer... If a surfer is getting that kind of score against head-on targeting... then quite a lot of bugs to work out I'd say --Rednaxela 23:52, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
