Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Mikkir
Freelance Mining Company
10
|
Posted - 2015.09.02 21:41:43 -
[1] - Quote
So I was reading this thread, got confused, and decided I needed to figure out how the equation actually works. So I found an article on eve uni and I want to make sure I understand it so I can come up with some good builds to test.
All this is done from the point of view of fitting a golem.
So lets start with the part of the equation that I need to focus on:
(S/E*Ve/Vt)^(ln(drf)/ln(5.5)
The preconception I had before I looked at this is once the signature of the ship is larger than the missile explosion radius than there was no reason to do anything more to alter the S/E ratio, but I may be wrong here. There was no mention of the ratio S/E being capped at 1, which means I can use target painting as a way to buffer (or eliminate) the Ve/Vt ratio.
What this means piratically, if I'm not misunderstanding, is that I can do 4 things to handle fast moving ships. Specifically: Increase S by target painting Decrease E by rigors/ballistic computers Increase Ve by flares/ballistic computers Decrease Vt by webs
But before I can make educated choices I need to make sure I'm not completely wrong about being able to pump up S as opposed to only focusing on Ve. |
stoicfaux
6221
|
Posted - 2015.09.02 23:27:19 -
[2] - Quote
You are correct, except that after a certain point (usually a couple of webs) the (S/E) part of the missile formula becomes dominant.
Since everything in (S/E*Ve/Vt) is multiplied together, you can "normalize" the various mods to get an idea of their effectiveness against each other:
A 37.5% TP provides a 1.375 multiplier. (1 + .375) A 15% flare provides a 1.15 multiplier. (1 + .15) A 15% rigor provides a 1.176 multiplier (1 + 1 / (1 -.15)) A 60% web provides a 2.5 multiplier ( 1 / (1 - .6) ) A 50% speed boost provides a .667 multiplier. ( 1 / (1 + .5) ) If your target is stationary, then that provides a really, really, really, big multiplier which leaves you relying on (S/E) or the damage cap (of 100%) for damage. etc..
Missile Damage formula: min(1, (S/E), (S/E*Ve/Vt)^(ln(drf)/ln(5.5)))
Pon Farr Memorial: once every 7 years, all the carebears in high-sec must PvP or they will be temp-banned.
|
Mikkir
Freelance Mining Company
11
|
Posted - 2015.09.03 04:33:09 -
[3] - Quote
Thanks stoicfaux!
That brings a lot of clarity to how to design missile ships (at least for PvE).
With the bonused RF target painter on a golem it looks like 2 should be standard (60% and 52% increases). The web seems like an extremely attractive option considering how much trouble elite frigs are and the huge multiplier it gives. A missile guidance computer may not be the worst idea ever, but pretty much never use 2 as there are better options.
All in all some really good information, and can help me figure out what I should be doing in this faction missile vs tech 2 fury situation. |
Tsukino Stareine
Sock Robbers Inc. Low-Class
1372
|
Posted - 2015.09.03 07:44:31 -
[4] - Quote
elite frigates melt to a set of t2 light drones (augmented if you wanna go even more bling) with decent drone skills.
You should not be attempting to fire cruise missiles at frigates unless you REALLY need to leave and they're pointing you. |
The Bigpuns
Touring New Eden Haven.
4
|
Posted - 2015.09.03 08:50:15 -
[5] - Quote
Excess St/Er carries over to the Ve/Vt, but not the other way round.
Webs are only therefore really useful vs frigs. For all other targets, I find 4 tp's give me a combination of superb application, application at range, and holding aggro when my drones are out. I fit a flare II rig, just because anything else would be too heavily stacking penalised, and switch to precision scripted mgc's for missions where a target may be immune to tp's. |
Kitty Bear
Harbingers of Chaos Inc Gentlemen's.Club
1526
|
Posted - 2015.09.03 11:29:59 -
[6] - Quote
Mikkir wrote: What this means practically is that I can do 4 things to handle fast moving ships: Increase S by target painting.
If your flying solo this isn't an issue. If you have friends along for extra fun, more than 6? TP's applied to the same target does not equate to sig-bloom overkill. The extra TP's just become wasted fitting options.
NB I'm not totally sure what the upper limit value for applied module affects is .. I'm fairly sure it's 6 but I may be wrong, and some kind/knowledgeable folks will post the correct number |
Mikkir
Freelance Mining Company
11
|
Posted - 2015.09.03 13:32:28 -
[7] - Quote
The Bigpuns wrote:Excess St/Er carries over to the Ve/Vt, but not the other way round.
Webs are only therefore really useful vs frigs. For all other targets, I find 4 tp's give me a combination of superb application, application at range, and holding aggro when my drones are out. I fit a flare II rig, just because anything else would be too heavily stacking penalised, and switch to precision scripted mgc's for missions where a target may be immune to tp's.
Would you mind sharing your fit?
I've never been able to hold agro off my drones, and those elite frigates chew through them. Especially in something like "the blockade" when they come in as a group of 4. |
Arthur Aihaken
Chig
4620
|
Posted - 2015.09.03 17:24:15 -
[8] - Quote
The Bigpuns wrote:Webs are only therefore really useful vs frigs. For all other targets, I find 4 tp's give me a combination of superb application, application at range, and holding aggro when my drones are out. I fit a flare II rig, just because anything else would be too heavily stacking penalised, and switch to precision scripted mgc's for missions where a target may be immune to tp's. Why not just go with a pair of TPs and a pair of precision-scripted MGCs? (then you don't need the flare rig) Unless you're utilizing the TPs to paint multiple targets in-advance?
I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
|
Mikkir
Freelance Mining Company
11
|
Posted - 2015.09.03 19:59:31 -
[9] - Quote
Arthur Aihaken wrote:The Bigpuns wrote:Webs are only therefore really useful vs frigs. For all other targets, I find 4 tp's give me a combination of superb application, application at range, and holding aggro when my drones are out. I fit a flare II rig, just because anything else would be too heavily stacking penalised, and switch to precision scripted mgc's for missions where a target may be immune to tp's. Why not just go with a pair of TPs and a pair of precision-scripted MGCs? (then you don't need the flare rig) Unless you're utilizing the TPs to paint multiple targets in-advance?
I know from experience that 2x target painters isn't enough to keep elite frigs off your drones. If 4x is enough that would be enough for me to run 4, because the extra drone DPS on stuff I don't want to shoot would be worth it. |
Arthur Aihaken
Chig
4622
|
Posted - 2015.09.04 17:57:19 -
[10] - Quote
Mikkir wrote:I know from experience that 2x target painters isn't enough to keep elite frigs off your drones. If 4x is enough that would be enough for me to run 4, because the extra drone DPS on stuff I don't want to shoot would be worth it. I find I hardly use my drones as it's almost as easy to just leave frigates to the end, switch to Precision ammunition and pop them all with a pair of target painters. With precision-scripted MGCs and two target painters you can single-volley even Elite frigates. I guess if you can achieve the same results with four TPs it doesn't make much of a difference. I rarely look at drone damage as more than anything but "token" DPS on the Golem.
I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
|
|
Mikkir
Freelance Mining Company
11
|
Posted - 2015.09.04 19:22:32 -
[11] - Quote
That's fair, but every cruise missile cycle you don't have to use is saving 8 seconds shooting frigates, and drones can chew through frigates and destroyers as quickly as I can chew through battleships if they're not getting beat on by elite frigates. |
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |