RPG Launcher to Advanced Rocket Launcher upgrade vs. Armor

[rkagerer]

I've been cleaning out older weapons to make room for their newer counterparts.

The RPG Launcher has an RPG Anti-Tank Rocket with Armor Effectiveness 0.75 (and Armor Degradation 0.3).
Is there a reason the Advanced Rocket Launcher, with its many more ammunition options, doesn't have a rocket which performs as well or better against armor?  (Or are you supposed to use its Incendiary Rocket for such targets, like say a Sectopod cluster?)

Thanks!

[psavola]

Shrapnel rockets will shred almost every unit to pieces. Including sectopods.

[rkagerer]

Thanks @psavola, I appreciate your response!

I had a closer look, and noticed one reason the Shrapnel rocket trends better is that it delivers CUTTING damage rather than CONCUSSIVE, and large enemy units tend to be less vulnerable to concussive damage.  e.g. Sectopod, Cyberdisk Terrorist and MIB Tank Terrorist all have damage modifiers that reduce the effects of concussive damage, compared to cutting.  I included details stats below.

But I think there are still some counter-examples where the RPG Anti-Tank Rocket performs better, at least from a strict reading of the stats.  E.g. The Vampire Knight has 55 front armor, and takes 90% of concussive damage but only 60% from cutting.  So a hit from an RPG Anti-Tank Rocket should deal around 48 damage (= [95 - 55 x 0.75] x 0.9), while a Shrapnel rocket would do around 27 (= [100 - 55] x 0.6).  My math may be slightly off depending on the order modifiers are applied and other effects of which I'm unaware, but https://xcf.trigramreactor.net/master/gunSim shows the relation holds.  It even slightly edges out the more advanced Tritanium Shrapnel Rocket (at least for Aimed shots - although I'm not clear why Gun Profiler reports te RPG's snap shots do less damage than aimed ones).

Do you think the shrapnels are inferior in such cases, or is there something I'm missing?

I recognize the subsequent fire created by the shrapnel variants will do some further damage after the fact, and isn't accounted for above.

For four-tile units, does the larger blast radius of the Shrapnel rockets come into play to as a further damage-multiplier (from each tile affected)?

I'm getting rid of the older equipment nonetheless, but found it kind of curious that it didn't seem clear the newer stuff is universally better.  (In a different example, I know the Nitro Express Rifle served me very well up until Laser Sniper Rifles, due my agents' high ACC stats and its strong damage bonus multiplier).

---

RPG Anti-Tank Rocket
Damage: 95 CONCUSSIVE
Blast Radius: 1 Tile
Armor Effectiveness: 0.75
Radius Reduction: 40
Armor Degradation (Raw Damage): 0.3

Shrapnel Rocket
Damage: 100 CUTTING
Blast Radius: 8 Tiles
Radius Reduction: 4
Armor Degradation (Raw Damage): 0.05

Tritanium Shrapnel Rocket
Damage: 130 CUTTING
Blast Radius: 11 Tiles
Radius Reduction: 5
Armor Degradation (Raw Damage): 0.05

Sectopod Terrorist: 100% CUTTING, 40% CONCUSSIVE, 145 Front Armor
MIB Tank Terrorist: 90% CUTTING, 75% CONCUSSIVE, 90 Front Armor
Cyberdisc Terrorist: 100% CUTTING, 60% CONCUSSIVE, 34 Front Armor
Chryssalid Terrorist: 100% CUTTING & CONCUSSIVE, 34 Front Armor
Ancient Female Tomb Guardian: 70% CUTTING, 90% CONCUSSIVE, 40 Front Armor
Vampire Knight: 60% CUTTING, 90% CONCUSSIVE, 55 Front Armor

[Stone Lake]

So a hit from an RPG Anti-Tank Rocket should deal around 48 damage (= [95 - 55 x 0.75] x 0.9), while a Shrapnel rocket would do around 27 (= [100 - 55] x 0.6).

Didn't carefully read, but it seems your calculations are incorrect?
Resist is applied first, so it should be (=95 * 0.9 - 55 * 0.75 ~ 57) and (100 * 0.6 - 55 = 60 - 55 = 5 (yes, 5)).

It seems that shrapnel is clearly inferior here. But I'd also say Vampire Knight is somewhat an outlier, it's basically an APC-level armor (!) without a weakness of having 4 tiles to damage with a blast (!!) and with 250+ health (!!!). Even said ~57 damage of AT rocket is peanuts to him, he'd need 5 of those or more. So it'd make more sense just searching for a better weapon (usually sonic / mass driver / gauss) than blaming it on rockets.

Large turrets is another thing shrapnel rockets handle just fine.

[Stormtrooper]

I had a closer look, and noticed one reason the Shrapnel rocket trends better is that it delivers CUTTING damage rather than CONCUSSIVE, and large enemy units tend to be less vulnerable to concussive damage

Funny how back in the day I was panicking because of some tough armored units and on this very forum someone told me this very thing. 
I guess it's because IRL shrapnel explosives are anti-infantry, not anti-armor weapon so when you see "shrapnel rocket" you imagine frags scattering around large radius, cutting soldiers with light or no armor, not something that's surprisingly useful against all sorts of tanks and heavy armor suits.

[DarthTheIII]

Sectopod Terrorist: 100% CUTTING, 40% CONCUSSIVE, 145 Front Armor
MIB Tank Terrorist: 90% CUTTING, 75% CONCUSSIVE, 90 Front Armor
Cyberdisc Terrorist: 100% CUTTING, 60% CONCUSSIVE, 34 Front Armor
Chryssalid Terrorist: 100% CUTTING & CONCUSSIVE, 34 Front Armor
Ancient Female Tomb Guardian: 70% CUTTING, 90% CONCUSSIVE, 40 Front Armor
Vampire Knight: 60% CUTTING, 90% CONCUSSIVE, 55 Front Armor

If you are hitting something with a rocket or other explosive it will hit the enemies under armor, not front.

I'm getting rid of the older equipment nonetheless, but found it kind of curious that it didn't seem clear the newer stuff is universally better.  (In a different example, I know the Nitro Express Rifle served me very well up until Laser Sniper Rifles, due my agents' high ACC stats and its strong damage bonus multiplier).

Did you prefer nitro express rifles over barret 50cals?  Sure the Nitro has 20% more scaling, but there is a 70% difference in armor effectivness, ignoring the barrets other advantages

[rkagerer]

Thanks all.  I forgot about under-armor, thanks for reminding me.

I don't think I really tried the M82 Barrett (not sure what's mean by 50cals? - is there some variant I can't see?) .  It looks in several respects like it could be a good alternative, as it still has a decent ACC-based bonus (and of course the larger clip would be welcome).   I do notice it can only fire one snap-shot a turn vs. the Nitro's two.

I tried some of the other more modern, 'classic' weapons but the Nitro's served me well until lasers.  Armored enemies got a bit challenging and the M82 might have worked better there.

[DarthTheIII]

Yeah I just meant the M82 Barret, I forgot the exact name, and they shoot 50cal rounds in real life so I misnamed it a bit.

If it works it works, but I certainly couldn't see myself using Nitro's that late.  They can snap twice, but with only 3 shots per reload you're still going to average out to like 1.6 snaps a turn or something.  And even if your only shooting at a 30 armor target, like a syndicate security or something, an 80% difference in armor effectivness means the barret will be doing an effective 24 extra damage, on top of the 7 higher base.  So shooting at moderatly armored targets the barret is hitting for 30 more on average, and the 10% extra scaling on the nitro will only make up for about 10 of that.  Hell even if your shooting at a red dawn ganger, with a soldier with 120 FA, the Nitro will only be doing like 1 more damage on average. 

And the 200% kneel bonus on the barrets means you can aimed shot through smoke at 100%+ accuracy.

With all that said, I could see using the nitros over barrets in more enclosed spaces, where the nitro's 38% snap shot gets more use, but in those situations I'd use a heavy cannon or something.

[rkagerer]

That's awesome, I will have to try it out.  Thanks for that thorough rundown.  I've moved beyond Nitro's now, to mainly TurboLasers, but jotted it down for another run-through or when I simply just want to have some agents to play and compare on another runthrough.