EVE Search - Stacking penalty on Inertia modules

All Channels

Ships and Modules

Stacking penalty on Inertia modules

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)

Chribba Otherworld Enterprises Otherworld Empire	Posted - 2007.01.07 17:05:00 - [1] I'm trying to understand how stacking on inertia modules are calculated but I just can't seem to get it to work. Anyone aware on the formula? For example, Crusader + 1x Local Hull Inertia reduces its mass to 892,500. The plain 15% the LHI gives, but on the next LHI it all goes to hell, as the stacking penalty calculations from damage mods does not seem to apply (or I do it the wrong way). Basicly what I am trying to calculate is the speed after activating an MWD/AB, but the mass just won't calculate. Buy EVE history and get Otherworld shares

Samirol Turbulent Privateer Alliance	Posted - 2007.01.07 17:10:00 - [2] trying to make your dread go faster? Tier 2 BS Lotto Contact mach'ett3 for all your sig needs

Chribba Otherworld Enterprises Otherworld Empire	Posted - 2007.01.07 17:12:00 - [3] Originally by: Samirol trying to make your dread go faster? It goes decent fast already, but yeah, easier to calculate than to fit, fit and refit modules when testing. Buy EVE history and get Otherworld shares

ElCoCo KIA Corp	Posted - 2007.01.07 17:14:00 - [4] Do you also fit a nanofiber? I've not got around to test what's the priority on the stacking penalty when combining nanos and inertia stabs. Meaning, if you fit 1 nano and 1 inertia, which one is first on the calculation? (meaning the second one gets the stacking penalty)

Chribba Otherworld Enterprises Otherworld Empire	Posted - 2007.01.07 17:18:00 - [5] Originally by: ElCoCo Do you also fit a nanofiber? I've not got around to test what's the priority on the stacking penalty when combining nanos and inertia stabs. Meaning, if you fit 1 nano and 1 inertia, which one is first on the calculation? (meaning the second one gets the stacking penalty) For now I am only trying to figure out the formula to use with Inertia's only. afaik Nanos don't affect mass at all so that shouldn't matter. And I don't think agility affects speed either so nanos and overdrives should be fairly simple to calculate as they only add base velocity. Buy EVE history and get Otherworld shares

Toaster Oven	Posted - 2007.01.07 17:22:00 - [6] Stacking penalty goes as: Originally by: Jim Hsu f(1) = 1 f(2) = 0.8708860 f(3) = 0.5705831 f(4) = 0.2829552 f(5) = 0.1059927 f(6) = 0.0299912 When using Local Hull Nanos, you get the following benefit per additional module: 1 = 15 * 1 = 15% reduction 2 = 15 * 0.8708860 = 13.06329% reduction 3 = 15 * 0.5705831 = 8.5587465% reduction 4 = 15 * 0.2829552 = 4.244328% reduction 5 = 15 * 0.1059927 = 1.5898905% reduction 6 = 15 * 0.0299912 = 0.449868% reduction Which when converted to an absolute multiplier for mass you get 1 = .85 2 = .8693671 3 = .914412535 4 = .95755672 5 = .984101095 6 = .99550132
ElCoCo KIA Corp	Posted - 2007.01.07 17:24:00 - [7] Yes sorry, you're right. The common thing inertias and nanos have is the agility modifier. I didn't remember correctly. (That only counts for turning speed and acceleration, right?)

Chribba Otherworld Enterprises Otherworld Empire	Posted - 2007.01.07 17:29:00 - [8] Edited by: Chribba on 07/01/2007 17:26:35 Originally by: Toaster Oven Stacking penalty goes as: Originally by: Jim Hsu f(1) = 1 f(2) = 0.8708860 f(3) = 0.5705831 f(4) = 0.2829552 f(5) = 0.1059927 f(6) = 0.0299912 When using Local Hull Nanos, you get the following benefit per additional module: 1 = 15 * 1 = 15% reduction 2 = 15 * 0.8708860 = 13.06329% reduction 3 = 15 * 0.5705831 = 8.5587465% reduction 4 = 15 * 0.2829552 = 4.244328% reduction 5 = 15 * 0.1059927 = 1.5898905% reduction 6 = 15 * 0.0299912 = 0.449868% reduction Which when converted to an absolute multiplier for mass you get 1 = .85 2 = .8693671 3 = .914412535 4 = .95755672 5 = .984101095 6 = .99550132 It's getting closer Got a link to Jim's formula? Coz using those values lands me close but not exact. 775910,13675 vs 776146,56257 NM the link I found it, using that crap EVE-Search.com Buy EVE history and get Otherworld shares

Toaster Oven	Posted - 2007.01.07 17:32:00 - [9] Originally by: Chribba Got a link to Jim's formula? Coz using those values lands me close but not exact. 775910,13675 vs 776146,56257 NM the link I found it, using that crap EVE-Search.com I think those are approximations calculated using ingame values. AFAIK no player has ever figured out the exact formula? If I'm wrong, I'd like to know what it is exactly

Chribba Otherworld Enterprises Otherworld Empire	Posted - 2007.01.07 17:55:00 - [10] Yay! Progress, I got an accurate value when using 4x Inertias, that should be sufficient to do calculations on. Buy EVE history and get Otherworld shares

Ather Ialeas Amarr Karjala Inc. Imperial Republic Of the North	Posted - 2007.01.07 17:58:00 - [11] Remember to sort the effects from highest to lowest first before applying those multipliers.
dalman Finite Horizon	Posted - 2007.01.07 17:58:00 - [12] Originally by: Toaster Oven Originally by: Chribba Got a link to Jim's formula? Coz using those values lands me close but not exact. 775910,13675 vs 776146,56257 NM the link I found it, using that crap EVE-Search.com I think those are approximations calculated using ingame values. AFAIK no player has ever figured out the exact formula? If I'm wrong, I'd like to know what it is exactly Do as Chribba did and use this crappy EVE-search.com site. And read Jim Hsu's original post on it. The 'formula' was more or less found, but there's some constants in it which are more or less impossible to say exactly what they are (and especially as the game doesn't give you very exact figures to compare with...). Am I forced to have any regret? I've become the lie, beautiful and free In my righteous own mind I adore and preach the insanity you gave to me
Sphynx Stormlord Gallente Anqara Industries Serenus Letum	Posted - 2007.01.07 20:18:00 - [13] Anyone know if the agility modifier is stacking penalised as well?
ReaperOfSly Gallente Lyrus Associates Interstellar Starbase Syndicate	Posted - 2007.01.07 22:13:00 - [14] I didn't think inertia stabs were stacking penalised. I've been using 6 on my carrier to allow me to align to warp as fast as a cruiser --------------------------------------------------------------------
Gor Kraon Minmatar Shadowclan	Posted - 2007.01.07 22:20:00 - [15] Edited by: Gor Kraon on 07/01/2007 22:21:33 They are, using more than 4 is pretty much a waste. Oh, make sure you add the mass of the MWD/AB (when its on) to the calculation as well. It also gets reduced by the inertia stabs. This was from some other thread, i just added and re-named some of the values for my benefit. Speed = (Base Speed + Speed Modules) * Navigation Skill * Ship Speed Bonus * Speed Rigs * Speed Implants * Gang Speed Bonus Boost Speed = Speed * (1 + Module Boost * Acceleration Control * Boost Rigs * Boost Implants * Thrust / ((Mass + Module Mass) * Mass Reduction Modules * Mass Reduction Rigs))
dalman Finite Horizon	Posted - 2007.01.07 22:26:00 - [16] Originally by: ReaperOfSly I didn't think inertia stabs were stacking penalised. I've been using 6 on my carrier to allow me to align to warp as fast as a cruiser Mass is an attribute that is subject to stacking penalty. So mass reduction rigs and inertia stabs are penalised. Agility is however not subject to stacking penalty afaik. So if you fit 4 local inertia stabs, that 4:th one will give you -4.24% to mass but still -15% to agility... So if you only want to warp as fast as possible and your max speed is of no concern, then sure you can fit 6 inertia stabs. Am I forced to have any regret? I've become the lie, beautiful and free In my righteous own mind I adore and preach the insanity you gave to me
Wucking Fanker	Posted - 2007.01.07 22:50:00 - [17] I know on Nanophoons the optimal fit is 5 nanos and 2 instabs to give maximum speed with a MWD. I don't understand it though just worked it out by trying every combination possible.
Shandling Minmatar Disband	Posted - 2007.01.08 01:31:00 - [18] Originally by: Wucking Fanker I know on Nanophoons the optimal fit is 5 nanos and 2 instabs to give maximum speed with a MWD. I don't understand it though just worked it out by trying every combination possible. Yep, that's what I do... I drop a can and orbit around it at whatever range I would be, and see what combination of stabs/nanos gets me the best speed at orbit. (not always the same as your max speed, it seems...)
31i73 BGG	Posted - 2007.02.06 13:17:00 - [19] and how would one figure out the optimal fitting of a crow for maximum speed? is it 3 istabs and 2 polycarbon rigs (reduce mass)? Or does the +15% mwd speed -rig benefit more?
M00dy Stain of Mind	Posted - 2007.02.06 22:31:00 - [20] Originally by: 31i73 and how would one figure out the optimal fitting of a crow for maximum speed? is it 3 istabs and 2 polycarbon rigs (reduce mass)? Or does the +15% mwd speed -rig benefit more? Necro? 2 Stabs and one Nano in low slots for best orbit speed. For rigs use three MWD Boost rigs. (Nano Pumps?) Your signature exceeds the maximum allowed awesomeness of 24000 Gigs - Devil Now if only I had written that... :p - Devil

Pages: [1] :: 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.