| Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Whitehound
1533
   |
Posted - 2013.07.13 20:50:00 -
[31] - Quote
Chris Winter wrote:Whitehound wrote:Ships are not stationary. They can only stand still, which is not the same. Stationary targets are things like stations, gates, cans, etc.. Everything without a propulsion. Fairly certain that in the English language, "stationary" means "not moving." Everyone else in the thread figured that out.
The word itself has got many meanings and not just "not moving". It entirely depends on the context it is being used in. In the context of EVE is there a difference between "stationary targets" and "stationary ships". You could have asked. Only you then want to argue, still. Why is that?
Loss is meaningful. Therefore is the loss of meaning likewise meaningful. It is the source of all trolling. |
xPredat0rz
Grey Templars
Fidelas Constans
42
|
Posted - 2013.07.14 06:46:00 -
[32] - Quote
Whitehound wrote:Chris Winter wrote:Whitehound wrote:Ships are not stationary. They can only stand still, which is not the same. Stationary targets are things like stations, gates, cans, etc.. Everything without a propulsion. Fairly certain that in the English language, "stationary" means "not moving." Everyone else in the thread figured that out. The word itself has got many meanings and not just "not moving". It entirely depends on the context it is being used in. In the context of EVE is there a difference between "stationary targets" and "stationary ships". You could have asked. Only you then want to argue, still. Why is that?
Hate to break it to you but all structures(Ihubs, SBUs, TCUs, POSes, Stations) are stationary structures. While yes you could say in real physics they are orbiting something etc i got that. You take your Turret based Battleship. Park it 5km away from large easy to shoot structure and shoot it while neither of you are moving and you will not hit for full damage. There is still a % chance to hit. You will even miss said insanely large structure with perfect skills.
Take same structure and shoot it with missiles. If it doesnt move they should hit for full damage-resists. Missiles dont need to track and what you are shooting has an insanely large sig radius correct? They dont always hit for 100% damage
Take Fighters. With perfect skills do 1k dps on a carrier. They do not do full damage as they have to track and there is still a % chance to hit.
Your wrong. |
Gorn Arming
Merch Industrial
Goonswarm Federation
204
|
Posted - 2013.07.14 07:24:00 -
[33] - Quote
Whitehound wrote:Webs (60%) are better than TPs (37.5%) and TCs (30%), but only work within 9km-14km range.
TPs work a bit better than TCs, but require a lock (just like webs), have a long cycle time and are limited by an optimal range and falloff.
TCs are the weakest, but are the easiest to use and can be switched to gain more range.
Comparing web strength to a TC's tracking bonus is idiotic; you're not comparing the same attribute.
A web reduces the target's velocity by 60%, which is equivalent to increasing your tracking (assuming your own ship is stationary) by 1/(1-0.6) = 250%, not by a mere 60%. A web obviously won't help against transversal generated by your own ship's movement--but then you can set that to zero any time you like.
This is like third grade math, here. |
Mina Sebiestar
Mactabilis Simplex Cursus
386
|
Posted - 2013.07.14 08:43:00 -
[34] - Quote
Whitehound wrote:Chris Winter wrote:TCs can actually help you against a stationary target, if you're orbiting it. Webs, however, won't. No, they do not. You always deal full damage against stationary targets (within optimal range). You probably did not know that. The point also was that each module works differently and the pilot needs to know this before he/she can make use of the gain.
Not to burst your bubble but you will never do full dmg on stationary object even if you are at optimal at full stop shooting at station even if it is under web or tp your dmg read out will be from barely hit to wreck..
to my knowledge only missiles will do constant dmg on something
http://i.imgur.com/1N37t.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/KTjFEt6.jpg I dont always fly stabber but when i do...
|
Whitehound
1535
|
Posted - 2013.07.14 09:58:00 -
[35] - Quote
xPredat0rz wrote:Hate to break it to you but all structures(Ihubs, SBUs, TCUs, POSes, Stations) are stationary structures. While yes you could say in real physics they are orbiting something etc i got that. You take your Turret based Battleship. Park it 5km away from large easy to shoot structure and shoot it while neither of you are moving and you will not hit for full damage. There is still a % chance to hit. You will even miss said insanely large structure with perfect skills.
The hit'n'miss chance uses the transversal speed, which for stationary targets or at least some of them does not exist and so one deals full damage (not accounting for randomness) against these.
I then do not really care for exceptions within exceptions when the whole point was that there are exceptions. The conversation is only spinning in a circle now.
Loss is meaningful. Therefore is the loss of meaning likewise meaningful. It is the source of all trolling. |
Whitehound
1535
|
Posted - 2013.07.14 10:00:00 -
[36] - Quote
Gorn Arming wrote:Comparing web strength to a TC's tracking bonus is idiotic; you're not comparing the same attribute.
A web reduces the target's velocity by 60%, which is equivalent to increasing your tracking (assuming your own ship is stationary) by 1/(1-0.6) = 250%, not by a mere 60%. A web obviously won't help against transversal generated by your own ship's movement--but then you can set that to zero any time you like.
This is like third grade math, here.
I did not start the comparison, but the OP did. I do not see it as being idiotic. You then have only proven yourself wrong when you say a web can be the equivalent to an increase in tracking. What was your point again?
Loss is meaningful. Therefore is the loss of meaning likewise meaningful. It is the source of all trolling. |
Bertrand Butler
Cras es Noster
54
|
Posted - 2013.07.14 10:33:00 -
[37] - Quote
There are some times when its best to admit you were wrong and stop posting.
There are some times when its best to admit nothing and keep derping until everyone else is too tired to talk to you anymore.
Both times are good times. |
Ralph King-Griffin
Var Foundation inc.
0
|
Posted - 2013.07.14 10:40:00 -
[38] - Quote
Bertrand Butler wrote:There are some times when its best to admit you were wrong and stop posting.
There are some times when its best to admit nothing and keep derping until everyone else is too tired to talk to you anymore.
Both times are good times.
At least the latter provided me this mornings entertainment,
Far better than watching pepa pig with the kids.
If in doubt...do...excessively. |
Uppsy Daisy
Perkone
Caldari State
515
|
Posted - 2013.07.14 11:00:00 -
[39] - Quote
Ralph King-Griffin wrote:Bertrand Butler wrote:There are some times when its best to admit you were wrong and stop posting.
There are some times when its best to admit nothing and keep derping until everyone else is too tired to talk to you anymore.
Both times are good times. At least the latter provided me this mornings entertainment, Far better than watching pepa pig with the kids.
I dunno.
I think I would have preferred to watch Daddy Pig gettin' down with some muddy puddles than contributing to this one...
|
Whitehound
1535
|
Posted - 2013.07.14 11:22:00 -
[40] - Quote
Bertrand Butler wrote:There are some times when its best to admit you were wrong and stop posting.
There are some times when its best to admit nothing and keep derping until everyone else is too tired to talk to you anymore.
Both times are good times.
Stop with this BS. You are not even on topic.
I was never wrong to begin with. Some have only now start to realize that there is more to it than simple percentages. I am happy to go along with them and this thread as long as they keep learning about it and how the modules can be used to improve tracking. The percentages I have listed are simply the gains one can get from each module, and I have pointed it out before. Obviously are some still learning how to use each module and when, which can be seen in their comments. It is then cool that they are trying to prove me wrong. Only you are derping here.
Loss is meaningful. Therefore is the loss of meaning likewise meaningful. It is the source of all trolling. |
Kadesh Priestess
Scalding Chill
295
|
Posted - 2013.07.14 11:53:00 -
[41] - Quote
Whitehound wrote:Webs (60%) are better than TPs (37.5%) and TCs (30%), but only work within 9km-14km range. In turret damage formula, there's single factor which decides how well will you hit ship if it's within optimal range. It includes turret tracking speed, turret signature resolution, target angular velocity, target signature radius.
Tracking computer gives you +30% tracking, target painter is equivalent of +37.5% tracking, web is equivalent of up to +150% tracking if it slows down target ship to have 40% of its initial angular speed.
Sometimes its effect is lesser (if you're ought to fly fast, or you're bad pilot and can't reduce angular speed by manual piloting after gaining necessary distance control with web, or due to influence of target ship agility if it orbits you at high speed on low orbit), but it should remain much stronger than TP or TC within web range in most, if not all cases. |
Whitehound
1539
|
Posted - 2013.07.14 12:20:00 -
[42] - Quote
Kadesh Priestess wrote:Tracking computer gives you +30% tracking, target painter is equivalent of +37.5% tracking, web is equivalent of up to +150% tracking if it slows down target ship to have 40% of its initial angular speed.
No. If you see it like this then a web can give an infinite gain the moment you are faster than the other ship and follow it in a straight line (instead of the other ship orbiting your ship).
The hit'n'miss chance then gets randomized and its curve receives a slight deformation when turned into DPS. The DPS is calculated with:
(0.5*Chance+0.5*Chance^2)*0.99+0.01*3, for example, a 50% hit chance results in an average damage of 40.125% of the base damage (or 39.338% of max. DPS).
If you take this into account then the 7.5% difference between a TP and a TC is going to be different again and makes a direct comparison difficult, because the DPS formula is non-linear.
Each module then has got a different range, different cycle times and cap usage. A TC can even be switched to do something else. Hence I call the percentages "gains", because this is what they are.
Loss is meaningful. Therefore is the loss of meaning likewise meaningful. It is the source of all trolling. |
Bibosikus
Caldari Deep Space Ventures
Tribal Band
150
|
Posted - 2013.07.15 09:48:00 -
[43] - Quote
I used to use a Legion with dual TC's in C3 anoms which works very well.
Assuming you can use T2 Heavy Pulse guns, I'd suggest you fill your three mids with a decent AB and two Tracking Comps, and hold 2 of each script in your cargo.
As frigs spawn (these are C2 anoms so you'll be dealing with frigs mainly), burn away and pretty much instapop them with optimal range scripts and scorch. When or if they get under 15k, switch to tracking speed and Multifreq. You'll get over 0.1 tracking and frigs will die to that.
It's a bit fiddly at first, but once you get used to the spawn points you'll be forecasting and saving time.
Or of course you can try a TC and a web. Whatever suits your style eh?
The box said "Requires Windows-á2000 or better", so I installed Linux. |
Lloyd Roses
Blue-Fire
Confederation of xXPIZZAXx
122
|
Posted - 2013.07.15 10:22:00 -
[44] - Quote
Same here, used a Legion especially to REALLY FAST clear c1-sites (completion times < 3minutes, +á la 6 shots six frigs at 50km) - and did not use a web. Just warp there to the anom, load scorch and all the tracking scripts you have and start popping frigs where they stand. Rarely one of them made it within 10, so had to switch to multifreq from time to time. (If you run c1-anoms that way, c2/c3 sites look like garbage in comparison)
c2 sites also have frigate spawns at range, so you'll always have some 30km room atleast to pop them with scorch while their MWDs are still running.
The thing is, your web only reaches out for 10km, once those frigs are within that range, you archieve identical results by just ABing aligned. So on Zealot/Legion: TC >> Web/Painter.
Only reason you'd ever fit a web/paint to your ship would be to increase missile damage or prevent drone-aggro.
I only correct my own spelling. |
Christopher Multsanti
State Protectorate
Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2013.07.17 09:50:00 -
[45] - Quote
Wow. Whitehound has been trolling this whole thread and people are still replying to him? |
Danny John-Peter
Stay Frosty.
220
|
Posted - 2013.07.17 14:06:00 -
[46] - Quote
This thread = All of my wats.
For the OP, I would say for PVE a TC would be the better option as it gives not only a better chance of hitting harder to track targets it can also be scripted for range allowing you to hopefully blap things before tracking becomes an issue.
As I said though; this thread... |
Issa'c Kane
Blue Republic
RvB - BLUE Republic
0
|
Posted - 2013.07.17 16:07:00 -
[47] - Quote
Thanks for all of the responses so far, didn't expect this thread to turn into a debate of EVE physics however. 
I have finally put my Zealot fit into use the last couple of nights in a C2. I tried both a TC with a speed script, and then swapped that out with a stasis web to get the feel for both. Here were the results (with no math or talk of physics involved, just game play observations.):
(as expected) With the sleeper frigs within 10KM, the web does indeed increase the damage more than the TC w/ speed script, using T2 heavy pulses /w multifreq. However this requires for me to "wait" until the frigates get into range just to apply the web for this specific scenario.
I am always aligned to a safe spot during combat site runs in WH space, so this sometimes puts me burning to the complete opposite direction of the site/sleepers, which then takes longer for the frigates to reach me and in turn for me to web+apply damage to them. (As anyone who has ran WH sites know, sleepers sometimes spawn 60+KM away.)
So the end result with no math involved and speaking out of pure practicality, I have stuck with the TC w/ speed script. I can apply damage to frigates at range (although less dps) but this way the over all time to kill the frigates is indeed faster since I can hit+kill them much further out.
TL;DR. End result from testing:
TC w/ speed script = Less damage to frigates, but they die "faster" after spawning due to not waiting for them to get to me.
Web = A good bit more damage up close, but if they don't spawn on top of me due to me burning away to be aligned, I have to wait for them to get within 10KM which means their life time after spawn is much longer.
I'll be sticking with the TC w/ speed script as of now. |
| |
|
| Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |