EVE Search - How turrets work, for newer players

All Channels

Warfare & Tactics

How turrets work, for newer players

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Cattegirn Rampant SR	Posted - 2010.01.03 11:30:00 - [1] First article on the page Some interesting things about tracking and signature resolution that might be useful for newer players. Strategy articles and PVP training
Marko Riva Adamant Inc.	Posted - 2010.01.03 13:36:00 - [2] I'm not sure sig radius is measured in cubic meters :P Apart from that little factoid I rather like how it emphasises tracking being an important part of the damage calculation, most people don't understand when you say "tracking=damage". ----------- I think, therefore I'm single. New projectile damage PDF Alliance creation service
Cattegirn Rampant SR	Posted - 2010.01.03 14:57:00 - [3] Corrected that, thanks. I pretty much rely on the forum for proofing Strategy articles, PVP training
Intigo Amarr Rionnag Alba Triumvirate.	Posted - 2010.01.03 15:15:00 - [4] "How turrets work in EVE" Ctrl-F -> Falloff -> No results ___________________ HELLO! My name is Inigo Mont...oh f' it.
Cattegirn Rampant SR	Posted - 2010.01.04 08:36:00 - [5] I suppose it also could use a discussion of ammo types and the effect on cap usage. Everyone knows that falloff range halves your hit chance, it's so straight forward that I chose to focus on the area where the questions come up most often - tracking and sig radius. Strategy articles, PVP training
GavinCapacitor	Posted - 2010.01.04 19:17:00 - [6] Originally by: Cattegirn I suppose it also could use a discussion of ammo types and the effect on cap usage. Everyone knows that falloff range halves your hit chance, it's so straight forward that I chose to focus on the area where the questions come up most often - tracking and sig radius. You did not just say "everyone knows X" in a thread that has "new players" in the title did you? really?
Intigo Amarr Rionnag Alba Triumvirate.	Posted - 2010.01.04 20:26:00 - [7] Originally by: GavinCapacitor Originally by: Cattegirn I suppose it also could use a discussion of ammo types and the effect on cap usage. Everyone knows that falloff range halves your hit chance, it's so straight forward that I chose to focus on the area where the questions come up most often - tracking and sig radius. You did not just say "everyone knows X" in a thread that has "new players" in the title did you? really? I'm pretty sure he did. I'm still a bit amazed myself. ___________________ HELLO! My name is Inigo Mont...oh f' it.
Cattegirn Rampant SR	Posted - 2010.01.05 10:16:00 - [8] Actually, it says "newer" in the title. Anyway, thanks for being so productive and contributing. :P Strategy articles, PVP training
Tozmeister Digital Fury Corporation	Posted - 2010.01.05 12:26:00 - [9] Edited by: Tozmeister on 05/01/2010 12:27:11 The old Trcking guide is here :- http://web.archive.org/web/20071223162431/www.eve-online.com/guide/en/g25.asp Edit:- Linkage +++????+++Out of Cheese Error. Redo From Start+++
Jessica Lanson Port Hercules	Posted - 2010.01.05 17:02:00 - [10] Originally by: Cattegirn Everyone knows that falloff range halves your hit chance, it's so straight forward that I chose to focus on the area where the questions come up most often - tracking and sig radius. I think that's proof that you don't understand falloff and probably link it's linear, or that the 50% comes at falloff and not optimal+falloff. Also you probably think that halving your hit chance also halves the damage you do and are therefore ignoring hit quality. This might help: http://wiki.eve-id.net/Tracking The next thing to do would be a graph or diagram that explains why large turrets have such a problem with small targets (signature resolution vs signature radius). That is covered in the flash animation you screen captured from. After that, would be to explain to players how they can make turrets more effective by minimising tracking e.g. don't orbit, fly in straight lines, fit tracking computers etc etc and then a brief rundown of the differences between Tracking Computer, Tracking Enhancer, Painter and Web and when you would use them. I still laugh when I see frigate-size blaster boats with tracking computers. You should also probably cover overview setup in there as you can get the overview to show both angular and transversal velocity (not that you need transversal but some old folks still use it) so you can tell if the manoeuvering you are doing is improving your turrets. BTW, did you just say "everyone knows that..." in a guide for noobs?
Cattegirn Rampant SR	Posted - 2010.01.05 17:41:00 - [11] Why do I even bother. Strategy articles, PVP training
Ki Tarra Ki Tech Industries	Posted - 2010.01.06 06:43:00 - [12] Originally by: Cattegirn Article specifically gives numbers that show that it does not double hit chance when you double angular. Also a "linear relationship" doesn't mean "proportional." Where are you getting your definition of linear? The tracking formula certainly doesn't follow the definition that I am familiar with.
Cattegirn Rampant SR	Posted - 2010.01.06 07:44:00 - [13] Edited by: Cattegirn on 06/01/2010 07:45:07 Originally by: Ki Tarra Quote: Approximately speaking, your guns consider a cruiser at 1000m distance doing 100m/s transverse about as difficult to hit as a frigate doing 50m/s at the same distance. And a frigate is less than half the size of a cruiser. The cruiser would need to be going 156.25 m/s to be as hard to hit as a frigate doing 50 m/s, using the standard 125m and 40m sizes for those classes. Um Hello? It says approximately speaking for a reason. I'm well aware of that. And different cruisers and different frigates all have different sig radii. There is no standard "frigate sig radius" or "cruiser sig radius". The point of the statement is to show the mechanic of sig radius on hit chance in a way people can visualize, not to educate about what ships have which sig radii. That's why it's a qualified statement - LOL. Yes, the relationship between hit chance and angular is linear. No, that doesn't mean doubling angular halves hit chance. It says right in that section that the result is about 6% chance to hit in that specific case. That should be sufficient for anyone. The numbers in the article contradict what was being said. He/She didn't grok the article. No mystery. If you don't understand it, download the turret tool and see how it works for yourself instead of trying to lecture those that do. Strategy articles, PVP training
Cattegirn Rampant SR	Posted - 2010.01.06 09:59:00 - [14] Edited by: Cattegirn on 06/01/2010 10:06:14 Look, Take the formula from http://wiki.eve-id.net/Tracking looking at the first half of that equation, the tracking portion is what we're interested in here. Now plug in the numbers from the article example: Chance to hit = 0.5^blob where blob=((1/0.1)(100/1000)(125/125))^2 Chance to hit = 0.5^1 (i.e, 50%) i.e, "Each weapon has a signature resolution value and each target has a signature radius value. If you are shooting a target with a signature radius exactly equal to the signature resolution on your guns, then if the target has an angular velocity exactly equal to the tracking speed of the turret you will hit the target 50% of the time. " Now halve the signature of the target: Chance to hit = 0.5^blob where blob=((1/0.1)(100/1000)(125/62.5))^2 Chance to hit 0.5^4 = 0.06 or Double the speed of the target Chance to hit = 0.5^blob where blob=((1/0.1)(200/1000)(125/125))^2 Chance to hit = 0.5^4 = 0.06 ie., "e chance to hit keeps dropping as the demand on your turret tracking gets increasingly higher. At 2x your tracking speed, e.g., 0.2rad/sec, you will only hit 6% of the time." and i.e, "Eve treats it as a proportional relation with speed. It's very simple: If the target had a 0.1rad/s angular velocity at say, 120 meters signature radius, then another ship at the same speed and distance with half that signature radius will be treated as going twice as fast, i.e, 0.2rad/s" Ok so far? Now the linearity. Graph the following: x angular = 0.1 (e.g., a Heavy Neutron Blaster I) x = 50% of angular, y = 0.5^blob where blob = ((1/0.05)(100/1000)(125/125))^2 x = 75% of angular, y = 0.5^blob where blob = ((1/0.075)(100/1000)(125/125))^2 x = 100% of angular, y = 0.5^blob where blob =((1/0.1)(100/1000)(125/125))^2 x = 125% of angular, y = 0.5^blob where blob =((1/0.125)(100/1000)(125/125))^2 x = 150% of angular, y = 0.5^blob where blob =((1/0.15)(100/1000)(125/125))^2 x = 175% of angular, y = 0.5^blob where blob =((1/0.15)(100/1000)(125/125))^2 x = 200% of angular, y = 0.5^blob where blob =((1/0.2)(100/1000)(125/125))^2 I hope this is useful. Strategy articles, PVP training
Emperor Cheney Celebrity Sex Tape	Posted - 2010.01.06 10:57:00 - [15] Originally by: Cattegirn First article on the page Some interesting things about tracking and signature resolution that might be useful for newer players. Wow, this whole page is great, thanks very much.
Jessica Lanson Port Hercules	Posted - 2010.01.06 12:09:00 - [16] You're getting better now that you've actually looked at the formula. I'm still upset about your cruiser at 0.1 angular being the same "to hit" as a frigate at 0.05 angular. It clearly isn't. Let's see if you notice why, or if I have to post again :-) Still missing falloff in your turret guide.
Cattegirn Rampant SR	Posted - 2010.01.06 13:01:00 - [17] Edited by: Cattegirn on 06/01/2010 13:04:21 You're getting better now that you've actually looked at the formula. How about instead of being a condescending idiot you actually try to read and understand the respectful responses that were painfully written out for you? Quote: Now if i do a graph of tracking vs hit, for that gun, it won't be a straight line will it? What you MEANT to say was the relationship between tracking and angular was linear but you actually wrote that the relation between tracking and hit chance was linear. Um, it was % of angular vs chance to hit as a relationship. You could try actually reading what I write. All your nonsense shows is that you have failed to even try to understand what is being written. The condescending language you use and the repeated demonstrations that you aren't even bothering to read carefully leave me with the impression that you aren't really sincerely interested at all. You also continue to get hung up on a statement that already has been explained and was meant to be an approximate one at that, to help visualize a tracking problem. It has nothing to do with any actual ships. The formulas were "parsed" (lol) long before you showed up and tried to lecture people who quite honestly already understand this better than you do. You're missing the points, confused as hell, and it is entirely your own fault. You can lead a horse to water... And I don't need to keep explaining or clarifying further. It's all there for anyone who actually cares and hasn't got an ego in the way. Strategy articles, PVP training
Cattegirn Rampant SR	Posted - 2010.01.06 13:10:00 - [18] Originally by: Emperor Cheney Originally by: Cattegirn First article on the page Some interesting things about tracking and signature resolution that might be useful for newer players. Wow, this whole page is great, thanks very much. Quite welcome, thanks. Strategy articles, PVP training
Ki Tarra Ki Tech Industries	Posted - 2010.01.06 16:00:00 - [19] Edited by: Ki Tarra on 06/01/2010 16:00:58 Originally by: Jessica Lanson Now if i do a graph of tracking vs hit, for that gun, it won't be a straight line will it? This! A linear relationship will graph as a strait line. A graph of tracking vs to-hit will not form a strait line; therefore it is not linear. Originally by: Cattegirn Graph the following: x angular = 0.1 (e.g., a Heavy Neutron Blaster I) x = 50% of angular, y = 0.5^blob where blob = ((1/0.1)(50/1000)(125/125))^2 x = 75% of angular, y = 0.5^blob where blob = ((1/0.1)(75/1000)(125/125))^2 x = 100% of angular, y = 0.5^blob where blob =((1/0.1)(100/1000)(125/125))^2 x = 125% of angular, y = 0.5^blob where blob =((1/0.1)(125/1000)(125/125))^2 x = 150% of angular, y = 0.5^blob where blob =((1/0.1)(150/1000)(125/125))^2 x = 175% of angular, y = 0.5^blob where blob =((1/0.1)(175/1000)(125/125))^2 x = 200% of angular, y = 0.5^blob where blob =((1/0.1)(200/1000)(125/125))^2 Try it! It does not make a strait line! Originally by: Cattegirn There is no standard "frigate sig radius" or "cruiser sig radius". There is a standard size for ship classes. It is the size of that class's turret resolution: 40m = frigate, 125 = cruiser, 400m = battleship. Individual ships are then balanced from that baseline. Other than Logistics, you will not find ships that go too far from that baseline.
Jessica Lanson Port Hercules	Posted - 2010.01.06 16:09:00 - [20] Edited by: Jessica Lanson on 06/01/2010 16:19:34 Rather than shout your mouth off, why don't you fix your guide? You've had some errors pointed out to you, yet they remain. You also haven't even touched on falloff which makes as big a contribution to the result as tracking does. EDIT: Most people would let the misinformation remain and take the kill mails. You should be happy we're helping you fix this.
Jessica Lanson Port Hercules	Posted - 2010.01.06 16:49:00 - [21] Edited by: Jessica Lanson on 06/01/2010 16:58:12 combined with previous message - double post
Ki Tarra Ki Tech Industries	Posted - 2010.01.06 17:13:00 - [22] Originally by: Jessica Lanson Also you do know that 50% to hit means you do a lot less than 50% damage because of hit quality? Fix the damn guide. Don't go telling people "its 50% to hit" and getting them killed when their weapons are actually doing a lot less. The formula for hit quality is out there if you google. I did mention it earlier. In the interest of being helpful I will ensure that you find the correct formula, as there is a similar but incorrect one out there that seems to be quoted more often. Where ChanceToHit >= 1%: AvgDPS = BaseDPS * [ ( ChanceToHit^2 + ChanceToHit + 0.0499 ) / 2 ] Where ChanceToHit <= 1%: AvgDPS = BaseDPS * ChanceToHit * 3
Jessica Lanson Port Hercules	Posted - 2010.01.06 17:37:00 - [23] Edited by: Jessica Lanson on 06/01/2010 17:44:06 Ah yea I forgot to add the 1% of 3 from wrecking. That would take my 37.5ish to 40. If you can tell me how i got 1/16 from .16 i'll give you a medal. I'll edit that one as it's a genuine brainslip caused by missioning and my inability to count.
Jessica Lanson Port Hercules	Posted - 2010.01.06 18:03:00 - [24] I actually do it as e.g. (for .N to hit) .N x ((N(N+1)/2N)+50)/100 Which doesn't count wrecking hits which is why I come out about .03 lower (just add +0.03 and call it close enough). I'm not sure its completely accurate but it seems to be close. The boundary conditions probably get me with the way I do it. The (N*(N+1))/2N is the average of the sum of 1 to N.
Ki Tarra Ki Tech Industries	Posted - 2010.01.06 18:13:00 - [25] Originally by: Jessica Lanson N x ((N(N+1)/2N)+50)/100 That doesn't look right. I am not getting anything close to the right result out of that. Maybe there is a typo in there somewhere. Just go with "(NN + N + 0.0499)/2" and you will get the correct result (including wrecking hits) and the formula isn't too confusing. Without factoring for wrecking hits, it would simply be "(NN + N)/2"
Jessica Lanson Port Hercules	Posted - 2010.01.06 22:40:00 - [26] Edited by: Jessica Lanson on 06/01/2010 22:42:21 It's bad bracketing and the fact that while most people use 0 to 1 for probablities, I use 0 to 100 as percent. (N(N+1))/2 is Gauss's thing for the sum of 1 to N with N being your hit chance in the 1-100 range. Then divide by N for the average roll, add 50 from the formula then divide by 100 to get the DPS fraction on a hit. So ((N(N+1))/(2*N) + 50) / 100 is the average fraction of your normal volley scored on a hit. I've probably screwed up the brackets again but you can work it out from the intent. Multiply that by the hit chance / 100 to combine the probability of a hit with the average damage per hit. Add 3/100 for wrecking. That's a fudge; otherwise you'd need to subtract 1 from the 1 to N sum because it applies a different formula if you roll a 1, divide it by 2(N-1) not (2N) as there's 1 less number in the range, and then add the 1/100x3 to wreck and I cannot be bothered. It's only as accurate as the least accurate input. I should sit down and cancel out all the brackets and stuff and reduce it to something like yours but then I'd have to memorise it. Doing it this way is a bit more intuitive for me as I can "see" the calculation not have to memorise the magic 0.4-something number you have in yours. I'd work it out properly if I ever wrote a guide. Is your formula the same with the wrecking taken into account?
Cattegirn Rampant SR	Posted - 2010.01.07 08:40:00 - [27] Tarra, I see it, I'm sorry but someone said something about it being proportional, which it is not. There is a slight curve to it that I didn't see on paper -- but checking the slopes, there it is. I'll update that. As for "standard sig radii" I don't think standard sig resolution values on turrets translate to standard sig radii on ships. But, I'll remove the statement entirely to avoid confusion. I'd rather players be looking at their actual sig radius on a ship per ship basis rather than making assumptions about sizes anyhow. Strategy articles, PVP training
Protar Minmatar Fracture.. Exalted.	Posted - 2010.01.07 11:21:00 - [28] Originally by: Intigo "How turrets work in EVE" Ctrl-F -> Falloff -> No results Lol, thats the first thing I did too! Then i saw your poast ----
Ki Tarra Ki Tech Industries	Posted - 2010.01.07 15:45:00 - [29] Edited by: Ki Tarra on 07/01/2010 15:46:00 Originally by: Cattegirn I'd rather players be looking at their actual sig radius on a ship per ship basis rather than making assumptions about sizes anyhow. While that might be nice in theory, in practace there is no way to see what your target's actual signature radius is. Looking at the ships actual sig radius is only helpful when selecting which ship you will fly, and even then it doesn't often rank very high when compared with other concideration in selecting a ship. I doubt many newer players will be memorizing ship rig radius'. However, I expect most would bennefit from memorizing the standard sizes and the approximate ratio between them, which is 1:3. But if you are fixing things that have been left out of the guide, I would suggest that you add something useful about falloff before worrying any more about sig radius.
Cattegirn Rampant SR	Posted - 2010.01.13 21:33:00 - [30] It's an article about tracking and sig radius and how those work, as it says. There is info on falloff elsewhere. Strategy articles, PVP training

Pages: [1] 2 :: 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.