[b]TL:DR[/b] : Interesting it would appear that rate of bullet flare is HIGHLY leveraged to damage - this one is very much for the nerds like me :)
First and foremost thanks to Dom for this thread - this area is one of particular interest to your humble respondent.
Let's assume for a moment Newsk and Merrill are [b]not[/b] lying for their own nefarious fun.
Who knows they may be but ..... what if they aren't .... then the following may explain matters and raise some very interesting opportunities.
1. Range is now an independent variable and so can be set aside (Wiesnewski Crucible Radio 5 Oct 2015)
2. Each weapon class has an initial starting cone that determines bullet spread (Wiesnewski Crucible Radio 5 Oct 2015)
3. The initial cone flares once the player starts to fire. The degree and rate of flare is effected by;
3.1 weapon fire rate;
3.2 in autos the number of continuous bullets a player fires - burst fire keeps flare tight; and
3.3 base damage - if SM and JW are to be believed then flare is [b]materially[/b] effected by small movements in base damage.
This means that while a 0.04% increase in base damage means nothing to min theoretical TTK without taking into account the effects of cone flare (see optional example below), it would seem that cone flare is inversely proportional to damage x a [b]very large[/b] multiplier if Sage and Newsk are speaking truthfully. If this is so the implications are very interesting indeed.
This makes a lot of sense when you consider the logic underpinning a use of a damage cone that flares in both quantum and by rate based on [b]both[/b] fire rate and player technique. It reinforces the absolute importance of control burst firing with autos and in particular high RoF autos. It's also interesting if you listen to Newsk's comments on Crucible Radio 5th Oct 2015 as these effects appear to come into play on all weapon classes and in particular hand cannons. The implications for play style and weapon selection are far reaching indeed.
One is temped to share some theoretical (and very much guessed-imated) math on opening cone states and the differential equations that may determine cone flare rate but this would be boring (nerd alert!).
Then again the conspiracy theorists could be right.
Sage and Newski cocked up with a typo and then apologised for the cock up but creating and even bigger cock up hoping that folks lacked the rudimentary math skills to multiply, divide and convert percentage to fractions ..... Hmmmm.
[b]Optional Example[/b]
Now take a high RoF weapon like the Necrocasm.
[b]Pre Patch[/b]
Crit : 17 damage units per bullet
Body : 14 damage units per bullet
Rate of Fire : 900 bullet per minute
Target dies at 200 damage units in the source code (cf Sage Merrill 9 Dec 2015 Crucible Pod Cast)
Thus dead at :
11.76471 successive crits TTK 0.78431s or;
14.28571 successive body TTK 0.95238s
Summary
12 successive bullets to the head kills in 0.8s
14 successive bullets to the body kills in 0.9s
[b]Post Patch[/b]
Change : 0.04% increase in base damage
Crit : 17.0068 damage units per bullet
Body : 14.0057 damage units per bullet
Thus dead at :
11.76000 successive crits TTK 0.78400s or;
14.27990 successive body TTK 0.95199s
Summary
12 successive bullets to the head kills is 0.8s
14 successive bullets to the head kills in 0.9s
[b]QED[/b] - or is it ?
EDIT : Crucible Radio interview with Newsk and Sage 28 Dec all but confirmed this hypothesis. Looks like OP has his answer !
English
-
If 3.3 is true then it goes a long way towards explaining why they appear so incompetent. There is no reason damage should be the adjustment variable for cone flare. It makes it impossible for them to alter the two independently. What if they decide "You know, we like where the damage per bullet is now, but we think the cone should be a little tighter"?