EVE Search - Error in the turret tracking formula?

All Channels

Ships and Modules

Error in the turret tracking formula?

» 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)
Emsigma	Posted - 2006.05.09 13:52:00 - [1] Hi, I was just reading through the turret tracking guide and realized that it is depending on transversal speed. Why is that? Transversal speed can not be compared to the turrets tracking since the turrets specify their tracking as radians / second while the transversal is just a speed perpenticular against the vector between the two ships. Imagine a case when two ships fly alongside each other. In one case they are flying 100m from each other and one ship is going 200m/s faster than the other ship. The transversal speed is now 200m/s. Imagine the same scenario but it is 10km between the ships instead. The transversal is still 200m/s now but the radial speed is around 100 times as easy to track. Does this really mean that the guns hit as good in both cases with the current formula or is it a problem in the Guide? Perhaps transversal is normated by distance in the actual formula, but unfortunately the guide doesn't name the formula itself. Can someone clearify this for me?
Gronsak	Posted - 2006.05.09 13:59:00 - [2] it takes distance of target into consideration. radians per sec times by distance gives u speed. infact that is how the radian is definied -------------------Sig----------------------- Boost the raven, i dont know how since its got great volley damage, massive range, any damage type, overpowered tank BUT BOOOOOOOSTTTT them raveneeeeen
Emsigma	Posted - 2006.05.09 14:07:00 - [3] Yes, I kinda guessed that it was divided by distance when used in the formula, but still... but that still makes transversal speed totally meaningsless as a measurement for anything really. So why put it in the guide that is supposed to help new people and even more important. Why can you choose to see transversal speed in the overview?
Gronsak	Posted - 2006.05.09 14:09:00 - [4] well if you look at your turrets tracking speed in radians per sec, and multiply it by your targets distance you get a velocity, if ur targets trans velocity is lower than the tracking u will hit him fine ect -------------------Sig----------------------- Boost the raven, i dont know how since its got great volley damage, massive range, any damage type, overpowered tank BUT BOOOOOOOSTTTT them raveneeeeen
Emsigma	Posted - 2006.05.09 14:21:00 - [5] Edited by: Emsigma on 09/05/2006 14:23:24 Originally by: Gronsak well if you look at your turrets tracking speed in radians per sec, and multiply it by your targets distance you get a velocity, if ur targets trans velocity is lower than the tracking u will hit him fine ect I would like to see one single pilot out there that crunches 0.013 x distance with a calculator while fighting :) Specially when you have radial speed as an option on the overview that I have NEVER seen anyone but myself use. I am confident that 90% of the players think that transversal speed is an absolute measure to how good you hit a moving targets when it infact means nothing.
Twilight Moon	Posted - 2006.05.09 14:29:00 - [6] Originally by: Emsigma I am confident that 90% of the players think that transversal speed is an absolute measure to how good you hit a moving targets when it infact means nothing. Yep, low = Shoot high = Web, then shoot ...seems to work fine for me.
Emsigma	Posted - 2006.05.09 14:39:00 - [7] Originally by: Twilight Moon Originally by: Emsigma I am confident that 90% of the players think that transversal speed is an absolute measure to how good you hit a moving targets when it infact means nothing. Yep, low = Shoot high = Web, then shoot ...seems to work fine for me. So what does it mean to you when an assault frig has a transversal of 600m/s? Can you shoot it or not?
Twilight Moon	Posted - 2006.05.09 14:46:00 - [8] Edited by: Twilight Moon on 09/05/2006 14:47:47 No. I'm in a Battlecruiser, they wont track a 600m/s transversal velocity ship. 200m/s and below seems to work fine for cruiser class guns. Depends on the specific gun though, and your mods. Saying that though, with a bit of manual flying that 600m/s will drop like a stone in a short time. Go fly Minmatar for a bit and you'll know when you can and cannot hit depending on the targets transversal velocity.
Gronsak	Posted - 2006.05.09 14:55:00 - [9] Originally by: Emsigma I am confident that 90% of the players think that transversal speed is an absolute measure to how good you hit a moving targets when it infact means nothing. perhaps but if nothing else, people get used to the guns they use, and know what they will and will not hit and if that fails once u see the meassges of you missed so and so, u know u cant track and switch target -------------------Sig----------------------- Boost the raven, i dont know how since its got great volley damage, massive range, any damage type, overpowered tank BUT BOOOOOOOSTTTT them raveneeeeen
Litus Arowar	Posted - 2006.05.09 14:55:00 - [10] Originally by: Twilight Moon Edited by: Twilight Moon on 09/05/2006 14:47:47 No. I'm in a Battlecruiser, they wont track a 600m/s transversal velocity ship. 200m/s and below seems to work fine for cruiser class guns. Depends on the specific gun though, and your mods. Saying that though, with a bit of manual flying that 600m/s will drop like a stone in a short time. Go fly Minmatar for a bit and you'll know when you can and cannot hit depending on the targets transversal velocity. there's no yes or no answer here, it depends on the distance of the ship from you... I fully agree with the OP that transverse speed is the wrong column to have on the overview... it should be rad/s I however have distance, transverse, size, and velocity all displayed on my overview... size is generally displayed improperly, and doesn't correspond to sig radius at all, so I'll probably be getting rid of that... the other 3 help me figure out where a target I'm not looking at is, and how likely it is to hit me/catch me I fly inties, and yes, I make use of all these to figure out my odds, though I'd much prefer to simply have rad/s, velocity, and distance... Originally by: cytomatrix Try sitting inside a big frickin ball filled up with glue and tubes stuck up your nose and your arse. Then compare RL and Eve.
Twilight Moon	Posted - 2006.05.09 15:13:00 - [11] Originally by: Litus Arowar there's no yes or no answer here, it depends on the distance of the ship from you... I fully agree with the OP that transverse speed is the wrong column to have on the overview... it should be rad/s Surely if the ships closer to you, and still moving fast in such a way that it screams across your gunsights the transversal velocity shoots up to sky high levels again anyway?
Emsigma	Posted - 2006.05.09 17:05:00 - [12] Originally by: Twilight Moon Originally by: Emsigma Does this really mean that the guns hit as good in both cases with the current formula or is it a problem in the Guide? No. If the ship is close to you and orbiting you at 1000m you at 200m/s sustained, its going to be "passing accross your guns sights" much faster than a ship orbiting you at 200m/s at 10km out. Therefore the ship that is closer will have a higher transverse velocity, thus making it harder to hit. Guns can only track at a certain speed after all. I think we are meaning the same thing but I expressed myself a bit clumpsy. What I meant is that the flash made tracking guide talks about transversal as a key figure that you should consider when examining your chanses of tracking, and then asks if that is the case, and thus making the turret tracking formula severly bugged, or if it was the guide that was wrongly made. What I am meaning is that if a ship has a transversal of 200m/s from you at 1km you are never gonna hit it with cruiser turrets. If you fire at a ship that goes 200m/s transversal from you at 60km (assumng you can hit that far) you won't miss a shot due to tracking problems. If TomB had never ever named transversal in that guide I don't think people would have missunderstood it at all. To ask "how fast was his transversal" is an EVE analogy to the question "how long is a rope".
Litus Arowar	Posted - 2006.05.09 17:32:00 - [13] Edited by: Litus Arowar on 09/05/2006 17:34:34 Originally by: Twilight Moon Originally by: Litus Arowar there's no yes or no answer here, it depends on the distance of the ship from you... I fully agree with the OP that transverse speed is the wrong column to have on the overview... it should be rad/s Surely if the ships closer to you, and still moving fast in such a way that it screams across your gunsights the transversal velocity shoots up to sky high levels again anyway? no, if the ship's 2m away or 20km away its maximum transverse velocity will always be the same (not counting your velocity) the problem I have with this is that transverse velocity is only useful as a number if you do a calculation in conjunction with distance AND signature radius... that's the problem, it tells you nothing on its own... a rad/s readout would only require you to compare it to your guns' threshold for tracking, and if you wanted to go further, to the ship's sig radius... so if you know the inty you're fighting has a sig of no less than 135 (mwd claw) and you see that he is orbiting you at 0.3 rad/s, your gatling lasers will hit him no problem (not counting optimal/falloff range) rad/s has been missing from the overview for far too long, it would in no way hurt the game balance or whatever the devs are worried about, and displaying it shouldn't be a problem, as it's clearly already being calculated Originally by: cytomatrix Try sitting inside a big frickin ball filled up with glue and tubes stuck up your nose and your arse. Then compare RL and Eve.
Twilight Moon	Posted - 2006.05.09 17:44:00 - [14] Meh....mathematics was never my strong point, so I'll just say "yes" and run away. Wait.....are you saying I can (or should) have the radians a ship moves across my guns on my overview? That would be VERY handy.
Litus Arowar	Posted - 2006.05.09 17:48:00 - [15] Originally by: Twilight Moon Meh....mathematics was never my strong point, so I'll just say "yes" and run away. Wait.....are you saying I can (or should) have the radians a ship moves across my guns on my overview? That would be VERY handy. yes that's exactly what I'm saying... it's basically already there, as distance and transverse velocity can be combined through alchemi (or mathematics) to produce the rad/s number... but since few people can do that quickly enough in combat, just having my super high-tech spaceship divide A by B should be doable, no? Originally by: cytomatrix Try sitting inside a big frickin ball filled up with glue and tubes stuck up your nose and your arse. Then compare RL and Eve.
Leda Blackhowl	Posted - 2006.05.09 17:53:00 - [16] Well basicly if the target ships rad/s is equal or lower then my guns tracking rad/s I should hit it very well (in matter of tracking - distance is the other part). True?
Hoshi	Posted - 2006.05.09 18:39:00 - [17] Originally by: Leda Blackhowl Well basicly if the target ships rad/s is equal or lower then my guns tracking rad/s I should hit it very well (in matter of tracking - distance is the other part). True? If tracking speed = transversal speed (and not taking signature radius into account) you have 50% hit chance. If tracking is dubbel as fast as transversal = 85% hit chance. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sarmaul	Posted - 2006.05.09 18:45:00 - [18] to be honest, the entire tracking formula is a load of *******s. in reality if a ship is orbiting a stationary object it can be moving 10km/s and still hit perfectly as it is the ship that is turning while the turrets remain stationary. there also isn't 1 good reason why there is no radians/second option on the overview.
New Soi	Posted - 2006.05.09 18:57:00 - [19] Originally by: Leda Blackhowl Well basicly if the target ships rad/s is equal or lower then my guns tracking rad/s I should hit it very well (in matter of tracking - distance is the other part). True? Partially true. I believe there's 3 factors that determine the chance of hitting: - Tracking: what you said. - Optimal & Falloff: at optimal you have a 100% chance of hitting, at optimal+falloff 50%, and optimal+2*falloff 0%. - Signature resolution: depending on the size of your guns and the size of your target, the damage will be reduced. Hope it helps a bit ______________________________ Time flows where it wants to flow
Harry Voyager	Posted - 2006.05.09 19:05:00 - [20] The game uses an algorithim that considers distance and transversal velocity, rather than radians per second, primarily to simplify the calculation. As such it does produce slightly different results from a conventional rad/s calculation, which means, in order to predict if you are going to hit in the game, you must consider it as a function of transverse and distance. I've used both, and using the radian method leads to far more missed shots than a range/transverse composite. If you're using 1400s, you just aren't going to hit a frigate with a 600m transverse, even when your firing from 100km away and your rad/s are down to 0.001, simply because the game is looking at the 600m/s trans, rather than the 0.001 rad/s Harry Voyager
Karille	Posted - 2006.05.09 20:00:00 - [21] IMHO the whole tracking idea is borked. If i'm orbiting something, i dont care how fast i'm going, my guns dont have to move to track it because my ship is constantly turning for them. I also agree with the rad/seconds column in the overview being infinately useful because neither velocity and transversal velocity tell me what i want to know. PLZ impliment?
Emsigma	Posted - 2006.05.09 20:28:00 - [22] Uhm... radial velocity IS on the overview :) I have it on :) It's under columns :)
Leda Blackhowl	Posted - 2006.05.09 20:35:00 - [23] Edited by: Leda Blackhowl on 09/05/2006 20:35:15 Originally by: Hoshi If tracking speed = transversal speed (and not taking signature radius into account) you have 50% hit chance. If tracking is dubbel as fast as transversal = 85% hit chance. ah okay - so as a rule of tumb: keep the transversal of the target lower than the tracking speed of your gun. thank ya bery mutch
Farjung	Posted - 2006.05.09 20:43:00 - [24] Originally by: Emsigma Uhm... radial velocity IS on the overview :) I have it on :) It's under columns :) Radial velocity is velocity along the radius - ie if they are moving towards or away from you. It is measured in m/s. Transversal velocity is velocity perpendicular to the radius. It is also measured in m/s. I believe you're looking for angular velocity, which can be measured in rad/s. --- Reckless Wave of Mutilation
Emsigma	Posted - 2006.05.09 21:04:00 - [25] Edited by: Emsigma on 09/05/2006 21:15:23 Edit: Don't mind me :)
Matrices Sunbound	Posted - 2006.05.10 06:46:00 - [26] Sarmaul you went from FIX to BOB! Anyway, not sure about your statement there about a ship and a stationary object. If my tempest orbits a webbed battleship at 5km, my 650mm start missing quite frequently. It doesn't matter who is moving, since TV is a number representing velocity of one ship relative to another.
Sarmaul	Posted - 2006.05.10 07:01:00 - [27] Originally by: Matrices Sunbound Anyway, not sure about your statement there about a ship and a stationary object. If my tempest orbits a webbed battleship at 5km, my 650mm start missing quite frequently. It doesn't matter who is moving, since TV is a number representing velocity of one ship relative to another. what I said is what would happen if the tracking formula was true to life. however as the tracking formula doesn't take into account angular velocity into the equation you will miss when orbiting a stationary object too fast/close
Nyabinghi	Posted - 2006.05.10 07:03:00 - [28] What I am still trying to understand is whether in close range combat flying a frigate against small frigates/fighters do I want to increase my ship speed or do I want to slow it down? The faster you go the harder it is to hit something or manuever into an optimal position, the slower you go the more damage you take. So it seems like an equal trade off both ways. But there must be a "sweet spot" in there somewhere. I make cool banners for ISK.
Sebroth	Posted - 2006.05.10 07:50:00 - [29] Originally by: Litus Arowar Originally by: Twilight Moon Meh....mathematics was never my strong point, so I'll just say "yes" and run away. Wait.....are you saying I can (or should) have the radians a ship moves across my guns on my overview? That would be VERY handy. yes that's exactly what I'm saying... it's basically already there, as distance and transverse velocity can be combined through alchemi (or mathematics) to produce the rad/s number... but since few people can do that quickly enough in combat, just having my super high-tech spaceship divide A by B should be doable, no? you may have a super high tech ship but as an minmatar Im more then happy by the fact that I can get my ship in warp w/o exploding We have lots of strange stuff like that in this game. I can see who is in local and I can see who is red and blue on my overview, why cant I see my standings in local (I have more then 700 "buddies" now and getting more every day). If I take show info on someone I can see personal, and corp standing but not our alliance standings. Why dont I have a sexy vocie warning me of incomming hostiles when Im afk in my sniper tempest ect. ect. One day I hope we will get more logic ingame.
Crellion	Posted - 2006.05.10 10:31:00 - [30] Originally by: Farjung Originally by: Emsigma Uhm... radial velocity IS on the overview :) I have it on :) It's under columns :) Radial velocity is velocity along the radius - ie if they are moving towards or away from you. It is measured in m/s. Transversal velocity is velocity perpendicular to the radius. It is also measured in m/s. I believe you're looking for angular velocity, which can be measured in rad/s. Correct abd the way the game uses a mix of transversal velocity and distnace to calculate angular velocity means that in practice the formula is indeed broken. A ship orbitting at 100kms is easily within the speed of all turrets but because of the way the game calculates it the turrets still miss. From a math point of view I think it is indeed broken. Balance wise I am not sure.

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.