EVE Search - A Guide to Turret Tracking

All Channels

Ships and Modules

A Guide to Turret Tracking

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 2 post(s)

TomB	Posted - 2005.12.06 12:58:00 - [1] Anyone who wants to learn more about how turrets track targets in EVE, this should cover most of your questions: EVE Turret Tracking Guide .

Azuriel Talloth	Posted - 2005.12.06 12:59:00 - [2] First ________________ "Pain is an illusion of the flesh. Despair is an illusion of the mind."
Menelak Faf	Posted - 2005.12.06 13:06:00 - [3] o.O SoonÖ is relative.
Gabriel Karade	Posted - 2005.12.06 13:08:00 - [4] Edited by: Gabriel Karade on 06/12/2005 13:11:53 Originally by: Azuriel Talloth First (\_/) (O.o) (> <) "That's no ordinary rabbit!...that's the most foul, cruel and bad-tempered rodent you ever set eyes on"
Naughty Boy	Posted - 2005.12.06 13:08:00 - [5] Could we have the confirmation that tracking does not affect the hit type ("barely scratch", "well aimed") but only the "hit chance" as shown in the tracking guide? (Or only marginally through the specific formula used to determine wreckings?) Popular belief says that when tracking is good, hit types are good. It would sounds "logical" in the real world, but inconsistant with the eve tracking formula (if it really determines hit chance as stated). Any comment (pretty please)? Sincerly Yours, The Naugthy Boy. --- Spreadsheet - Damage @ range.
Azuriel Talloth	Posted - 2005.12.06 13:09:00 - [6] Edited by: Azuriel Talloth on 06/12/2005 13:14:37 anyone else notice TomB just nerfed all of Tuxford's stickies ________________ "Pain is an illusion of the flesh. Despair is an illusion of the mind."
Gabriel Karade	Posted - 2005.12.06 13:12:00 - [7] nevermind then, rolling eyes smiley is one of my pet hates... (\_/) (O.o) (> <) "That's no ordinary rabbit!...that's the most foul, cruel and bad-tempered rodent you ever set eyes on"
Fi T'Zeh	Posted - 2005.12.06 13:30:00 - [8] I suspect that's because RMR is code / feature locked now. No more ship / module tweaking .... ps. POST WITH YOUR MAIN
Khaldorn Murino	Posted - 2005.12.06 13:43:00 - [9] Also, does the dps in the calculator take into account the % to hit chance of the tracking, or is that something you have to factor in manually? - Just a simple warrior.
keepiru	Posted - 2005.12.06 14:17:00 - [10] Originally by: Fi T'Zeh I suspect that's because RMR is code / feature locked now. No more ship / module tweaking If that's the case then i pity those who are training for command cruiser, with the pifitful cap they have. ------------- Where are the named 800mm Plates and Mega Ions, CCP?
dalman	Posted - 2005.12.06 14:20:00 - [11] tracking vs sig radius It seems to me that the formula is simply: ((tracking on gun/target's rad per second) * (sig resolution on gun / target's sig radius)) = number that determines whether you hit or not (as in, this number is used in the probability formula). So, activating a MWD giving 600% to speed and 600% to sig radius doesn't affect the chance to be hit at all. Oh, and by the way, with this guide you can clearly see that blasters need a boost to tracking, especially the electrons. ps, this guide is quite old, seems TomB wanted to re-sticky it :s Drink up, shoot in. Let the beating begin. Distributor of pain. Your loss becomes my gain...
dalman	Posted - 2005.12.06 14:24:00 - [12] Originally by: Khaldorn Murino Also, does the dps in the calculator take into account the % to hit chance of the tracking, or is that something you have to factor in manually? Yes, of course it does, othewise the dps calculator would have been quite... hehe. Although, the DPS shown is just simply the theoretical damagemod * ammobase * curve of hit chance / rof. Drink up, shoot in. Let the beating begin. Distributor of pain. Your loss becomes my gain...

Tuxford	Posted - 2005.12.06 14:34:00 - [13] Originally by: Azuriel Talloth Edited by: Azuriel Talloth on 06/12/2005 13:14:37 anyone else notice TomB just nerfed all of Tuxford's stickies It's ok I have them bookmarked _______________

Naughty Boy	Posted - 2005.12.06 14:40:00 - [14] Originally by: dalman It seems to me that the formula is simply: ((tracking on gun/target's rad per second) * (sig resolution on gun / target's sig radius)) = number that determines whether you hit or not (as in, this number is used in the probability formula). So, activating a MWD giving 600% to speed and 600% to sig radius doesn't affect the chance to be hit at all. It is: *Hit chance = ((1/2)^(((((Transv/(RangeTracking))(Sig_Res/Sig_Rad))^2) +((max(0,Range-Optimal))/Falloff)^2))* Same effect as the one you describe though. Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. --- Spreadsheet - Damage @ range.
Imhotep Khem	Posted - 2005.12.06 14:54:00 - [15] Originally by: Naughty Boy Edited by: Naughty Boy on 06/12/2005 13:27:18 Could we have the confirmation that tracking does not affect the hit type ("barely scratch", "well aimed") but only the "hit chance" as shown in the tracking guide? (Or only marginally through the specific formula used to determine wreckings?) Popular belief says that when tracking is good, hit types are good and when tracking is bad, hit types are bad. It might sound "logical" in the real world, but it is inconsistant with the eve tracking formula (if it really determines hit chance as stated, and not hit type). This belief is very widely accepted, despite how inconsistent it is with what is written in the guide. Any comment (pretty please)? Sincerly Yours, The Naugthy Boy. I doubt if they will admit to it. It works out the same, and if they dont admit it, they can change it in the future. I doubt they change it because it probably takes a bit more b/w. I bet hit/miss/wreck is server side and hit types are probably generated on the client side ;) I agree the names they gave the types implies they get better with tracking, but empirical data has shown otherwise. ____ If your not dyin' your not tryin'.
Fi T'Zeh	Posted - 2005.12.06 14:55:00 - [16] Edited by: Fi T''Zeh on 06/12/2005 14:58:10 Originally by: keepiru Originally by: Fi T'Zeh I suspect that's because RMR is code / feature locked now. No more ship / module tweaking If that's the case then i pity those who are training for command cruiser, with the pifitful cap they have. The other theory is that most of the threads became dead horses by about page 8... EDIT : Yes as if any more proof was needed that blasters need buffing, this calculator about does it. .... ps. POST WITH YOUR MAIN
Imhotep Khem	Posted - 2005.12.06 14:56:00 - [17] Originally by: dalman ...So, activating a MWD giving 600% to speed and 600% to sig radius doesn't affect the chance to be hit at all... Well the sig penalty is instantaneous while the speed increase is gradual. Of course the speed decrease after mwd is off is also gradual. ____ If your not dyin' your not tryin'.
Dreez	Posted - 2005.12.06 15:21:00 - [18] TomB. Please stop preaching about tracking when you appearently dont know squat about the issue we blasterthronpilots are having with our guns against other battleships while orbeting at our Opt range. We have pilots clearly stating that blasterthrons should NOT orbit ravens for example, cuz it will lower their damage and that the orbit itself does not in anyway aid the megathron. I really dont meen to be disrespectfull, but the lack of response from you Devs about this issue has ****ed me of for far too long now. Now before you start preaching about tracking and blasters, go in SISU, get yourself some regular but specialized skills for the blasterthron. Then try to: 1. Get a proper t2 setup WITHOUT implants and CPUmods. 2. Win a fight against a Raven/ACTemp. And remember MWD, Webb, Scram, Injector. GL HF. GM Mulder: Ships beeing abducted by aliens is a perfectly normal thing, there is nothing abnormal about it.
Hugh Ruka	Posted - 2005.12.06 16:14:00 - [19] hmmm tracking guide ... I can figure that with some basic ingame tests. what bugs me is how is the hit "quality" determined ? I mean those wrecking and barely scratches etc shots. according to the tracking guide, I should always hit for gun multiplier*ammo damage with chance to hit depending on transversal and all those other things in the guide. I presume the sig resolution vs sig radius affects hit quality. ------------------------------ Removed due to offensive content - Laqum I realy liked my signature. Oh well ...
Naughty Boy	Posted - 2005.12.06 16:25:00 - [20] Edited by: Naughty Boy on 06/12/2005 16:25:09 Originally by: Hugh Ruka hmmm tracking guide ... I can figure that with some basic ingame tests. what bugs me is how is the hit "quality" determined ? I mean those wrecking and barely scratches etc shots. according to the tracking guide, I should always hit for gun multiplierammo damage with chance to hit depending on transversal and all those other things in the guide. I presume the sig resolution vs sig radius affects hit quality. I don't think so. I think it is: average damage = base damage at optimal, 0 transversal (function of gun damage mod, ammo damage mod) hit chance (function of range, ammo range mod, falloff of the gun, tracking of the gun, optimal range of the gun, sig resolution of the gun, sig resolution of the target) * hit type factor (random factor, average = 1, independant from tracking stuffs). So, tracking doesn't improve hit types, it only determines if you hit or not. So you can't get past a damage thresold when improving the tracking beyond what is "enough" to track the target (see dalman's formula, that's the one). No luck when trying to get a confirmation on that though... Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. --- Spreadsheet - Damage @ range.
Hugh Ruka	Posted - 2005.12.06 16:51:00 - [21] Originally by: Naughty Boy Edited by: Naughty Boy on 06/12/2005 16:27:13 Originally by: Hugh Ruka hmmm tracking guide ... I can figure that with some basic ingame tests. what bugs me is how is the hit "quality" determined ? I mean those wrecking and barely scratches etc shots. according to the tracking guide, I should always hit for gun multiplierammo damage with chance to hit depending on transversal and all those other things in the guide. I presume the sig resolution vs sig radius affects hit quality. I don't think so. I think it is: average damage = base damage at optimal, 0 transversal (function of gun damage mod, ammo damage mod) hit chance (as determined by the trackng guide, function of range, ammo range mod, falloff of the gun, tracking of the gun, optimal range of the gun, sig resolution of the gun, sig radius of the target) * hit type factor (random factor, average = 1, independant from tracking stuffs). So, tracking doesn't improve hit types, it only determines if you hit or not. So you can't get past a damage thresold when improving the tracking beyond what is "enough" to track the target (see dalman's formula, that's the one). No luck when trying to get a confirmation on that though... Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. there's a nice picture for sig radius vs sig resolution in the guide and I imagine it works like that. so you have some probability function that modifies the average hit with how good you hit the "middle" of the target (wrecking hit). logicaly the more target sig radius >> gun sig resolution, you should get better quality hits more often. this is just my speculation. ------------------------------ Removed due to offensive content - Laqum I realy liked my signature. Oh well ...
Naughty Boy	Posted - 2005.12.06 17:06:00 - [22] Originally by: Hugh Ruka there's a nice picture for sig radius vs sig resolution in the guide and I imagine it works like that. so you have some probability function that modifies the average hit with how good you hit the "middle" of the target (wrecking hit). logicaly the more target sig radius >> gun sig resolution, you should get better quality hits more often. You are shooting a big target while standing still, with guns with a small sig resolution. There is no tracking issue, you shoot at optimal, you average damage should be the theoretical base damage (gun damage mod * ammo mod). If "good hits" were a consequence of this situation were tracking is not an issue, you should get your actual damage above the theoretical damage computed on the basis damage mod * ammo mod. All your hits are "good hits", that's the assumption, remember... it just can't work that way, that would make the tracking guide useless as there would be a tracking related issue getting your damage higher than what the the tracking guide is telling. To me, It just doesn't work that way. I might be wrong though. Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. --- Spreadsheet - Damage @ range.
Vishnej	Posted - 2005.12.06 23:09:00 - [23] Likewise, I'd like to know how the hit modifiers are calculated. ---------------------------- T2 Destroyers: a proposal Requested Changes: An alphabet's worth
mechtech	Posted - 2005.12.06 23:25:00 - [24] yep, we have the missle, turret % to hit, and stacking formula. Now all we need is the hit type formula. I know someone out there has the brains to c-rack (it tried to edit that word out!) this one!
Darius Shakor	Posted - 2005.12.07 19:05:00 - [25] TomB you have done it again. (Or who ever did this has done it again) Like it anyway. ------ Shakor Clan Information Portal Every man has a devil. You can never rest until you find it.
The Wizz117	Posted - 2005.12.09 16:11:00 - [26] could we please also have a missile version of this?
Kharakan	Posted - 2005.12.09 18:08:00 - [27] Missiles need tracking guides? =/
Reesah	Posted - 2005.12.09 18:18:00 - [28] Originally by: Imhotep Khem Originally by: Naughty Boy Edited by: Naughty Boy on 06/12/2005 13:27:18 Could we have the confirmation that tracking does not affect the hit type ("barely scratch", "well aimed") but only the "hit chance" as shown in the tracking guide? (Or only marginally through the specific formula used to determine wreckings?) Popular belief says that when tracking is good, hit types are good and when tracking is bad, hit types are bad. It might sound "logical" in the real world, but it is inconsistant with the eve tracking formula (if it really determines hit chance as stated, and not hit type). This belief is very widely accepted, despite how inconsistent it is with what is written in the guide. Any comment (pretty please)? Sincerly Yours, The Naugthy Boy. I doubt if they will admit to it. It works out the same, and if they dont admit it, they can change it in the future. I doubt they change it because it probably takes a bit more b/w. I bet hit/miss/wreck is server side and hit types are probably generated on the client side ;) I agree the names they gave the types implies they get better with tracking, but empirical data has shown otherwise. I don't think tracking has anything to do with quality of hits. I was sitting still, firing on a stationary target, at optimum range, and I still got "scratches" on it. So I don't think tracking has anything to do with quality of hits. Sigs for ISK? Yeah, I got those.
Naughty Boy	Posted - 2005.12.09 18:39:00 - [29] Originally by: Reesah I don't think tracking has anything to do with quality of hits. I was sitting still, firing on a stationary target, at optimum range, and I still got "scratches" on it. So I don't think tracking has anything to do with quality of hits. There's this thread but it's a bit old. Link. It roughly shows that "hit types" are distributed as an uniform distribution, but as far as i understood there wasn't anything tracking related in the test. I guess i could setup an experiment and analyze the results, i'll see what i can do. Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. --- Spreadsheet - Damage @ range.
keepiru	Posted - 2005.12.13 16:31:00 - [30] Yes, because... small guns vs. battleships go into perma-wreck mode. Or so people say. So i think hit quality might be affected ------------- Where is the gistii a-type armor equivalent?

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 :: 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.