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

Issa'c Kane
Blue Republic RvB - BLUE Republic
0
|
Posted - 2013.07.12 14:11:00 -
[1] - Quote
o7,
So, here's the exact scenario. Going to be using a Zealot in a C2 wormhole to clear sleeper sites. Got a pretty good fit with a good balance of speed/tank/DPS together so far.
Should I fit a tracking computer with speed script, or a stasis web to hit sleeper frigates? I'll be using cruiser sized guns (obviously).
Also, any advice on how close the sleeper frigs will come to me? Do they throw damage out while sitting outside of web range?
Thanks. |

Whitehound
1521
|
Posted - 2013.07.12 14:20:00 -
[2] - Quote
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. Loss is meaningful. Therefore is the loss of meaning likewise meaningful. It is the source of all trolling. |

Kahega Amielden
Rifterlings Point Blank Alliance
818
|
Posted - 2013.07.12 14:23:00 -
[3] - Quote
Quote:Webs (60%) are better than TPs (37.5%) and TCs (30%), but only work within 9km-14km range.
Keep in mind that the above numbers only hold for webs if the source of all of the angular velocity is the target. While I agree in this case (assuming the frigs are at <10km) a web is probably better, you usually cannot just say that a web is effectively a 60% tracking speed boost unless you are perfectly stationary. |

Whitehound
1521
|
Posted - 2013.07.12 14:45:00 -
[4] - Quote
Kahega Amielden wrote:Quote:Webs (60%) are better than TPs (37.5%) and TCs (30%), but only work within 9km-14km range. Keep in mind that the above numbers only hold for webs if the source of all of the angular velocity is the target. While I agree in this case (assuming the frigs are at <10km) a web is probably better, you usually cannot just say that a web is effectively a 60% tracking speed boost unless you are perfectly stationary. Nonsense. A TP also does not give a 37.5% advantage when used against a Titan. Nor is a TCs with 30% much help when used against a stationary target or a 10x faster ship.
The percentages in brackets are simply those of the individual modules and their effect. Nobody says it has to be the equivalent of one another. These numbers however do represent the gain one can get from each and a 60% gain is more than a 30%. What is there to argue?! Loss is meaningful. Therefore is the loss of meaning likewise meaningful. It is the source of all trolling. |

Chris Winter
Zephyr Corp V.A.S.T.
154
|
Posted - 2013.07.12 20:07:00 -
[5] - Quote
Whitehound wrote: Nonsense. A TP also does not give a 37.5% advantage when used against a Titan. Nor is a TCs with 30% much help when used against a stationary target or a 10x faster ship.
The percentages in brackets are simply those of the individual modules and their effect. Nobody says it has to be the equivalent of one another. These numbers however do represent the gain one can get from each and a 60% gain is more than a 30%. What is there to argue?!
Congratulations on completely missing the point.
TCs can actually help you against a stationary target, if you're orbiting it. Webs, however, won't. |

Whitehound
1525
|
Posted - 2013.07.12 20:10:00 -
[6] - Quote
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. Loss is meaningful. Therefore is the loss of meaning likewise meaningful. It is the source of all trolling. |

Uppsy Daisy
Perkone Caldari State
512
|
Posted - 2013.07.12 21:09:00 -
[7] - Quote
Whitehound wrote: You always deal full damage against stationary targets (within optimal range). You probably did not know that.
No, you don't.
If you are orbiting a stationary target, your angular velocity contributes to your Transversal Speed, which in turn contributes to your chances to hit.
Please stop posting pretending you know when you don't Whitehound, it is getting boring correcting you the whole time.
See http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Turret_damage if you don't believe me.
More specifically:
Transversal speed is the absolute speed (in meters/second) at which you and your target are moving in a plane perpendicular to the line joining your ship center to the center of the target. In short, transversal velocity is the velocity component that changes the angle to your target. Two ships chasing each other in a straight line or heading straight at each other would have this number be zero. The smaller this number, the better your chance to hit will be.
Chris is right and YOU are wrong (again). |

Whitehound
1525
|
Posted - 2013.07.12 21:12:00 -
[8] - Quote
Uppsy Daisy wrote:No, you don't. Stationary targets do not have a transversal speed in EVE. Loss is meaningful. Therefore is the loss of meaning likewise meaningful. It is the source of all trolling. |

Uppsy Daisy
Perkone Caldari State
512
|
Posted - 2013.07.12 21:14:00 -
[9] - Quote
Whitehound wrote:Uppsy Daisy wrote:No, you don't. Stationary targets do not have a transversal speed in EVE.
If you are orbiting them they do.
Read it again.
Transversal speed is the absolute speed (in meters/second) at which you and your target are moving in a plane perpendicular to the line joining your ship center to the center of the target. |

Whitehound
1525
|
Posted - 2013.07.12 21:19:00 -
[10] - Quote
Uppsy Daisy wrote:If you are orbiting them they do.
Read it again.
Transversal speed is the absolute speed (in meters/second) at which you and your target are moving in a plane perpendicular to the line joining your ship center to the center of the target. No, they do not in EVE. The emphasis is on "in EVE". Turn on the column on your overview for transversal speed and angular velocity. You will see that objects like stations and other stationary objects do not have a speed and their transversal speed is assumed to be 0, in which case there are no misses due to tracking. Loss is meaningful. Therefore is the loss of meaning likewise meaningful. It is the source of all trolling. |

Uppsy Daisy
Perkone Caldari State
512
|
Posted - 2013.07.12 21:28:00 -
[11] - Quote
Whitehound wrote:Uppsy Daisy wrote:If you are orbiting them they do.
Read it again.
Transversal speed is the absolute speed (in meters/second) at which you and your target are moving in a plane perpendicular to the line joining your ship center to the center of the target. No, they do not in EVE. The emphasis is on "in EVE". Turn on the column on your overview for transversal speed and angular velocity. You will see that objects like stations and other stationary objects do not have a speed and their transversal speed is assumed to be 0, in which case there are no misses due to tracking.
I couldn't care less what the overview says.
I know how the to-hit formula works.
Both the attacker and the targets velocity are part of the calculation, as I have stated multiple times.
If you are orbiting a stationary target, your velocity contributes to the transversal velocity.
This is a fact. |

Whitehound
1525
|
Posted - 2013.07.12 21:49:00 -
[12] - Quote
Uppsy Daisy wrote:I couldn't care less what the overview says.
I know how the to-hit formula works.
Both the attacker and the targets velocity are part of the calculation, as I have stated multiple times.
If you are orbiting a stationary target, your velocity contributes to the transversal velocity.
This is a fact. No. Not in EVE physics. It is one of the many small details of EVE's game mechanics that stationary targets do not have a speed nor a transversal speed.
I can imagine how frustrating this must be to you right now, trying to be all self-righteous and that, but I cannot change it. Loss is meaningful. Therefore is the loss of meaning likewise meaningful. It is the source of all trolling. |

Taoist Dragon
The Church of Awesome Caldari State Capturing
504
|
Posted - 2013.07.12 21:58:00 -
[13] - Quote
once again Whitehounds hits a wide out when talking game mechanics.
DUH!
Transversal is bad to work with. Stick angular velocity on yer overview and see what happens.
AS angular velocity is measured in rads/s (oh look it exactly the same as weapon tracking!) you'll see that if you orbit a stationary target you have a high angular and can easily miss cos your guns don't track!
Eve is not physics! in eve you ship is nothing more than a point in space with a vector value. The vector values of you v your target give you the angular velocity and that compare to your turret tracking to see if you hit you target. Go do some reading this has been covered a gazzilion times! That is the Way, the Tao.
Balance is everything. |

Uppsy Daisy
Perkone Caldari State
512
|
Posted - 2013.07.12 22:12:00 -
[14] - Quote
Ok. One more try.
Load up the game, and exit your station.
Switch on the Velocity and Transversal Velocity columns on the overview.
Now jettison a can - this will be stationary.
Now orbit the can at 500m.
Now look at the columns in the overview.
Velocity is zero, because the can is not moving.
Transversal velocity is NOT zero. It is the speed you are orbiting the can at.
Transversal velocity is what is used in the to-hit calculations.
Do I win now?
Quote:I can imagine how frustrating this must be to you right now, trying to be all self-righteous and that, but I cannot change it.
Not frustrating at all no. I just wish you would stop giving people the wrong advice. This game is hard enough as it is. |

Termy Rockling
EVE University Ivy League
59
|
Posted - 2013.07.12 22:39:00 -
[15] - Quote
I had to test this since i always thought that the angular/transversal columns were empty on stationary targets. So i undocked, orbited station, angular/transversal showed nothing. Dropped can, orbited, again nothin on angular/transversal. I tried with sentrydrone, and orbiting that did show angular/transversal, i guess its not "real" stationary. Same with stationary ship, transversal/angular were affected by my movement around the target.
There are Stationaries and stationaries in EVE i guess  |

Whitehound
1526
|
Posted - 2013.07.12 22:47:00 -
[16] - Quote
Uppsy Daisy wrote:Do I win now? No. The argument was about the details and I have shown you that I am aware of them. The two of you have repeatedly been trying to prove me wrong, but only to show how little you actually know. Now, I do not really care how much or how little you know when you are trying to have an argument with me. Just understand that it has details everywhere and that the argument was pointless from the beginning.
If you go back to the start of the argument and read again what I wrote will you see for yourself. There is nothing to win here other then perhaps the insight I have given you on stationary targets.
You can jettison as many cans as you like. You would be right if it was real physics, but this is EVE. These objects posses no speed. Their speed is not 0 - they do not have a speed attribute to begin with! Thus does the formula default to a 0 transversal speed for such objects regardless of your ship's speed.
Are we done here? Loss is meaningful. Therefore is the loss of meaning likewise meaningful. It is the source of all trolling. |

Taoist Dragon
The Church of Awesome Caldari State Capturing
505
|
Posted - 2013.07.12 23:03:00 -
[17] - Quote
All the arguments about transversal and shite are completly invalid to the OPs request.
Transversal is generally a bad thing to look at as it is used to work out the actual number that means something (angular velocity) so unless you can do very quick angular velocity calcs in your head just stick it on your hud FFS. if it's small than you tracking stats on your turrets you know your guns can track it easily and all you need to worry about from then on is range application.
Upon looking at this further I think WH has a point. A can or something that is truely stationary will be hit (ie. not affected by tracking issues) actual dmaage applied will still be affected by range though. but is something as just a fraction of speed then the whole thing becomes a lot more difficult hence the thing with the can v sentry drones (that drift ever so slowly)
But back to the OP
If you can kill the frig before they get within 10-13km then TC will help more. if they get within 10-13km then a web will help to kill them quicker.
Personally I'd work to keep them at range and blap them before they get close then you can swap scripts on the TC to increase your optimals once frigs are gone to aid in damage application to the cruisers+ That is the Way, the Tao.
Balance is everything. |

Taoist Dragon
The Church of Awesome Caldari State Capturing
505
|
Posted - 2013.07.12 23:05:00 -
[18] - Quote
Whitehound wrote:Uppsy Daisy wrote:Do I win now? No. The argument was about the details and I have shown you that I am aware of them. The two of you have repeatedly been trying to prove me wrong, but only to show how little you actually know. Now, I do not really care how much or how little you know when you are trying to have an argument with me. Just understand that it has details everywhere and that the argument was pointless from the beginning. If you go back to the start of the argument and read again what I wrote will you see for yourself. There is nothing to win here other then perhaps the insight I have given you on stationary targets. You can jettison as many cans as you like. You would be right if it was real physics, but this is EVE. These objects posses no speed. Their speed is not 0 - they do not have a speed attribute to begin with! Thus does the formula default to a 0 transversal speed for such objects regardless of your ship's speed. Are we done here?
Are you a maths/science teacher or business analysist IRL by any chance? As these are the people I find are normally so anally retentive about winning a minor point that has nothing what so ever to do with the orignal query given. That is the Way, the Tao.
Balance is everything. |

Chris Winter
Zephyr Corp V.A.S.T.
155
|
Posted - 2013.07.12 23:12:00 -
[19] - Quote
Whitehound wrote:Uppsy Daisy wrote:Do I win now? No. The argument was about the details and I have shown you that I am aware of them. The two of you have repeatedly been trying to prove me wrong, but only to show how little you actually know. Now, I do not really care how much or how little you know when you are trying to have an argument with me. Just understand that it has details everywhere and that the argument was pointless from the beginning. If you go back to the start of the argument and read again what I wrote will you see for yourself. There is nothing to win here other then perhaps the insight I have given you on stationary targets. You can jettison as many cans as you like. You would be right if it was real physics, but this is EVE. These objects posses no speed. Their speed is not 0 - they do not have a speed attribute to begin with! Thus does the formula default to a 0 transversal speed for such objects regardless of your ship's speed. Are we done here? There's a really, really simple way to prove yourself wrong.
Take a fast ship with big guns (an attack BC, for example) and an MWD. Stick a buddy or an alt into a frigate. Have the buddy stay stationary while you orbit him at 10km or whatever. Oh hey, look at that, you'll miss.
I know this to be true because I've experienced this using attack BCs shooting at small-sig sentry guns in combat sites. The sentry guns are by definition stationary, so obviously the only thing making it harder for you to hit is your own velocity.
You really need to stop talking until you know what you're talking about. |

Freighdee Katt
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
333
|
Posted - 2013.07.12 23:31:00 -
[20] - Quote
Chris Winter wrote:Take a fast ship with big guns (an attack BC, for example) and an MWD. Stick a buddy or an alt into a frigate. Have the buddy stay stationary while you orbit him at 10km or whatever. Oh hey, look at that, you'll miss. Just did this with my combat toon in a Mach with 800mm ACs and an alt in a shuttle. Warped to safespot, alt is sitting at 0 m/s velocity, started duel.
First I orbited the shuttle in the Mach at 13 km and opened fire. That's my usual orbit distance when fighting BS sized NPCs, since it gives just enough distance for angular to drop to a reasonable level. All shots at the shuttle missed for going on ~30 seconds (a little surprising, since the angular was about half of the 0.06 rad/s tracking on this ship).
Hit keep at distance (set by default to my falloff range of 50km), angular drops to near 0, shuttle pops.
Test concluded. |
|

ISD Ezwal
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
351

|
Posted - 2013.07.12 23:48:00 -
[21] - Quote
I removed a post that was in essence a personal attack. You don't have to agree with each other to have a good discussion, so please keep it civil people!
The rules: 2. Be respectful toward others at all times.
The purpose of the EVE Online forums is to provide a platform for exchange of ideas, and a venue for the discussion of EVE Online. Occasionally there will be conflicts that arise when people voice opinions. Forum users are expected to be courteous when disagreeing with others.
4. Personal attacks are prohibited.
Commonly known as flaming, personal attacks are posts that are designed to personally berate or insult another forum user. Posts of this nature are not beneficial to the community spirit that CCP promote and as such they will not be tolerated. ISD Ezwal Lt. Commander Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs) Interstellar Services Department |
|

Whitehound
1527
|
Posted - 2013.07.12 23:52:00 -
[22] - Quote
Chris Winter wrote:There's a really, really simple way to prove yourself wrong.
Take a fast ship with big guns (an attack BC, for example) and an MWD. Stick a buddy or an alt into a frigate. Have the buddy stay stationary while you orbit him at 10km or whatever. Oh hey, look at that, you'll miss. Nothing wrong with this. However, the argument was on stationary targets and you did not know that it has special cases. Perhaps it was mean of me not to tell you about them right from the start, but it was also not me who wanted to make this into an argument. Only you wanted this.
So, yes, you will find to each of the three modules cases where they do not give you an advantage. I previously wrote:
Quote:Nonsense. A TP also does not give a 37.5% advantage when used against a Titan. Nor is a TC with 30% much help when used against a stationary target or a 10x faster ship. It is all there was to understand. Let me know when you are done arguing. I am only telling you. Loss is meaningful. Therefore is the loss of meaning likewise meaningful. It is the source of all trolling. |

Ireland VonVicious
Vicious Trading Company
171
|
Posted - 2013.07.13 00:16:00 -
[23] - Quote
The answer to the OP's question is based on the fitting.
If you are using a subsystem with drones you will see extra advantage to webs and tp's.
TC can easily be the best choice if you are having cap issues and all lasers for your dps.
I'd say TP is the most middle of the road option.
Webs are what you want if you are having issues with the close frigs (( High secondary gunnery skills or implant? )) |

Chris Winter
Zephyr Corp V.A.S.T.
156
|
Posted - 2013.07.13 00:36:00 -
[24] - Quote
Your claim was:
Whitehound wrote:No, they do not. You always deal full damage against stationary targets (within optimal range).
This claim has been proven false. Now you're claiming that you knew something else all along but didn't share it.
Sure, whatever.
As for there being cases where each of them doesn't help you...this is obviously true. If you're already hitting 100% of the time in all the scenarios you care about, none of them are going to help you.
|

Whitehound
1527
|
Posted - 2013.07.13 08:24:00 -
[25] - Quote
Chris Winter wrote:Your claim was: Whitehound wrote:No, they do not. You always deal full damage against stationary targets (within optimal range). This claim has been proven false. Now you're claiming that you knew something else all along but didn't share it. 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. 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 - 2013.07.13 08:27:00 -
[26] - Quote
and...thread delivers. |

Tauranon
Weeesearch
200
|
Posted - 2013.07.13 08:45:00 -
[27] - Quote
Whitehound wrote:Chris Winter wrote:Your claim was: Whitehound wrote:No, they do not. You always deal full damage against stationary targets (within optimal range). This claim has been proven false. Now you're claiming that you knew something else all along but didn't share it. 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.
There is no special case. Some objects simply have large signatures.
Guns have signature resolution, which is why you can make a medium gun have the same tracking figures as a small gun, yet the small gun still lands more hits on small fast moving targets.
I'm sure you can find an object in space with a small enough sig to be able to miss it from an orbit. Try a hyperion with 425mm railguns. |

Whitehound
1527
|
Posted - 2013.07.13 09:49:00 -
[28] - Quote
Tauranon wrote:There is no special case. Some objects simply have large signatures.
Guns have signature resolution, which is why you can make a medium gun have the same tracking figures as a small gun, yet the small gun still lands more hits on small fast moving targets.
I'm sure you can find an object in space with a small enough sig to be able to miss it from an orbit. Try a hyperion with 425mm railguns. Ignore it and be sure about it, but it is a long standing fact that stationary targets in EVE, meaning stations, gates, cans and all else that do not have a propulsion and cannot move, posses no speed and no transversal speed and no angular velocity attribute. You can verify this with the overview, where you get no reading for stationary targets. It is not just 0, it is empty.
Just to be clear, this is not my opinion or a hunch of mine. It has been said for many years on the forums and on the help channels by other players. I then have not ever seen a miss against a stationary target to believe otherwise. If you believe otherwise then feel free to prove not just me wrong, but everyone else who has been saying this. I will however not sit down and run a test series against various objects only to convince someone who has never heard of it and then cannot believe it.
There was a time when ships at 0km range could not deal damage against other ships until CCP changed it after many years had past. I am sure you have never heard about this either, but you may find proof of this in some of the older patch notes, which is how I learned about it. I have never seen this myself and was surprised just like many others that this was possible.
So go ahead, and believe you know all the answers and then use it to start arguments only to get taught by someone else about facts you have been missing. I know I do not have them all, but I certainly like to know more, which is why I know about all these things.
TL;DR: bite me. Loss is meaningful. Therefore is the loss of meaning likewise meaningful. It is the source of all trolling. |

Jani Padecain
The Shangri-La Colony
0
|
Posted - 2013.07.13 12:58:00 -
[29] - Quote
Don-¦t mind me. I-¦m just going to park this link in here.
Velocities: http://wiki.eveuniversity.org/Velocities
Turret damage: http://wiki.eveuniversity.org/Turret_Damage
And back to the topic. Since the lack of dronebay in Zealot. Fit a web.. |

Chris Winter
Zephyr Corp V.A.S.T.
158
|
Posted - 2013.07.13 20:25:00 -
[30] - Quote
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. |

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] |