Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Gypsio III
Questionable Ethics. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
1243
|
Posted - 2014.07.03 07:51:00 -
[61] - Quote
Gorn Arming wrote:This thread has been a goldmine of posts by people who don't understand math.
Yep. Threads about tracking are always like this. And the sig resolution issue is a pretty bit part of people's misunderstanding, a distressing number of people think it's a to-hit chance separate to tracking, as if turrets were missiles.
The counter-argument of the current system making it easier to relate your turrets' tracking speed to the angular velocity of a same-size opponent has some merit though. Although, since the sigs of different ships are so variable, it's not sure it's really that valuable. |
Aiyshimin
Imperial Collective Unsettled.
46
|
Posted - 2014.07.03 08:25:00 -
[62] - Quote
Bigger guns struggle to hit smaller targets, I don't get what's so "complicated" about this sig radius/resolution issue that would require spending dev time changing something that doesn't change anything.
|
Rab See
Fool Mental Junket
74
|
Posted - 2014.07.03 09:51:00 -
[63] - Quote
I win at eve becuase I understand the way these things interact. Lets make those 13 year olds work for their account and investigate the differences.
What, when you have removed signature, will target painters do? They are crap as it is. |
Arya Regnar
Darwins Right Hand
470
|
Posted - 2014.07.03 09:53:00 -
[64] - Quote
Joraa Starkmanir wrote:I think turrets should rely MORE on signature radius than they do currently not less. Remove it from the tracking formula, but add it as part of the dmg formula, so stationary targets dont take full dmg unless they are larger than the turret signature. No, no and no.
Turret mechanics are the only thing that works as it should at the moment.
EvE-Mail me if you need anything.
|
Velicitia
Arma Artificer
2398
|
Posted - 2014.07.03 10:40:00 -
[65] - Quote
Aebe Amraen wrote:Daichi Yamato wrote:what turret sig does it makes it sort of arbitrarily difficult for large weapons to hit small targets, and like wise makes small weapons hit large targets extremely well. No, the target sig radius does that. My proposal has nothing to do with sig radiuses.. The turret sig resolution does not do that. My proposal does have something to do with turret sig resolutions. The number of people telling me I'm wrong in this thread is simply more evidence that the vast majority of Eve players don't understand sig resolution.
hint -- the correlation between the target's sig radius and the turret's sig res is the crux of the matter.
The turret's sig res is essentially the same thing as the missile's explosion diameter (i.e. Sig Res <= Sig Rad, then 100% damage, barring other factors .... OR ... Sig Res > Sig Rad, then proportional decrease in applied damage) . One of the bitter points of a good bittervet is the realisation that all those SP don't really do much, and that the newbie is having much more fun with what little he has. - Tippia |
Gypsio III
Questionable Ethics. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
1243
|
Posted - 2014.07.03 10:43:00 -
[66] - Quote
Velicitia wrote:The turret's sig res is essentially the same thing as the missile's explosion diameter (i.e. Sig Res <= Sig Rad, then 100% damage, barring other factors .... OR ... Sig Res > Sig Rad, then proportional decrease in applied damage) .
Rab See wrote:What, when you have removed signature, will target painters do? They are crap as it is.
And yet, the fail continues. |
Vayn Baxtor
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
132
|
Posted - 2014.07.03 10:53:00 -
[67] - Quote
I would keep signature resolution. In fact, I'd rather see more uses and ideas applying it than just removing it. Last thing I'd want to see is big turrets hitting smaller ships that easily. Redundant or not, the concept of it isn't that difficult.
It would be great to see more ships using this particular attribute, or turrets that have other numbers than ~40, 125, 400 etc.
So for removing turret signature resolution stat, I'd say no. Using tablet, typoes are common and I'm not going to fix them all. |
Velicitia
Arma Artificer
2398
|
Posted - 2014.07.03 10:54:00 -
[68] - Quote
Gypsio III wrote:Velicitia wrote:The turret's sig res is essentially the same thing as the missile's explosion diameter (i.e. Sig Res <= Sig Rad, then 100% damage, barring other factors .... OR ... Sig Res > Sig Rad, then proportional decrease in applied damage) . Rab See wrote:What, when you have removed signature, will target painters do? They are crap as it is. And yet, the fail continues.
where am I wrong in the comparison?
it's how the math works ... yes, if the transversal is zero, you're gonna end up effectively zeroing out that side of the equation ... but that still doesn't mean that the tracking and signature resolution on the guns are the same thing. One of the bitter points of a good bittervet is the realisation that all those SP don't really do much, and that the newbie is having much more fun with what little he has. - Tippia |
Gully Alex Foyle
Black Fox Marauders Repeat 0ffenders
939
|
Posted - 2014.07.03 11:02:00 -
[69] - Quote
Velicitia wrote:Gypsio III wrote:Velicitia wrote:The turret's sig res is essentially the same thing as the missile's explosion diameter (i.e. Sig Res <= Sig Rad, then 100% damage, barring other factors .... OR ... Sig Res > Sig Rad, then proportional decrease in applied damage) . Rab See wrote:What, when you have removed signature, will target painters do? They are crap as it is. And yet, the fail continues. where am I wrong in the comparison? it's how the math works ... yes, if the transversal is zero, you're gonna end up effectively zeroing out that side of the equation ... but that still doesn't mean that the tracking and signature resolution on the guns are the same thing. If the transversal is zero (or very close to zero) the whole equation 'zeroes out' and you hit perfectly.
A moros will hit perfectly an unmoving pod, a Phoenix won't.
In your previous post it seems you said both wouldn't hit. |
Velicitia
Arma Artificer
2398
|
Posted - 2014.07.03 11:08:00 -
[70] - Quote
Gully Alex Foyle wrote:Velicitia wrote:Gypsio III wrote:Velicitia wrote:The turret's sig res is essentially the same thing as the missile's explosion diameter (i.e. Sig Res <= Sig Rad, then 100% damage, barring other factors .... OR ... Sig Res > Sig Rad, then proportional decrease in applied damage) . Rab See wrote:What, when you have removed signature, will target painters do? They are crap as it is. And yet, the fail continues. where am I wrong in the comparison? it's how the math works ... yes, if the transversal is zero, you're gonna end up effectively zeroing out that side of the equation ... but that still doesn't mean that the tracking and signature resolution on the guns are the same thing. If the transversal is zero (or very close to zero) the whole equation 'zeroes out' and you hit perfectly. A moros will hit perfectly an unmoving pod, a Phoenix won't. In your previous post it seems you said both wouldn't hit.
my bad -- it's lack of coffee .. .editing it to clear it up... One of the bitter points of a good bittervet is the realisation that all those SP don't really do much, and that the newbie is having much more fun with what little he has. - Tippia |
|
Deerin
Federal Navy Special Forces
257
|
Posted - 2014.07.03 11:22:00 -
[71] - Quote
OP Math is correct. It does simplify things mathematically and does have ZERO effect on the way game is played.
However, from a lore and phyical point of view, I wouldn't want to see a 125mm autocannon and 1400mm arillery to have the same "radius".
I believe there is an easier fix to make things more "readable":
Right now the angular velocity and tracking values are in rad/sec which is a hard to understand term. Change it to deg/s and suddenly it wil become much clearer for people. |
Daichi Yamato
Xero Security and Technologies
1760
|
Posted - 2014.07.03 11:26:00 -
[72] - Quote
people get how tracking works and how turret res affects everything. Just not grasping everything in its entirety (im bad and feel bad).
i kept forgetting that after u half a large weapons res to 200 u get a doubled tracking buff against BS's because they still have a sig rad of 400. so modifying turret tracking proportionally to its new turret res does not affect chances to hit.
Blowing up a ship sig with painters still works. EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY?No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided""So it will be up to a pilot to remain vigilant wherever they may be flying and be ready for anything at any time" |
Gully Alex Foyle
Black Fox Marauders Repeat 0ffenders
939
|
Posted - 2014.07.03 11:39:00 -
[73] - Quote
Deerin wrote:OP Math is correct. It does simplify things mathematically and does have ZERO effect on the way game is played.
However, from a lore and phyical point of view, I wouldn't want to see a 125mm autocannon and 1400mm arillery to have the same "radius".
I believe there is an easier fix to make things more "readable":
Right now the angular velocity and tracking values are in rad/sec which is a hard to understand term. Change it to deg/s and suddenly it wil become much clearer for people. Clearer to understand, but a bit harder to apply.
Example: a small turret has 0.3 rad/s tracking. Quick question: can it hit stuff up close?
Assuming 1,000 m as 'up close', I'd get 0.3 rad/s if the target orbited at 300 m/s. An AB frig will go 1,000 m/s at least, 400 m/s if webbed.
So, answer: up close, it hits well only frigs without a prop mod that are also webbed*. It will hit faster stuff too, but a severe (>50%) dmg reduction is to be expected.
Now, imagine the same question, but the turret's tracking is 17-¦/s. Try giving a quick approximate answer without using a calculator.
*Unless I can reduce transversal by also moving my own ship, of course, but that's beyond the point. |
Deerin
Federal Navy Special Forces
258
|
Posted - 2014.07.03 11:52:00 -
[74] - Quote
Gully Alex Foyle wrote:Deerin wrote:deg/s argument Good reply
Just make sure the angular velocity column in overview is also deg/s. So that you can have a fairly good idea on how fast your opponent circles you. Comparing 35 degrees to 18 degrees is easier than comparing 0.03523 to 0.01823. Yes they are essentially the same, but much readable as a bigger number. |
Arla Sarain
29
|
Posted - 2014.07.03 12:00:00 -
[75] - Quote
Deerin wrote:
Right now the angular velocity and tracking values are in rad/sec which is a hard to understand term. Change it to deg/s and suddenly it wil become much clearer for people.
How so?
What is difficult about rad/s versus degrees/s? Do you get confused by inches and cm? Does it matter? If the whole system is built around the same units.
Set up your overview to accommodate angular velocity. Both it and tracking are measured in radians per second. Same units.
Rad/s are far more intuitive. Because,as mentioned several times, they have physical meaning, whereas degrees is just a convention.
1rad/s is when the magnitude of speed is the same as the range/orbit. 500m/s at 500m orbit, or 1000m/s at 1000m orbit, will all give you an angular velocity of 1rad/s. This would be 57.3 degrees per second. How do degrees help you? |
Gully Alex Foyle
Black Fox Marauders Repeat 0ffenders
940
|
Posted - 2014.07.03 12:04:00 -
[76] - Quote
Deerin wrote:Gully Alex Foyle wrote:Deerin wrote:deg/s argument Good reply Good suggestion Agree.
My workaround is to shrink the ang velocity column to have only the first 4 digits visible. :)
So I see 0.035 vs. 0.018.
But yeah, my personal preference would be milli-radians!
- Easier to calculate in your head while creating a new fit or deciding whether to engage something (just divide expected max speed in m/s by expected minimum distance in km).
- Easier to read on your overview
Yes, I'm a nerd. |
Deerin
Federal Navy Special Forces
258
|
Posted - 2014.07.03 13:29:00 -
[77] - Quote
Arla Sarain wrote:This would be 57.3 degrees per second. How do degrees help you?
Bigger number easier to read. Totally cosmetic...and also somehow easier to visualise.
Personal preference I guess ::shrugs::
|
Spugg Galdon
APOCALYPSE LEGION The Obsidian Front
462
|
Posted - 2014.07.03 15:46:00 -
[78] - Quote
I've always thought of turret signature resolution as kind of turret "accuracy", where in the lower the number, the closer to the point of aim the shot is likely to land. Like "grouping" on a rifle. The tighter your grouping the more accurate you are.
I like this variable. I would even be interested in seeing ships get a bonus to this variable or, when module teircide occurs, perhaps weapon teirs will see this stat adjusted.
So, no. I think this complexity needs to remain but the system should be explained better via the wiki or something. |
Aebe Amraen
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
53
|
Posted - 2014.07.03 16:20:00 -
[79] - Quote
I'm happy to see some discussion going other than 'lol OP your terrible at math.' Thanks for sharing your perspectives. Just one thing I want to reply to personally:
Gully Alex Foyle wrote: But, even if PVP is extremely varied, most of the time you'll be shooting at the 'standard target'.
This is not the case in my experience. I very often find myself shooting at battleships with cruisers and shooting at frigates with battlecruisers and shooting at battlecruisers with destroyers. Perhaps I'm unusual though. |
Ashley Animus
7th Temporal Lounge
9
|
Posted - 2014.07.03 16:32:00 -
[80] - Quote
How about this to explain it.
Devide the tracking by its signature and you find the Absolute tracking value.
An Electron Blaster Cannon with 0.075 rad/s and a signature of 400. 0.075 / 400 = 0,0001875 Absolute
A 250mm railgun with a tracking of 0,02566 rad/s and a signature of 125. 0,02566 / 125 = 0,00020528 Absolute
Logically people think that the blaster has a lot more tracking because of the higher number. But in reality it has 9% worse tracking than the railgun. It confuses people without any reason.
+2 Good idea and stayed calm. |
|
Spugg Galdon
APOCALYPSE LEGION The Obsidian Front
463
|
Posted - 2014.07.03 17:13:00 -
[81] - Quote
Ashley Animus wrote:How about this to explain it.
Devide the tracking by its signature and you find the Absolute tracking value.
An Electron Blaster Cannon with 0.075 rad/s and a signature of 400. 0.075 / 400 = 0,0001875 Absolute
A 250mm railgun with a tracking of 0,02566 rad/s and a signature of 125. 0,02566 / 125 = 0,00020528 Absolute
Logically people think that the blaster has a lot more tracking because of the higher number. But in reality it has 9% worse tracking than the railgun. It confuses people without any reason.
+2 Good idea and stayed calm.
QFT
Comparing a large weapon to a medium in terms of their tracking is kind of fail |
Gizznitt Malikite
Agony Unleashed Agony Empire
4025
|
Posted - 2014.07.03 18:29:00 -
[82] - Quote
I don't really give a **** if people don't take the time to understand the formula's.
The turret sig resolution is a great way to help balance the ability to hit smaller targets.
Large Guns (400m sig resolution) have 10x as much trouble tracking a frig (40m sig radius) as it does a Battleship (400m sig radius). Seems alright to me. Why do we want to change this?
|
Gizznitt Malikite
Agony Unleashed Agony Empire
4025
|
Posted - 2014.07.03 18:53:00 -
[83] - Quote
A quick follow up:
Removing the sig resolution part will undermine the role of sig radius.
Many things in game alter the sig radius of your ship: Target Painters, Gang Links, Implants, MWD, Rigs, Modules, etc.
Removing the sig resolution from the turret hit formula essentially removes all the penalties and benefits of all these things.
|
Lady Rift
What Shall We Call It
22
|
Posted - 2014.07.03 19:03:00 -
[84] - Quote
Gizznitt Malikite wrote: A quick follow up:
Removing the sig resolution part will undermine the role of sig radius.
Many things in game alter the sig radius of your ship: Target Painters, Gang Links, Implants, MWD, Rigs, Modules, etc.
Removing the sig resolution from the turret hit formula essentially removes all the penalties and benefits of all these things.
all those things would still work like they do now. your large guns will still suck at shooting small things. MWD will still make you easyer to hit. TP's still as effective.
The op's post is 100% about trying to make the math easier to understand and grasp so that people don't fail like you just did. |
Bronson Hughes
The Knights of the Blessed Mother of Acceleration
115
|
Posted - 2014.07.03 19:04:00 -
[85] - Quote
Aebe Amraen wrote:Proposal: Because the turret signature resolution stat is useless, duplicative, and poorly understood by most EVE players, I suggest we do away with it entirely, adjust turret tracking speeds to keep each gun the same as it is currently, and stop confusing people. This does not even require any change in the Eve code base, just in the item database: pick a convenient number, for example 100, change all turret signature resolutions to 100, and multiply the tracking speed by 100/(old signature resolution). This can easily be accomplished with a database script and requires minimal programmer time to implement.
Summary: This will have literally no effect on how guns actually work in the game, on how often you hit or miss or on how much damage you apply. It will make the chance-to-hit formula easier to understand, allow easy comparison of tracking across guns of different sizes, and more natural comparison of your tracking speed to the angular velocity of targets.
What do you think?
Edit: fixed a typo.
I think this is a horrible idea.
Unless you plan to somehow make all turrets track at different rates against targets of different sizes (which is effectively what the signature resolution of the turret does), removing the turret signature resolution from the game will absolutely impact turret damage.
Right now, the chance to hit with a turret is calculated as:
Chance to hit = 0.5^X * 0.5^Y
Where X is the "tracking" term and Y is the "range" term. As long as you're within your turret's optimal range, only the tracking term matters, so let's assume that for now. Currently, the tracking term depends both on the relative motion of your ship and the target (tracking), and the size of the target compared to the size of your weapon (signature). The reason for tracking being part of the equation is obvious: it makes it harder to hit things that are moving too quickly. But the signature part of the equation is equally important: it makes it harder to hit things that are too small. Without a signature term, battleship guns would either get a massive buff to their ability to hit frigates (assuming their ability to hit other battleships stayed the same) or a massive nerf to their ability to hit other battleships (assuming their ability to hit frigates stayed the same). If there is no size component in the hit equation, there is no way to balance it, and that would completely break every turret-based combat ship.
tl;dr: don't ever dumb down basic EvE mechanics because someone doesn't feel they're simple enough to understand. Reading Comprehension: a skill so important it deserves it's own skillbook.
I want to create content, not become content. |
Aebe Amraen
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
55
|
Posted - 2014.07.03 19:42:00 -
[86] - Quote
Bronson Hughes wrote:
(snip)
I think this is a horrible idea.
Unless you plan to somehow make all turrets track at different rates against targets of different sizes (which is effectively what the signature resolution of the turret does), removing the turret signature resolution from the game will absolutely impact turret damage.
Right now, the chance to hit with a turret is calculated as:
Chance to hit = 0.5^X * 0.5^Y
Where X is the "tracking" term and Y is the "range" term. As long as you're within your turret's optimal range, only the tracking term matters, so let's assume that for now. Currently, the tracking term depends both on the relative motion of your ship and the target (tracking), and the size of the target compared to the size of your weapon (signature). The reason for tracking being part of the equation is obvious: it makes it harder to hit things that are moving too quickly. But the signature part of the equation is equally important: it makes it harder to hit things that are too small. Without a signature term, battleship guns would either get a massive buff to their ability to hit frigates (assuming their ability to hit other battleships stayed the same) or a massive nerf to their ability to hit other battleships (assuming their ability to hit frigates stayed the same). If there is no size component in the hit equation, there is no way to balance it, and that would completely break every turret-based combat ship.
tl;dr: don't ever dumb down basic EvE mechanics because someone doesn't feel they're simple enough to understand.
You're wrong. Rather than spending a bunch of time explaining why you're wrong, I will simply refer you back to the first three pages of this thread where a half dozen other people were wrong in the same way as you.
This is, as I said then, further evidence that most people do not understand the turret sig resolution stat. Removing the turret sig resolution stat in the way I suggested will literally change nothing about any gun's ability to hit small or large, fast or slow targets. All it will do is make the mechanic easier to understand, so that hopefully we will have fewer people being wrong. |
Benny Ohu
Chaotic Tranquility
3523
|
Posted - 2014.07.03 19:45:00 -
[87] - Quote
the bigness of mah gun is now in the tracking, and then my tracking-at-current-transversal-speed maths is muliplied by 100/target sig, but it's the same effect on my chance-to-hit as before, 'cos the bigness was in the tracking-at-current-transversal maths
gotcha |
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
1228
|
Posted - 2014.07.03 20:40:00 -
[88] - Quote
Gypsio III wrote:Gorn Arming wrote:This thread has been a goldmine of posts by people who don't understand math. Yep. Threads about tracking are always like this. And the sig resolution issue is a pretty bit part of people's misunderstanding, a distressing number of people think it's a to-hit chance separate to tracking, as if turrets were missiles. The counter-argument of the current system making it easier to relate your turrets' tracking speed to the angular velocity of a same-size opponent has some merit though. Although, since the sigs of different ships are so variable, it's not sure it's really that valuable. I'd be willing to bet that if the op didn't word the suggestion for normalizing tracking then suggesting regarding sig res that we "we do away with it entirely," where it's reasonable to assume "entirely" means from the tracking formula as well, rather than just converting it to a constant, that it might deal with half of those posts.
If it was explained exactly what would happen to the tracking formula that would probably have preempted half of the comments seeming to misunderstand. I get the math just fine but was myself initially confused by the wording of the op regarding the details of the suggestion.
Regarding tracking being associated by size currently, while the exact figures will differ within a size class, the general rule is still a lot more consistent for relating tracking angular than anything we would end up with for the suggested except for a small window of targets no larger than that of any individual weapon size now. |
Aebe Amraen
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
55
|
Posted - 2014.07.03 21:20:00 -
[89] - Quote
Tyberius Franklin wrote:I'd be willing to bet that if the op didn't word the suggestion for normalizing tracking then suggesting regarding sig res that we "we do away with it entirely," where it's reasonable to assume "entirely" means from the tracking formula as well, rather than just converting it to a constant, that it might deal with half of those posts.
I'm not sure what distinction you're trying to make here. I am suggesting that we get rid of sig resolution entirely by removing it from the formula. I suggested that rather than changing game code it may be easier to just adjust values in the database, which gives the same result (I assume this is what you mean by normalization). Getting rid of it entirely and converting it to a constant ("normalizing it") are equivalent. If a variable has the same value for every entry in the database, it is effectively no longer a variable. |
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
1228
|
Posted - 2014.07.03 21:26:00 -
[90] - Quote
Aebe Amraen wrote:Tyberius Franklin wrote:I'd be willing to bet that if the op didn't word the suggestion for normalizing tracking then suggesting regarding sig res that we "we do away with it entirely," where it's reasonable to assume "entirely" means from the tracking formula as well, rather than just converting it to a constant, that it might deal with half of those posts. I'm not sure what distinction you're trying to make here. I am suggesting that we get rid of sig resolution entirely by removing it from the formula. I suggested that rather than changing game code it may be easier to just adjust values in the database, which gives the same result (I assume this is what you mean by normalization). Getting rid of it entirely and converting it to a constant ("normalizing it") are equivalent. If a variable has the same value for every entry in the database, it is effectively no longer a variable. They aren't equivalent in that you have a number serving the exact same function in the formula. Whether you refer to is as sig res or "100" or whatever number you arbitrarily chose it still functions in modifying tracking the same way.
Removing it means changing the formula to actually remove it as a factor, or such is the way people are reading it judging by the comments. Turning a variable into a constant doesn't remove and terms from the equation, thus remove may not have been the best word to use. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |