EVE Search - trajectory analysis

Search EVE-Online forums for:

All Channels

Skill Discussions

trajectory analysis

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] :: one page

Author	Topic
SETH KAIN Caldari Noir.	Posted - 2008.09.02 14:32:00 - [1] Reads 5% bonus per skill level to weapon turret accuracy falloff. I'm kinda confused as to what this really means. Does this mean that the rounds have greater range(distance) or refer to better accurcy on a target. Is it worth it to train the 20 days to level 5? Thanks in advance. SETH
Cae'phon	Posted - 2008.09.02 14:44:00 - [2] For Turrets you have two Values that effect range, Optimal Range (which can be effected by ammor type) and Accuracy falloff. The Optimal Range is the best range that you turrets will track at, and the accuracy falloff is the up-most range that turrent will reach. (ie. Optimal range 11km Accuracy Falloff 8km= Best hit at 11km, can still hit them at 19km). Ammo type will only effect Optimal Range, and not Accuracy Falloff, the skill you are talking about will raise your Accuracy Falloff from 8km to 8.4 km if it's the first skill. ie. @ 8km Falloff Level 1 = 8.4 km Level 2 = 8.8 km Level 3 = 9.2 km Level 4 = 9.6 km Level 5 = 10 km Hope that helps
Drykor Minmatar Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.09.02 15:44:00 - [3] Originally by: Cae'phon Edited by: Cae''phon on 02/09/2008 14:50:40 Edited by: Cae''phon on 02/09/2008 14:50:01 For Turrets you have two Values that effect range, Optimal Range (which can be effected by ammor type) and Accuracy falloff. The Optimal Range is the best range that you turrets will track at, and the accuracy falloff is the up-most range that turrent will reach. (ie. Optimal range 11km Accuracy Falloff 8km= Best hit at 11km, can still hit them at 19km). Ammo type will only effect Optimal Range, and not Accuracy Falloff, the skill you are talking about will raise your Accuracy Falloff from 8km to 8.4 km if it's the first skill. ie. @ 8km Falloff Level 1 = 8.4 km Level 2 = 8.8 km Level 3 = 9.2 km Level 4 = 9.6 km Level 5 = 10 km Hope that helps, & this guide should help as well. Not completely right. Optimal range has nothing to do with tracking, it only tells you that WITHIN this range you will do the listed damage for the gun. This can be at 10 meters up to the optimal. This is a seperate mechanism from tracking, as most of the time you won't actually hit something at 10 meters. After the optimal, the falloff comes into effect. Previous poster didn't describe falloff correctly either, say you have an optimal of 11 km and falloff of 8 km, you will do 50% damage at 19 km and 0% at 27km. Also, CCP's own guide isn't totally correct.
Asuka SoryuLangley	Posted - 2008.09.02 16:27:00 - [4] Previous poster is not correct either. At optimal you have 100% chance to hit (you should at least), at optimal + falloff you have 50% chance to hit, at optimal + 2*falloff you have 0% chance to hit. This is how it is intended to work.
Sweet Rosella	Posted - 2008.09.02 16:30:00 - [5] Edited by: Sweet Rosella on 02/09/2008 16:37:36 It will make a difference but you will hardly notice it, my advice is if you fight in fall off then train it, specially the close range guns such as blasters, auto cannons, I'm not sure about the laser type they seem to have funny ways of doing things. edit BTW some ships have a bonus to fall off, in these cases your will benefit from it
Krissam Nomads Veritas Immortalis	Posted - 2008.09.02 16:34:00 - [6] that is only correct if you neglect tracking. -------- LOL I have no sig!
Drykor Minmatar Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.09.02 16:41:00 - [7] Originally by: Asuka SoryuLangley Previous poster is not correct either. At optimal you have 100% chance to hit (you should at least), at optimal + falloff you have 50% chance to hit, at optimal + 2*falloff you have 0% chance to hit. This is how it is intended to work. Which translates into the 100/50/0% damage I mentioned.
Asuka SoryuLangley	Posted - 2008.09.02 16:49:00 - [8] Originally by: Drykor Originally by: Asuka SoryuLangley Previous poster is not correct either. At optimal you have 100% chance to hit (you should at least), at optimal + falloff you have 50% chance to hit, at optimal + 2*falloff you have 0% chance to hit. This is how it is intended to work. Which translates into the 100/50/0% damage I mentioned. it is absolutly not the same thing: you can still do your perfect damage if you hit, but you will not hit 100% of the time; you cannot say your damage is going to be the halved (50%) becouse you do not know how many time you will actually hit
Lightmar	Posted - 2008.09.02 17:37:00 - [9] Hypothetically, if you are in optimal range of being hit with two fists, you will get two black eyes. If you are only in range of one fist, you will get one black eye, or maybe a bloody nose. Still, it will be half the damage
Asuka SoryuLangley	Posted - 2008.09.02 17:57:00 - [10] Originally by: Lightmar Hypothetically, if you are in optimal range of being hit with two fists, you will get two black eyes. If you are only in range of one fist, you will get one black eye, or maybe a bloody nose. Still, it will be half the damage You are assuming that you will hit 50% with 2 hits, but you could even hit twice or miss it twice. Consider this in a scale of 100 or 1000 hits and you'll understand, that's probability baby.

Matalino Gallente Ki Tech Industries	Posted - 2008.09.02 18:09:00 - [11] Edited by: Matalino on 02/09/2008 18:13:16 Originally by: Drykor Which translates into the 100/50/0% damage I mentioned. Which is only a useful approximation, but is not strickly speaking correct. Your chance to hit (with both you and your target stationary) is 100% / 50% / 6.25% at less than optimal / optimal + falloff / optimal + 2xfalloff. But most people don't care about that 6.25% chance to hit so simply call it zero. Originally by: Lightmar Hypothetically, if you are in optimal range of being hit with two fists, you will get two black eyes. If you are only in range of one fist, you will get one black eye, or maybe a bloody nose. Still, it will be half the damage That assumes that you get hit in the eye both times. Hit quality is highly variable. With 2 shots, both having a 100% chance to hit, you could deal as little as 1x damage or as much as 6x damage, with the median falling on the expected 2x damage. However, with a 50% change to hit, your expected average damage is actually a little bit less than 40%
SETH KAIN Caldari Noir.	Posted - 2008.09.03 12:55:00 - [12] Thanks for the replies. Honestly, is it worth the 20 days to train?
Windslip Gallente	Posted - 2008.09.03 15:39:00 - [13] Only if you haven't got anything better to train
Grarr Dexx Amarr The Cosa Nostra	Posted - 2008.09.03 15:49:00 - [14] Don't you need that shit for Large artillery spec or am I getting something wrong here?
Lubomir Penev interimo	Posted - 2008.09.03 15:52:00 - [15] Originally by: SETH KAIN Thanks for the replies. Honestly, is it worth the 20 days to train? For large autocannons it adds a lot, nice on all autocannons. Nice with large blasters and NULL, not really worth it for other guns and especially lasers. -- I'm done whining about AFs, it looks like they are making them right \o/
Matalino Gallente Ki Tech Industries	Posted - 2008.09.03 16:34:00 - [16] Originally by: Grarr Dexx Don't you need that shit for Large artillery spec or am I getting something wrong here? That is Motion Prediction that is needed for Large T2 Short-range turret specs. I would suggest starting with Trajectory Analysis IV, and then if you find that you are using blasters or autocannons that take advantage of falloff range train it up further as time permits.
SETH KAIN Caldari Noir.	Posted - 2008.09.03 17:38:00 - [17] Duh, I should have mentioned that I'm using light, medium, and large blasters for pvp purposes. Seems like this skill is worth training to level 5. Any other thoughts?
Twarda Sztuka	Posted - 2008.09.08 12:47:00 - [18] Edited by: Twarda Sztuka on 08/09/2008 12:47:12 Originally by: Drykor Not completely right... Originally by: Asuka SoryuLangley Previous poster is not correct either... And the funny thing is that at Optimal+2*Falloff it is not 0% as well. It is actually just under 5%.
Scoutette	Posted - 2008.09.08 15:06:00 - [19] Originally by: Twarda Sztuka Edited by: Twarda Sztuka on 08/09/2008 12:47:12 Originally by: Drykor Not completely right... Originally by: Asuka SoryuLangley Previous poster is not correct either... And the funny thing is that at Optimal+2*Falloff it is not 0% as well. It is actually just under 5%. And funnier still that it is actually just over 5%. Specificly 5.815% effective DPS or a 6.25% chance to hit.
Nocturnal Avenger Black Plague.	Posted - 2008.09.08 16:12:00 - [20] Originally by: Scoutette And funnier still that it is actually just over 5%. Specificly 5.815% effective DPS or a 6.25% chance to hit. And epicly funny: I have seen someone hit slightly further than optimal + 2*falloff. Something that should not be possible at all. - Carebear Pirate -

Scoutette	Posted - 2008.09.08 20:57:00 - [21] Originally by: Nocturnal Avenger And epicly funny: I have seen someone hit slightly further than optimal + 2falloff. Something that should not be possible at all. ??? You should* be able to hit further than optimal + 2falloff. In fact, at optimal + 2.57757falloff all hits that you do make will be wrecking hits. Of course your chance to hit that far out will be only 1%, but that is a minor detail.

Pages: [1] :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.