Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Moonlit Raid
State War Academy Caldari State
294
|
Posted - 2016.04.22 22:40:24 -
[1] - Quote
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=topics&f=7291 I would have posted here but I can't.
What the HELL is this? I'm given some arbitrary number that is clearly a calculation from other figures but what is it for? why give me some random ass number when I already have a perfect figure of EXACTLY what the turret's capability is?
I DESPISE this change, it serves no useful function. Currently I have a direct comparison between the turrets statistics (rad/sec) to the game world (angular velocity). What is this change improving? So far as I see it. JACK ****.
Could a Dev please reply urgently with just what the **** this is going to improve?
If brute force isn't working, you're just not using enough.
Please Note: Any advice given comes with the caveat that nothing will be suitable for every situation.
|
Lugh Crow-Slave
2267
|
Posted - 2016.04.23 00:25:14 -
[2] - Quote
reason given by ccp
"think of the newbie numbers are hard"
Citadel worm hole tax
|
Daichi Yamato
Xero Security and Technologies
3208
|
Posted - 2016.04.23 00:29:14 -
[3] - Quote
To make noobs think gun accuracy is chance based irrespective of relative movement...
EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided"
Daichi Yamato's version of structure based decs
|
Paranoid Loyd
8958
|
Posted - 2016.04.23 00:30:48 -
[4] - Quote
While I do agree it is dumb, it hardly warrants such a reaction.
Fix the Prospect! New Server Hardware!
|
Moonlit Raid
State War Academy Caldari State
294
|
Posted - 2016.04.23 02:02:48 -
[5] - Quote
Paranoid Loyd wrote:While I do agree it is dumb, it hardly warrants such a reaction.
Think of it like this. Your guns used to tell you how they worked, now they don't. What. The. ****.
If brute force isn't working, you're just not using enough.
Please Note: Any advice given comes with the caveat that nothing will be suitable for every situation.
|
Aluanna
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
20
|
Posted - 2016.04.23 06:56:02 -
[6] - Quote
Moonlit Raid wrote:Paranoid Loyd wrote:While I do agree it is dumb, it hardly warrants such a reaction. Think of it like this. Your guns used to tell you how they worked, now they don't. What. The. ****.
Gonna have to agree with Paranoid here.. You are clearly overreacting. Its obviously just another half-baked idea implemented by CCP, I'm sure they have plans to make it easier to compare to another number.. they just haven't implemented that other number yet..
Ideas for missile launchers to make firing missiles more interesting/rewarding
|
Moonlit Raid
State War Academy Caldari State
294
|
Posted - 2016.04.23 12:05:56 -
[7] - Quote
Aluanna wrote:Moonlit Raid wrote:Paranoid Loyd wrote:While I do agree it is dumb, it hardly warrants such a reaction. Think of it like this. Your guns used to tell you how they worked, now they don't. What. The. ****. Gonna have to agree with Paranoid here.. You are clearly overreacting. Its obviously just another half-baked idea implemented by CCP, I'm sure they have plans to make it easier to compare to another number.. they just haven't implemented that other number yet..
It warrants such a reaction because as it is currently, the figure presented is not only directly comparable to the overview, but it is a real world measurement that is perfectly legitimate and easily visualized. The only acceptable change here in my opinion is going from rad to deg. This arbitrary number; what else does it incorporate? If nothing else then all CCP have done is added a step in working out the tracking of my guns. 0.12 rad/sec = 38.4 [arbitrary units]. Or 320 = 1 radian. To know how fast my tracking is I have an additional step to take. If it does incorporate other statistics, how will I ever know how fast my guns are tracking without this other stat presented separately or my tracking speed presented separately. Utterly nullifying the point of adding them together.
Don't do it CCP, it's pointless and makes things fuzzy that are fairly simple to explain at the moment. Visualise the following situation with a new guy: -
"Well your guns track at this speed in rad/sec and if the target's angular velocity is faster than that you will never hit the target"
Now: -
"Take a look at your weapon accuracy score. You have to guess if you will hit a target or not because the number given isn't any kind of real measurement."
If brute force isn't working, you're just not using enough.
Please Note: Any advice given comes with the caveat that nothing will be suitable for every situation.
|
Gosti Kahanid
Raiders of the Space Brotherhood Of Silent Space
97
|
Posted - 2016.04.23 16:44:47 -
[8] - Quote
Currently the 250mm Railgun (medium) has a tracking of 0.0205 rad/s, while a Dual 250mm Railgun (large) has a tracking of 0.018rad/s So it seems like they both track about the same, but in reality when they both shoot at a target with a signature Resolution of 125m, the effektive tracking of the large Gun is 0.0056rad/s, because of its signature resolution. In other words, even though both guns show about the same tracking, the large ohne is way more slower than the medium one, and thats why they changed it. The value you see there is still rad/s, but the resolution of all Guns has been increased to 40000, so you can better see how good a Gun is actually tracking |
Lugh Crow-Slave
2269
|
Posted - 2016.04.23 17:40:11 -
[9] - Quote
Aluanna wrote:Moonlit Raid wrote:Paranoid Loyd wrote:While I do agree it is dumb, it hardly warrants such a reaction. Think of it like this. Your guns used to tell you how they worked, now they don't. What. The. ****. Gonna have to agree with Paranoid here.. You are clearly overreacting. Its obviously just another half-baked idea implemented by CCP, I'm sure they have plans to make it easier to compare to another number.. they just haven't implemented that other number yet..
And since it's ccp it could be a year or 4 until they do
The current number worked there was hardly a reason to change it
Citadel worm hole tax
|
Moonlit Raid
State War Academy Caldari State
294
|
Posted - 2016.04.23 17:59:29 -
[10] - Quote
Gosti Kahanid wrote:Currently the 250mm Railgun (medium) has a tracking of 0.0205 rad/s, while a Dual 250mm Railgun (large) has a tracking of 0.018rad/s So it seems like they both track about the same, but in reality when they both shoot at a target with a signature Resolution of 125m, the effektive tracking of the large Gun is 0.0056rad/s, because of its signature resolution. In other words, even though both guns show about the same tracking, the large ohne is way more slower than the medium one, and thats why they changed it. The value you see there is still rad/s, but the resolution of all Guns has been increased to 40000, so you can better see how good a Gun is actually tracking
As it stands now i can see precisely how well a gun is tracking. Also, because I know the targets signature radius has an effect on applied damage, I know if the target's angular velocity is below my tracking speed and I'm applying badly then I know I need to increase the signature radius of the target. What do I do with this new stat? just guess between fitting a target painter or a tracking computer? That's what it sounds like.
If brute force isn't working, you're just not using enough.
Please Note: Any advice given comes with the caveat that nothing will be suitable for every situation.
|
|
Daichi Yamato
Xero Security and Technologies
3210
|
Posted - 2016.04.23 22:41:49 -
[11] - Quote
Gosti Kahanid wrote:Currently the 250mm Railgun (medium) has a tracking of 0.0205 rad/s, while a Dual 250mm Railgun (large) has a tracking of 0.018rad/s So it seems like they both track about the same, but in reality when they both shoot at a target with a signature Resolution of 125m, the effektive tracking of the large Gun is 0.0056rad/s, because of its signature resolution. In other words, even though both guns show about the same tracking, the large ohne is way more slower than the medium one, and thats why they changed it. The value you see there is still rad/s, but the resolution of all Guns has been increased to 40000, so you can better see how good a Gun is actually tracking
So you've just shown that they didn't need a weapon accuracy score, just to modify the existing tracking values.
Rad/s is not difficult to grasp. I had a general understanding of how it worked before i joined the game. Weapon accuracy score however, says nothing about how the relative movement between ships affects accuracy. It also has no meaning unless compared to another weapon accuracy score. I cannot tell how well a gun tracks, i can only tell how well it tracks compared to another gun. And so when it comes to the overview i cannot tell if my gun has a good chance or a terrible chance (unless they make 'ship evasion score')
Or we could just keep rad/s and angular velocity.
EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided"
Daichi Yamato's version of structure based decs
|
Gosti Kahanid
Raiders of the Space Brotherhood Of Silent Space
97
|
Posted - 2016.04.24 05:12:21 -
[12] - Quote
Daichi Yamato wrote:Gosti Kahanid wrote:Currently the 250mm Railgun (medium) has a tracking of 0.0205 rad/s, while a Dual 250mm Railgun (large) has a tracking of 0.018rad/s So it seems like they both track about the same, but in reality when they both shoot at a target with a signature Resolution of 125m, the effektive tracking of the large Gun is 0.0056rad/s, because of its signature resolution. In other words, even though both guns show about the same tracking, the large ohne is way more slower than the medium one, and thats why they changed it. The value you see there is still rad/s, but the resolution of all Guns has been increased to 40000, so you can better see how good a Gun is actually tracking So you've just shown that they didn't need a weapon accuracy score, just to modify the existing tracking values. Rad/s is not difficult to grasp. I had a general understanding of how it worked before i joined the game. Weapon accuracy score however, says nothing about how the relative movement between ships affects accuracy. It also has no meaning unless compared to another weapon accuracy score. I cannot tell how well a gun tracks, i can only tell how well it tracks compared to another gun. And so when it comes to the overview i cannot tell if my gun has a good chance or a terrible chance (unless they make 'ship evasion score') Or we could just keep rad/s and angular velocity.
As I said: It still is rad/s, they only increased the Signature radius of every gun to the same value, so you can compare them to each other. Like I have shown in my example, the old system makes it look like that one gun only has about 10% better tracking, while in reality the gun tracs four times as good. There are a lot of people that doesn't know how that the signature Radius of your enemy actually change your tracking. A BS who flies with 0.1rad/s can be hit, while a frig that only has 0.01rad/s is to fast for your gun... So what reason is there for a tracking value when a ship which is faster gets hit, but not the other that flies slower... |
Daichi Yamato
Xero Security and Technologies
3213
|
Posted - 2016.04.24 11:45:53 -
[13] - Quote
Gosti Kahanid wrote: There are a lot of people that doesn't know how that the signature Radius of your enemy actually change your tracking. A BS who flies with 0.1rad/s can be hit, while a frig that only has 0.01rad/s is to fast for your gun... So what reason is there for a tracking value when a ship which is faster gets hit, but not the other that flies slower...
Calling it weapon accuracy score does not change that. Noobs still wont understand why a faster battleship is easier to hit than a slower frigate. Not without someone telling them or making a new column on the overview that modifies angular velocity with sig radius. Its not the tracking score that needed to change, it was the overview if anything.
Having rad/s tells noobs how accuracy is calculated using angular velocity. It can also be visualised. For example, 0.1rad is roughly a minute on a clock. To a noob, weapon accuracy score has no relation to anything on the overview or anything in real life. Its only worth comes from comparing it to other weapons.
What reason is there for it?
EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided"
Daichi Yamato's version of structure based decs
|
Eli Stan
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
468
|
Posted - 2016.04.24 15:19:09 -
[14] - Quote
Moonlit Raid wrote:https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=topics&f=7291 I would have posted here but I can't.
What the HELL is this? I'm given some arbitrary number that is clearly a calculation from other figures but what is it for? why give me some random ass number I assume it's for the purpose of better comparing the accuracy of differently sized weapons. It's neither arbitrary nor random - it's based off of existing numbers, angular tracking divided by sig resolution (not random), then multiplied by 40,000 to give it a human-scale result (not arbitrary).
Quote:when I already have a perfect figure of EXACTLY what the turret's capability is? If you mean angular tracking divided by signature radius of the gun, yes. If you mean angular tracking alone, no, you don't at all have an exact figure of the turret's capability.
Quote:Currently I have a direct comparison between the turrets statistics (rad/sec) to the game world (angular velocity). No you don't. You can have Ship A and Ship B both orbiting you at 0.12 rad/sec, yet your turrets can have wildly different abilities to hit them. Either ship can be target painted, of have MWD on or off, or have different base stats. There's nothing direct about your comparison - you have to take into account many other factors.
Quote: What is this change improving? It's improving direct comparison between two different guns.
For short range guns (pulse, blaster, AC) the scores are generally: Small: 240 to 400 Medium: 30 to 50 Large: 4 to 6 Extra Large: 0.02 to 2.0
For long range guns: Small: 60 to 140 Medium: 6 to 20 Large: 1 to 2 Extra Large: 0.015 to 0.02
I do agree though that it doesn't give much of a sense for the effectiveness against actual ships in space. Which is why I advocated for a Ship Evasion Score to be shown, which would be calculated exactly like the Weapon Accuracy Score is. Angular velocity divided by signature radius times 40000. This would give a frig approaching directly a score of essentially zero, or one orbiting at 500 meters and 500m/s an Evasion Score of around 1100. Which tells you a lot when you know your guns' Accuracy Score. |
Sobaan Tali
Caldari Quick Reaction Force
899
|
Posted - 2016.04.25 03:12:10 -
[15] - Quote
I'm rather curious, but the link is obviously DOA, so...what happened and who done it?
"Tomahawks?"
"----in' A, right?"
"Trouble is, those things cost like a million and a half each."
"----, you pay me half that and I'll hump in some c4 and blow the ---- out of it my own damn self."
|
Teddy KGB
Crushing Power of Gallente Galaxy Spiritus
12
|
Posted - 2016.04.26 19:15:23 -
[16] - Quote
i'm gona quit this game if they do this... i play this game of its hardness.. what the hell? ccp stop it! |
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Mercenary Coalition
3020
|
Posted - 2016.04.26 20:22:58 -
[17] - Quote
Moonlit Raid wrote:Aluanna wrote:Moonlit Raid wrote:Paranoid Loyd wrote:While I do agree it is dumb, it hardly warrants such a reaction. Think of it like this. Your guns used to tell you how they worked, now they don't. What. The. ****. Gonna have to agree with Paranoid here.. You are clearly overreacting. Its obviously just another half-baked idea implemented by CCP, I'm sure they have plans to make it easier to compare to another number.. they just haven't implemented that other number yet.. It warrants such a reaction because as it is currently, the figure presented is not only directly comparable to the overview Except for the other half of the equation that has zero info reflected on the overview. Unless you had some way to see the targets sig radius, you were guessing. Now your guessing methods will change. No need to throw a fit. |
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Mercenary Coalition
3020
|
Posted - 2016.04.26 20:34:29 -
[18] - Quote
Sobaan Tali wrote:I'm rather curious, but the link is obviously DOA, so...what happened and who done it? In the info panel you currently see the tracking speed in rad/s and the signature resolution (400, 125, and 40). For the majority of people, all they look at is the tracking speed since the sig resolution only changes between weapon sizes. Using both of those numbers compared to a target's signature radius and radial velocity, you got your chance to hit formula. For those that understand the formula, either number by itself only tells half of the picture. For some/most people, they tended to only look at tracking speed as the comparable variable. So for a large blaster that has a slightly higher tracking speed than a medium railgun, one would assume the blaster tracks better. Once you factor in the sig resolution, it shows that the blaster has a worse chance to hit than the railgun.
CCP decided to make a number value that accurately compares between weapon systems. They standardized all weapon sizes to an arbitrary sig res (40km in this case) and then do part of the equation for players and showing a new weapon accuracy score. This number accurately shows the relative difference between two different weapons tracking.
For tracking, nothing has changed. The only difference is which part of the formula you are seeing now. |
Memphis Baas
1483
|
Posted - 2016.04.29 15:30:29 -
[19] - Quote
No.
Sig. radius of the enemy doesn't change in combat (except mwd activation). Gun stats don't change (except overheating). However, the angular velocity of the enemy changes A LOT, and there's something we can do about it as a reaction.
So CCP needs to show us a gun stat that is directly comparable to the angular velocity display in the overview, so we can "react" and adjust our flying appropriately.
If the Accuracy Score is what they've decided upon, then THEY NEED TO PUT IT IN THE OVERVIEW, calculated live against all overview entries. So we can see "oh, I can do only 50% vs. that target and 100% vs that target", and/or sort the damn overview with the targets we have the best chance of hitting at the top.
Giving accuracy as a static number in the stupid Show Info page is ******* moronic. |
Eli Stan
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
473
|
Posted - 2016.04.29 20:55:18 -
[20] - Quote
Memphis Baas wrote:Sig. radius of the enemy doesn't change in combat (except mwd activation).
Actually, it does. Things that can change a target's sig radius during combat: MWD, as you say. Target painters. Links. Tactical destroyer defensive mode.
I agree that it's important for the server to supply this information to the client along with the current velocity, distance, etc. information. It's even more important, IMO, for CCP to add an "Evasion" score column to the overview that parallels the Weapon Accuracy Score calculation. |
|
Teddy KGB
Crushing Power of Gallente Galaxy Spiritus
13
|
Posted - 2016.05.03 05:42:43 -
[21] - Quote
god damn ccp what have you done!.. how could you come to this... this is the worst expantion i've ever seen in eve... you change the all game by changing tracking and rebalancing carriers.. do you guys know that fighter never miss for now.. almost. 2 carriers instapop armor recon with 60k ehp without any chance for logis to rep them.. god lord.. why they killed the game.. |
Teddy KGB
Crushing Power of Gallente Galaxy Spiritus
13
|
Posted - 2016.05.03 05:58:43 -
[22] - Quote
sadly i cannot describe my feelings in english.. i'm so mad.. i'm just about to blow up. i really don't see a reason to play it anymore.. they just making everything for people to die more and buy more plex for new ships.. dats the only reason i see.. if you want to win you need to donate and train carrier and you can solo pvp on it. coz damn thanatos cost now like kronos.. |
Teddy KGB
Crushing Power of Gallente Galaxy Spiritus
13
|
Posted - 2016.05.03 06:00:42 -
[23] - Quote
Moonlit Raid wrote:
"Take a look at your weapon accuracy score. You have to guess if you will hit a target or not because the number given isn't any kind of real measurement."
shut up and use rapid launchers!Gäó |
Dave Stark
7949
|
Posted - 2016.05.07 08:44:43 -
[24] - Quote
please bring back the tracking in rads/sec.
honestly - this accuracy score is pretty meaningless and has just replaced actual valuable useful information. i though the current design mantra was to remove bad complexity, not add it. |
Katyushenka
Silicon Dreams
0
|
Posted - 2016.05.08 03:40:08 -
[25] - Quote
Finally decided to train to lasers and accidently found that previous parameter 'tracking speed' is missing! Weapon accuracy score?!. How it is applied to reality?
Let me explain. When I investigate new weapon system (projectiles, blasters) I carefully examine its stats, ammo's infuence and read 3rd party guides (EVE Uni in my case). After theoretic part is done I begin actual testing - let's say - I orbit another ship (or NPC) checking changing angular velocity and damage dealt. After these steps I usualy have initial inspiration on how this weapon system works.
But now - how should I apply this 'weapon accuracy score'? How it is correlating to actual angluar velocity? Yea, I understand that big guns is worse than medium and lasers are worse than blasters in terms of tracking, but this is oversimplification. Somehow I can deal with it intuitively, but imagine someone who is just starting play EVE - he will be confused for sure.
Idea to make things easier is good, but there is the huge difference between simplification and clarification.
+1 to roll back to 'tracking' form 'score' until the better solution. |
Silverbackyererse
The Church of Awesome
209
|
Posted - 2016.05.08 03:44:48 -
[26] - Quote
Also confused by this unheralded (?) change.
Has anyone from CCP commented on this anywhere? I did look fleetingly of course. |
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |