Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
MinorFreak
Militaris Industries Cascade Imminent
13
|
Posted - 2012.02.13 20:54:00 -
[1] - Quote
say i have a ship that has a radar sensor strength of 181 versus a falcon with the below setup [Falcon, tech2] Medium Remote Armor Repair System II Covert Ops Cloaking Device II Covert Cynosural Field Generator I Cynosural Field Generator I 10MN MicroWarpdrive II ECM - Ion Field Projector II 2x ECM - Multispectral Jammer II ECM - Phase Inverter II ECM - Spatial Destabilizer II ECM - White Noise Generator II 1600mm Reinforced Rolled Tungsten Plates I 2x Signal Distortion Amplifier II 2x Medium Particle Dispersion Augmentor I 2x Warrior II
if the falcon puts all ecm modules on me, what's the percentage he won't jam me for 3 cycles (one minute)? And can someone show me what the Bernoulli formula would look like for such a case? |
Sprite Can
31
|
Posted - 2012.02.13 21:17:00 -
[2] - Quote
Use EFT? Refreshing Lemon-Lime~ |
MinorFreak
Militaris Industries Cascade Imminent
13
|
Posted - 2012.02.13 21:27:00 -
[3] - Quote
hmmm...yeah thx, i was trying to get eveHQ to show ecm calculations. problem is, eft doesn't show overloaded stats and the projected effects aren't boosted by rigs, skills, modules of the jamming ship...are they? |
King Rothgar
Autocannons Anonymous Late Night Alliance
205
|
Posted - 2012.02.13 21:50:00 -
[4] - Quote
EFT has this ability you know. Anyways, assuming he overheats the 2x multispecs and the radar, it's 25.7% per 20s cycle. Easy way to the solution for 3x cycles is to put 3x as many jammers on the target ship since 3x falcons at once is equal to one falcon over 3x cycles. Answer, 59% chance of jam.
Hans Jagerblitzen for CSM7 |
Alice Katsuko
Terra Incognita Intrepid Crossing
65
|
Posted - 2012.02.14 02:30:00 -
[5] - Quote
Piece of **** forums ate my post, so you're not getting a nice and detailed explanation. Blame CCP for their inability to properly rip off an open-source forum after a year of "effort."
For your falcon versus something with 181 sensor strength, chance of all jammers to fail F = (((1 - (9.74687 / 181))^2) * ((1 - (4.87344 / 181))^3)) * (1 - (14.62031 / 181))^3 = 0.758194196^3 = 0.435854332
A generic formula would be something like:
F = (((1 - (M / S))^m) * ((1 - (O / S))^o)) * (1 - (R / S)^r)^n Where F is chance for all jammers to fail, S is target sensor strength, M is multispectral jammer strength, m is number of multispectral jammers (ditto for O and R), and n is number of 20-second cycles.
Edit: There are only three types of jammers in practice -- multispectral, off-racial, and racial. That's because all racial jammers have identical off-racial and racial strengths, so you can merge them for calculations. |
MinorFreak
Militaris Industries Cascade Imminent
13
|
Posted - 2012.02.14 08:37:00 -
[6] - Quote
thx, alice. that's exactly what i needed. just to make sure though, that 43.6% chance to fail is for 3 cycles, yes? if so that's really encouraging indeed |
Bruce Kemp
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
5
|
Posted - 2012.02.14 13:32:00 -
[7] - Quote
Alice Katsuko wrote:Piece of **** forums ate my post, so you're not getting a nice and detailed explanation. Blame CCP for their inability to properly rip off an open-source forum after a year of "effort."
For your falcon versus something with 181 sensor strength, chance of all jammers to fail F = (((1 - (9.74687 / 181))^2) * ((1 - (4.87344 / 181))^3)) * (1 - (14.62031 / 181))^3 = 0.758194196^3 = 0.435854332
A generic formula would be something like:
F = (((1 - (M / S))^m) * ((1 - (O / S))^o)) * (1 - (R / S)^r)^n Where F is chance for all jammers to fail, S is target sensor strength, M is multispectral jammer strength, m is number of multispectral jammers (ditto for O and R), and n is number of 20-second cycles.
Edit: There are only three types of jammers in practice -- multispectral, off-racial, and racial. That's because all racial jammers have identical off-racial and racial strengths, so you can merge them for calculations.
Are you a maths teacher or something.
Nerf ECM.
|
Luba Cibre
39
|
Posted - 2012.02.14 17:44:00 -
[8] - Quote
Bruce Kemp wrote:Alice Katsuko wrote:Piece of **** forums ate my post, so you're not getting a nice and detailed explanation. Blame CCP for their inability to properly rip off an open-source forum after a year of "effort."
For your falcon versus something with 181 sensor strength, chance of all jammers to fail F = (((1 - (9.74687 / 181))^2) * ((1 - (4.87344 / 181))^3)) * (1 - (14.62031 / 181))^3 = 0.758194196^3 = 0.435854332
A generic formula would be something like:
F = (((1 - (M / S))^m) * ((1 - (O / S))^o)) * (1 - (R / S)^r)^n Where F is chance for all jammers to fail, S is target sensor strength, M is multispectral jammer strength, m is number of multispectral jammers (ditto for O and R), and n is number of 20-second cycles.
Edit: There are only three types of jammers in practice -- multispectral, off-racial, and racial. That's because all racial jammers have identical off-racial and racial strengths, so you can merge them for calculations. Are you a maths teacher or something. Nerf ECM. It's really simple maths, but with all the decimals, it looks complicated. |
MinorFreak
Militaris Industries Cascade Imminent
13
|
Posted - 2012.02.14 18:44:00 -
[9] - Quote
i love this formula because i can use it as a template, assuming standard null-sec pvp fit for falcons is 2 multispec and 1 of each faction ecm, plus a microwarpdrive. And thank you for making the values for lvl5 skills and for the fitting i described regarding rigs and modules. All i have to do now is play around with the "181" number without figuring out the tiddlywinks of the math.
F = (((1 - (9.74687 / S))^2) * ((1 - (4.87344 / S))^3)) * (1 - (14.62031 / S))^3
i was thinking of a curse with 4 conjunctive ECCM. I'm not sure if my opponents regularly overheat their ecms. is overheating a huge part of pvp? being a cheapskate carebear overheating seems expensive and risky during brainless mission running so it's a hard habit to break. |
King Rothgar
Autocannons Anonymous Late Night Alliance
208
|
Posted - 2012.02.14 19:08:00 -
[10] - Quote
Different mods can be overheated for different lengths of time and have very different repair bills. Guns, for example, can only be overheated for around a minute and can easily cost 10-15M isk to repair for BS class weapons. On the other hand, a point and web can be overheated for 2-3 minutes at a time and cost a measly 50k isk to repair afterward. I think the price is related to the amount of minerals needed to make the module but I'm unsure on that.
In regards to your curse, I don't recommend ECCM at all. The falcon has a 4-5s targeting delay after it decloaks and then will take another 4-5s to lock you. That's more than enough time to close any gap, lock him and cap him out before he can ever activate his ECM. Once he's capped out, he can't jam you. And I have yet to see a falcon fit a cap booster to counter this. The cookie cutter nano-curse is the single best ship for taking out falcons/rooks solo, no need for gimmick fits with it.
Hans Jagerblitzen for CSM7 |
|
Alice Katsuko
Terra Incognita Intrepid Crossing
65
|
Posted - 2012.02.14 20:15:00 -
[11] - Quote
MinorFreak, Falcon fitttings tend to vary quite a bit. Most fit a heavier tank, but it really depends on the situation. You're assuming a Falcon that focuses almost entirely on jamming, which is a worst-case scenario, and so isn't a bad assumption to make.
In general, I wouldn't suggest fitting four ECCM modules on a Curse, or on any other ship. If you're facing that much ECM pressure, you need backup, not more sensor strength.
I don't know if ECM piloats overheat their jammers. I regularly overheat remote reppers when flying a Logistics ship, but that's because no amount of nanite repair paste I can conceivably use during an engagement will cost more than a properly fitted fleet ship.
Bruce Kemp wrote:Are you a maths teacher or something. Nerf ECM. Law student. But as was said, it's very basic math. These forums do not have a good way of writing mathematical formulas, sadly, so it looks needlessly complicated. The decimals don't help much, either. But most calculations in EVE are fairly simple, come to think of it.
It's fairly basic probability. I'll try to explain in a bit more detail if anyone is interested, although a good high-school math textbook should cover the subject in much more detail. The odds of two or more events occurring together is the product of the odds of each of those events occurring independently. For example, three events 1, 2, and 3 can occur with a probability of A, B and C, respectively; the probability of all three events occurring is A * B * C. If A = B = C, we can write the probability of all three occurring as A^3 instead.
The formula I wrote does the same thing. Multiplying the odds of each jammer failing gives us the odds of all of them failing. Just since there are multiple jammers with identical success/failure odds, it makes more sense to use exponents. |
MinorFreak
Militaris Industries Cascade Imminent
13
|
Posted - 2012.02.14 23:26:00 -
[12] - Quote
well, see the thing is that falcon i'm assuming is going to be quite a ways out from the gate while a bubble goes up and mr.sabre here slams into me thereby ruining any ideas of fitting a MWD. My primary target is going to be the sabre. In fact, once the sabre is down i'll happily crash the gate to GTFO.
[Sabre, Arthenis's Sabre 2] 6x 200mm AutoCannon II (Republic Fleet EMP S) Improved Cloaking Device II Interdiction Sphere Launcher I (Warp Disrupt Probe) Limited 1MN MicroWarpdrive I J5b Phased Prototype Warp Scrambler I F-90 Positional Sensor Subroutines (Scan Resolution) Medium Azeotropic Ward Salubrity I 2x Nanofiber Internal Structure II Small Projectile Burst Aerator I Small Projectile Collision Accelerator I
an overloaded curse with 4 eccms gives 275 radar sensor strength. plugging that into the template gives F = (((1 - (9.74687 / 275))^2) * ((1 - (4.87344 / 275))^3)) * (1 - (14.62031 / 275))^3 f= (0.9304 * 0.9478 * 0.9468)^3 = 0.8350^3 f= 58.2% chance that the falcon will fail to lock over a 1 minute period vs 43.6% with the pilgrim |
Soldarius
United Highsec Front The 99 Percent
155
|
Posted - 2012.02.15 06:02:00 -
[13] - Quote
Recon 5 Falcon pilot here. 4 ECCMs are way too much. This will get you killed due to no tank at all. The Falcon gets about a 14 ECM strength with racials. If he is rainbow fit, he will likely only have 1 Amarr jammer. This is the typical configuration.
All recons have a very high natural sensor strength. Curse has 28. Just one ECCM will boost you to 56, meaning he will have a very good chance 1-(14/56)=75% of missing his jam attempt. Even the added possibility of his 3-4 additional off racials will not add a significant possibility of getting jammed.
The most likely event sequence is that the sabre will uncloak and pop bubble. He then begins to try locking you. Falcon will uncloak, wait out it's sensor recalibration delay (minimum of 5 seconds) and then try locking you. So you should have a good 10 seconds before you even get locked.
Use this time to lock targets, deploy your drones, and activate ECCM. Get moving a bit to reduce incoming damage. Now comes the hard part, ignore the Falcon and kill the Sabre. DIC is not just keeping you pinned, he has the majority of the dps. Killing him will free you to either gtfo or go for the Falcon as well.
If you are not jammed,.neut the crap out of the sabre and assign drones. Your buffer should be enough to handle him. Once the sabre is gone, the Falcon should screw off on his own. If he doesn't, MWD directly at him and ruin his day.
If the Falcon jams you first time, having your drones out and on aggressive will enable them to auto-aggress the first ship in range that red-boxes you. If the Falcon is out of your drone control range (very likely unless he is stupid), they will go after the Sabre as soon as he fires/points you. Be patient and don't panic. If you popped medium drones, he'll go down fast.
Once the Sabre is gone and his bubble dies, you are pretty much in control. You can try to close with the Falcon and engage with drones, or loot and gtfo. Falcon pilot would be a complete idiot if he sticks around. But you never know.
If you can get into neut range of the Falcon, by all means do it. He may panic and just freeze up. It only takes a trickle of cap to do a minimum range warp or activate a single jammer. So time your neuts to keep him capped out. This is also important because he may be smartbomb fit. With only drones to deal damage, neuting is very important to keep them from getting wiped out. "How do you kill that which has no life?" |
MinorFreak
Militaris Industries Cascade Imminent
13
|
Posted - 2012.02.15 07:22:00 -
[14] - Quote
tyvm, soldarius. uhm...i know their fits. they are very predictable. their fits haven't altered in over 4 months. their tactics are probably complacent. they will engage solo targets up to battleship level. I'm sure once their efficiency drops they'll start altering their fits but until then i assume i'll get in one or three kills before they adapt.
uhm...i'm getting hints that medium drones won't work as well as light versus destroyer sized targets. http://www.evealtruist.com/2012/02/drones-vs-frigates.html#more |
Tora Bushido
Count With Teddy Mercenaries Stay Calm Don't Panic
14
|
Posted - 2012.02.15 11:13:00 -
[15] - Quote
You forgot the "human fail factor" in this formula....... My resists to bad posts are 78-89-83-90 ....... The metal head plate increased it by 5%.
|
Smiling Menace
Star Nebulae Holdings Inc.
131
|
Posted - 2012.02.15 11:18:00 -
[16] - Quote
Tora Bushido wrote:You forgot the "human fail factor" in this formula.......
Heh, this is EVE. That comes as standard. |
Biced
Dookie on the flowah
5
|
Posted - 2012.02.15 11:20:00 -
[17] - Quote
MinorFreak wrote:tyvm, soldarius. uhm...i know their fits. they are very predictable. their fits haven't altered in over 4 months. their tactics are probably complacent. they will engage solo targets up to battleship level. I'm sure once their efficiency drops they'll start altering their fits but until then i assume i'll get in one or three kills before they adapt. uhm...i'm getting hints that medium drones won't work as well as light versus destroyer sized targets. http://www.evealtruist.com/2012/02/drones-vs-frigates.html#more
very nice link.
you should use hammer IIs and if you go shield id used 2 eccm max on a curse or a low backup + 1 overheated eccm not more than that. reason you should use hammers is cause you will cap the saber out right away and he will be moving in perfect spped for hammers to track him uless like said in your link he sits still. also if you fit 4 eccm, you armor tank the curse? cause if not the saber will kill you before your drones finish him off.
so id say hammers 1 overheated eccm and a back up array. RF point and go mess that facon up as well =p |
MinorFreak
Militaris Industries Cascade Imminent
13
|
Posted - 2012.02.15 11:41:00 -
[18] - Quote
Smiling Menace wrote:Tora Bushido wrote:You forgot the "human fail factor" in this formula....... Heh, this is EVE. That comes as standard. oh for sure. like i'm a carebear going up solo against an extremely experienced bunch of gatecampers preying on people who don't read intel chat. i'm sure everything will be 'DUCKY' and i'll die in a fire soon after logging on after all this mental diarrhea.
As for drones i'm going with 10 hammerheads and 10 warriors. an AB plus warp scrambler should do the trick nicely since the primary target of mine always fits an MWD and a SCRAM. I'm assuming a 60/40 chance of success in ganking the sabre even if things go as planned.
Yes, i am definitely going to be *GASP* armor tanked in null sec without an MWD. very unconventional and full of fail i'm sure. then again, i'm not planning on escaping bubbles but running towards them, so to speak. I know...silly ideas these carebears have in nullsec. *mutter mutter*
|
Biced
Dookie on the flowah
5
|
Posted - 2012.02.15 11:51:00 -
[19] - Quote
MinorFreak wrote:Smiling Menace wrote:Tora Bushido wrote:You forgot the "human fail factor" in this formula....... Heh, this is EVE. That comes as standard. oh for sure. like i'm a carebear going up solo against an extremely experienced bunch of gatecampers preying on people who don't read intel chat. i'm sure everything will be 'DUCKY' and i'll die in a fire soon after logging on after all this mental diarrhea. As for drones i'm going with 10 hammerheads and 10 warriors. an AB plus warp scrambler should do the trick nicely since the primary target of mine always fits an MWD and a SCRAM. I'm assuming a 60/40 chance of success in ganking the sabre even if things go as planned. Yes, i am definitely going to be *GASP* armor tanked in null sec without an MWD. very unconventional and full of fail i'm sure. then again, i'm not planning on escaping bubbles but running towards them, so to speak. I know...silly ideas these carebears have in nullsec. *mutter mutter*
Okay. let me start of by saying this. sabe gets a snigle mwd pulse on you after that the scram and the mwd shut off (as soon as you get a lock) you med drones shred him in about 40sec. then you either mwd out of the bubble and warp to a safe. or you go after the faclon. could also just wait out the aggro timer and jump.
if you have 1 overheated eccm and a back up array and they have 1-2 falcon 1-2 saber you should **** em all.
so id use a nano curse with a mwd but w/e armor will work just as well and if you go armor why not use a 1600plate pilgrim?
forgot to add you are super over doing that eccm thing your dps is drones so you only need to get one lock. in which you cap him dry and put your drones on him. when you get that lock the falcon missed his jamms so you have like 20 sec which is more than 2 neut cycles by that time he is in low shield and has no cap. even if the falcon does get a lucky jamm on you the saber will die shortly after.
DO IT silly carebear i belive in you! |
MinorFreak
Militaris Industries Cascade Imminent
13
|
Posted - 2012.02.15 20:30:00 -
[20] - Quote
Biced wrote:minorfreak wrote:Biced wrote:MinorFreak wrote:tyvm, soldarius. uhm...i know their fits. they are very predictable. their fits haven't altered in over 4 months. their tactics are probably complacent. they will engage solo targets up to battleship level. I'm sure once their efficiency drops they'll start altering their fits but until then i assume i'll get in one or three kills before they adapt. uhm...i'm getting hints that medium drones won't work as well as light versus destroyer sized targets. http://www.evealtruist.com/2012/02/drones-vs-frigates.html#more very nice link. you should use hammer IIs and if you go shield id used 2 eccm max on a curse or a low backup + 1 overheated eccm not more than that. reason you should use hammers is cause you will cap the saber out right away and he will be moving in perfect speed for hammers to track him uless like said in your link he sits still. also if you fit 4 eccm, you armor tank the curse? cause if not the saber will kill you before your drones finish him off. so id say hammers 1 overheated eccm and a back up array. RF point and go mess that falcon up as well =p As for drones i'm going with 10 hammerheads and 10 warriors. an AB plus warp scrambler should do the trick nicely since the primary target of mine always fits an MWD and a SCRAM. I'm assuming a 60/40 chance of success in ganking the sabre even if things go as planned. Yes, i am definitely going to be *GASP* armor tanked in null sec without an MWD. very unconventional and full of fail i'm sure. then again, i'm not planning on escaping bubbles but running towards them, so to speak. I know...silly ideas these carebears have in nullsec. *mutter mutter* Okay. let me start of by saying this. sabe gets a snigle mwd pulse on you after that the scram and the mwd shut off (as soon as you get a lock) you med drones shred him in about 40sec. then you either mwd out of the bubble and warp to a safe. or you go after the faclon. could also just wait out the aggro timer and jump. if you have 1 overheated eccm and a back up array and they have 1-2 falcon 1-2 saber you should **** em all. so id use a nano curse with a mwd but w/e armor will work just as well and if you go armor why not use a 1600plate pilgrim? forgot to add you are super over doing that eccm thing your dps is drones so you only need to get one lock. in which you cap him dry and put your drones on him. when you get that lock the falcon missed his jamms so you have like 20 sec which is more than 2 neut cycles by that time he is in low shield and has no cap. even if the falcon does get a lucky jamm on you the saber will die shortly after. DO IT silly carebear i belive in you! okay, the problem with an MWD on my ship is that the sabre has a scrambler, and twice the base max velocity. The other thing is i'd rather have a 181 sensor strength than a greatly reduced one with less eccm. [Pilgrim, yogi the bear] Covert Ops Cloaking Device II 2x Medium Energy Neutralizer II Covert Cynosural Field Generator I 10MN Afterburner II Warp Scrambler II 3x Conjunctive Radar ECCM Scanning Array I Damage Control II Medium Armor Repairer II 2x Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane II 1600mm Reinforced Rolled Tungsten Plates I 2x Medium Drone Durability Enhancer I 5x Hammerhead II 5x Warrior II 5x Warrior II 5x Hammerhead II
|
|
MinorFreak
Militaris Industries Cascade Imminent
13
|
Posted - 2012.02.17 20:13:00 -
[21] - Quote
the hammerhead has the same orbital velocity as the sabre has base velocity. i'm hoping this will allow it to trail the violenced boat. I'm not really sure if going with the vespa with 510m/s is the smarter move for a slight overtake.
|
Dethbringer1
NoWar4Me
0
|
Posted - 2012.02.22 19:01:00 -
[22] - Quote
Are you a maths teacher or something.
Nerf ECM. [/quote] It's really simple maths, but with all the decimals, it looks complicated.[/quote]
Haven't had a math class since 10th grade algebra 25 years ago and seems perfectly understandable to me.
oops forgot I studied to test out of algebra in college about 7 years ago. |
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |