Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Areen Sassel
132
|
Posted - 2016.07.31 21:39:43 -
[121] - Quote
So that is a good example of the common error in this thread:
" If I know my artillery has a tracking value of 0.013 (radians/sec), then I know that IGÇÖll be able to track and hit anyone on my overview who has an angular velocity less than 0.013, assuming theyGÇÖre in my optimal range."
No, you don't, not unless you know the target's signature radius - and if you estimate that correctly you then have a fiddle factor to multiply by to find the angular velocity you can hit. Exactly the same is true in the WAS world - the fiddle factor is just different. |
Gibbeous Moon
Heimdal Freight and Manufacture Inc
21
|
Posted - 2016.07.31 22:18:48 -
[122] - Quote
Magnus Rexana wrote:
That being said, I now have an insatiable desire to shoot a 40km wide space frog...
If I'd ever come across a 40km wide space frog I'd just be runnin'....
|
Brokk Witgenstein
Extreme Agony The Wraithguard.
512
|
Posted - 2016.07.31 22:30:22 -
[123] - Quote
I'd just lay off the LSD for a day. |
Sergey Hawk
The Sith Syndicate REFORD
123
|
Posted - 2016.08.02 12:31:58 -
[124] - Quote
Areen Sassel wrote: So that is a good example of the common error in this thread:
" If I know my artillery has a tracking value of 0.013 (radians/sec), then I know that IGÇÖll be able to track and hit anyone on my overview who has an angular velocity less than 0.013, assuming theyGÇÖre in my optimal range."
No, you don't, not unless you know the target's signature radius - and if you estimate that correctly you then have a fiddle factor to multiply by to find the angular velocity you can hit. Exactly the same is true in the WAS world - the fiddle factor is just different.
Common error in this thread that some people believe that WAS is a awesome improvement but they are wrong. Is the old system did not takes into account signature radius? In calculating the old formula already used the signature radius. But CCP make super-duper improvement just multiplying OLD values by 100 and called new value WAS. Do you really think that this is improves some game mechanics??? Now we need some WAS analog for angular velocity in overview column. With OLD system you fit cruiser with blasters, you know your blasters tracking speed in rad/s and you have angular velocity in overview. In combat with another cruiser, if you do not remember your blaster tracking speed, you can quickly look blaster stats and all you need is to compare tracking speed with angular velocity in overview because all cruisers have approximately the same size of signature radius. We are not talking about MWD. With the old system we do not need to make any calculations. With new system you need to convert WAS in rad/s. Yes, it's simple calculations but it's a waste of time! Why, during the battle, I do have to think about these calculations? WHY??
Lauda about CCP New camera:
It's a sh.tbox! It zooms like crazy and centering before rotation is a disaster. It's amazing - all these dev teams, and you make a piece of crap like this.
|
Dirty Forum Alt
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
370
|
Posted - 2016.08.02 14:19:06 -
[125] - Quote
I'm not opposed to the existence of the new Weapon Accuracy Score - and I don't think anybody else is either.
We just want the old rad/s value back *as well*.
Put it in the spot that currently says "40.0km" for literally *every single module in the entire game*.... |
Althalus Stenory
Flying Blacksmiths
62
|
Posted - 2016.08.09 11:45:46 -
[126] - Quote
@CCPlease read that thread and hear us ! Thanks !
(i'm feeling like I was summoning god... lol, sadly it's common knowledge "he" never answers) |
Lunarisse Aspenstar
Societas Imperialis Sceptri Coronaeque
840
|
Posted - 2016.08.09 12:20:56 -
[127] - Quote
Dirty Forum Alt wrote:I'm not opposed to the existence of the new Weapon Accuracy Score - and I don't think anybody else is either.
We just want the old rad/s value back *as well*.
Put it in the spot that currently says "40.0km" for literally *every single module in the entire game*....
This is my issue/concern. I don't mind the existence of the new WAS. But please give me back my data! |
Soltys
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
152
|
Posted - 2016.10.07 00:07:31 -
[128] - Quote
Can we please get rad/s back into the game ?
How the hell are people supposed to quickly relate overview readings to their weapons' / drones' stats (sig radius vs. resolution aside - which it doesn't address in any way or form either way) ?
What kind of ridiculous idea (and whose ?) was that either way ?
If you do crazy nonsense like that, please add damn CHECKBOX so we can retain normal values without being forced to convert it back to something comparable. Then your new (?) target audience can have their pretty kindergarten values and normal players can have well - normal values.
Jita Flipping Inc.: Solmp / Kovl
|
Arec Bardwin
1915
|
Posted - 2016.10.07 01:24:08 -
[129] - Quote
Wait, CCP removed rad/s from ingame info? Relying on old eft installs to get the tracking info is just |
Soltys
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
153
|
Posted - 2016.10.07 01:55:57 -
[130] - Quote
Arec Bardwin wrote:Wait, CCP removed rad/s from ingame info? Relying on old eft installs to get the tracking info is just
I reedited my initial reply. It's not that they removed it - they scaled tracking of every gun/drone to same 40km resolution - which made them directly comparable, but PITA to relate to angular velocity in overview.
Jita Flipping Inc.: Solmp / Kovl
|
|
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
18265
|
Posted - 2016.10.07 05:22:01 -
[131] - Quote
Tau Cabalander wrote:You know, you could always shoot stuff and observe the results.
Example: I know I can thwak a frigate with an arty Tornado at 30 km. I've never done the math.
There is even a test server.
I haven't run the maths on most of my toys for years, I just sort o know if I'm going to hit stuff or not. |
Arec Bardwin
1915
|
Posted - 2016.10.07 13:00:41 -
[132] - Quote
When we've got the new awesome weapon accuracy stat added could we at least have it shown with the range and damage info in the mouse-over display for weapons? That would actually be useful when being TDed and such. |
Soltys
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
154
|
Posted - 2016.10.07 21:39:56 -
[133] - Quote
TBH "normalized" (or however to call it) angular velocity column in overview would be damn awesome now to have.
The tracking related part in chance-to-hit has always been (target_angular / target_sig) / (gun_track / gun_res).
Now after scan resolution changes, it's essentially (target_angular / target_sig) / (gun_track / 40km). So instead of displaying actual angular velocity, display "normalized" angular matching 40km signature radius. Then we have simply: norm_angular / gun_track. Something that is always directly comparable in every situation.
Jita Flipping Inc.: Solmp / Kovl
|
Tornii
Federal Defense Union Gallente Federation
90
|
Posted - 2016.10.22 10:30:56 -
[134] - Quote
Ferrotsmite Anzomi wrote:People don't compare medium guns to small guns... or to large guns, they compare them to the ships they will be shooting. This. The change essentially removed the ability to make informed adjustments to ship maneuvering while shooting a target. |
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |