| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |

Drallimer
Blueprint Haus Get Off My Lawn
|
Posted - 2011.02.08 11:41:00 -
[1]
So far nobody has been able to answer me this question.
This toon is specialized in ECM. With my skills I get 150km optimal + 100km falloff range with racial jammers in a Scorpion. Since transversal speed and tracking speed is irrelevant for ECM it leaves us the with the following formula:
C = 0.5^((R-O)/F)^2 where C = chance to hit, R = target range, O = optimal for weapon, F = falloff increment
This formula is quoted everywhere, including on this forum.
Now, the problem is....when you type in my values and a target range of 250km you get an inaccurate response from the formula: 0.25 = 0.5^((250km-150km)/100km)^2 We all know that optimal + falloff should yield 50% chance to hit, this formula does not. It is therefore, in my opinion, inaccurate.
Anyone have an accurate formula?
|

Ben Alman
Gallente
|
Posted - 2011.02.08 11:47:00 -
[2]
Edited by: Ben Alman on 08/02/2011 11:48:50 Edited by: Ben Alman on 08/02/2011 11:48:20 Should be as simple as:
C = 1 - ((R-O / (F*2)) for R > O and F being fallof in km (According to ISK the guide fallof scales linear from optimum to 2x fallof)
|

Furb Killer
Gallente
|
Posted - 2011.02.08 11:54:00 -
[3]
That would then be a fairly enormous error in ISK the guide.
Anyway @ OP, you got your brackets wrong, the square should be inside the exponential: C = 0.5^(((R-O)/F)^2), then the result should be 0.5.
|

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
|
Posted - 2011.02.08 11:57:00 -
[4]
Originally by: Drallimer So far nobody has been able to answer me this question.
This toon is specialized in ECM. With my skills I get 150km optimal + 100km falloff range with racial jammers in a Scorpion. Since transversal speed and tracking speed is irrelevant for ECM it leaves us the with the following formula:
C = 0.5^((R-O)/F)^2 where C = chance to hit, R = target range, O = optimal for weapon, F = falloff increment
This formula is quoted everywhere, including on this forum.
Now, the problem is....when you type in my values and a target range of 250km you get an inaccurate response from the formula: 0.25 = 0.5^((250km-150km)/100km)^2 We all know that optimal + falloff should yield 50% chance to hit, this formula does not. It is therefore, in my opinion, inaccurate.
Anyone have an accurate formula?
It's accurate ù you're just missing some parentheses.
C = 0.5^(((R-O)/F)^2)
In other words, 0.5^(((250-150)/100)¦) = 0.5^((100/100)¦) = 0.5^1 = 0.5 ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡à you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki |

Ben Alman
Gallente
|
Posted - 2011.02.08 11:59:00 -
[5]
Originally by: Furb Killer That would then be a fairly enormous error in ISK the guide.
Anyway @ OP, you got your brackets wrong, the square should be inside the exponential: C = 0.5^(((R-O)/F)^2), then the result should be 0.5.
Quick go tell them we don't want people to die stupid :)
|

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
|
Posted - 2011.02.08 12:09:00 -
[6]
Originally by: Ben Alman Quick go tell them we don't want people to die stupid :)
àas if there is any other way.
Also: yes we do.  ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡à you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki |

Ben Alman
Gallente
|
Posted - 2011.02.08 12:23:00 -
[7]
Edited by: Ben Alman on 08/02/2011 12:25:40 Hm actually the difference is max 10% between the simple version an the complex one.
Since distance changes constantly and hit chance is then generated by RNG anyway I cal live with the simple formula ;) Sorry I have to link it that way the forums screw with the link
Edit: Blue is the deviation
Quote: http://fooplot.com/index.php?&type0=0&type1=0&type2=0&type3=0&type4=0&y0=0.5^%28%28%28x-10%29/5%29^2%29&y1=1-%28x-10%29/%285*2%29&y2=%280.5^%28%28%28x-10%29/5%29^2%29%29-%281-%28x-10%29/%285*2%29%29&y3=&y4=&r0=&r1=&r2=&r3=&r4=&px0=&px1=&px2=&px3=&px4=&py0=&py1=&py2=&py3=&py4=&smin0=0&smin1=0&smin2=0&smin3=0&smin4=0&smax0=2pi&smax1=2pi&smax2=2pi&smax3=2pi&smax4=2pi&thetamin0=0&thetamin1=0&thetamin2=0&thetamin3=0&thetamin4=0&thetamax0=2pi&thetamax1=2pi&thetamax2=2pi&thetamax3=2pi&thetamax4=2pi&ipw=1&ixmin=10&ixmax=20&iymin=-0.1&iymax=1&igx=1&igy=0.1&igl=1&igs=0&iax=1&ila=1&xmin=10&xmax=20&ymin=-0.1&ymax=1
|

Drallimer
Blueprint Haus Get Off My Lawn
|
Posted - 2011.02.08 13:21:00 -
[8]
Thank you you all for the help. As someone pointed out, using this formula you will get an S-curve, not a linear curve.
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |