EVE Search - Speed Boosting Modules Use Mass Of Ships

All Channels

Ships and Modules

Speed Boosting Modules Use Mass Of Ships

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
TomB	Posted - 2003.12.07 04:16:00 - [61] Quote: First up spaceship command and evasive manouvering both list 5% agility in there attributes .. the results I'm seeing between inactive (skillless) mass (IAM from here on) and active mass (AM from here on) seem to support the theory that they do this by lowering mass by 5%/level, however while which of the two is applied (and in fact both or neither) seems to vary by ship, wether its positive or negative seems to mostly go by race (all caldari seem to have it working backwards) it also seems to round/calculate slightly I have command 4 and evasive 4 .. so both would be a 20% or together an 40% Active Mass is the only mass the is used, the "Inactive Mass" is just a bug in the system which is not used anymore and should not be displayed anywhere. About evasive manuevering and space ship command, they give bonus to the agility which is not diaplyed in the client currently (mass * agility = inertia). I'm working on merge for these two for easier understanding to be displayed in the client. "Where is my hat?"
TomB	Posted - 2003.12.07 04:26:00 - [62] I see the problem, the "Inactive Mass" is displayed in the client and not the "Active Mass" I'll get that fixed asap "Where is my hat?"
Ana Khouri	Posted - 2003.12.07 04:47:00 - [63] @Zyrla Bladestorm: Your use of the skill boni is slightly wrong. As all skill/module boni which effect the same thing, spaceship command and evasive maneuvers are not simply added, but multiplied. With lvl4 in each skill the reduction is 0.8 * 0.8 -> 0.64 free speech not allowed here
Zyrla Bladestorm	Posted - 2003.12.07 05:13:00 - [64] pretty extreme setups so far .. Slasher 2x ab mass 1mn, velocity 5148m/s can maintain indefinetely 1x MWD, 1x ab mass 1mn, velocity 11840m/s can maintain almost indefinetely (have to restart the MWD every ~4 minutes after letting the cap recharge for a few seconds) Vigil 1x mwd, 2x ab Mass 1.32mn, velocity 14772m/s can maintain indefinetely Probe 1x mwd, 1x ab mass 1.735mn, velocity 4546m/s can maintin indefinetely Rifter 2x mwd mass 1.2mn, velocity 35km/s 30s of thrust 1x mwd mass 1.2mn, velocity 3875m/s can maintain indefinetely 1x mwd, 1x ab mass 1.2mn, velocity 8281m/s can maintain indefinetely more to come . ----- Apologys for any rambling that may have just occurred.
Zyrla Bladestorm	Posted - 2003.12.07 05:15:00 - [65] yup I know .. I tried the normal method first and it didn't fit .. whereas in most cases adding them together did fit pretty closely .. which is why I used it (its not unknown for eve's maths to do unexpected things) I just forgot to post that little tidbit . ----- Apologys for any rambling that may have just occurred.
xeno calligan	Posted - 2003.12.07 07:20:00 - [66] The way the bonus for accelration control is being factored in seems to have changed. With a meganewton afterburner and acc ctrl lvl 4, I get a bonus of 30% and not 45% as before. The formula has changed from: speed bonus = (1 + booster_bonus) * acc_ctrl to: speed bonus = 1 + booster_bonus * acc_ctrl Thus if I train acc ctrl from lvl 4 to lvl 5 I get a net gain of: (1+0.251.25)/(1+0.251.2) = 1.00962, ie. a relative boost of 0.962% for 842,980 skill points! (as opposed to 4.17% before) With these changes the accelration control skill has a very small effect on afterburners. Ofcourse with MWDs the picture changes, since the speed boost is so extreme (i.e. a 3.72% net gain going from lvl 4 to lvl 5). Is this effect intended??
Slave Miner	Posted - 2003.12.07 08:41:00 - [67] I see lots of frigates... some cruisers... and 2 bs's that were tested... has anyone thought of of consequences of having the huge cap usage in battles? There has got to be a better way to limit the ammount of mwd's you can put on a ship with out having such a huge cap drain, maybe even a greater deminishing return for additional units added. At the present point it takes some battleships about 30 seconds to gain an acceptable speed for getting into range (500m/s+) while this isn't so much a problem, that compounded ontop of the huge cap, you'll be lucky to be able to even keep your shields running by the time you get into your optimal. Personaly, i'd preffer across the board reduction in cap usage(at least 45%), and a deminishing return for additional units, whether it be mwd or ab (though i'd personaly preffer ab's be excluded, but that's me) in conjunction with this new system. To put it simply, the acceleration isn't so much a problem as long as you aren't using huge ammounts of cap.
j0sephine	Posted - 2003.12.07 15:38:00 - [68] Edited by: j0sephine on 07/12/2003 15:39:47 "What's the problem with mass?" Well, when i was writing it the problem seemed to be the ships would have vastly different (possibly even bugged) mass after being assembled, much different from their unassembled mass. But since you wrote later the unassembled mass is obsolete parameter, then the real problem appears to be, different ships have so different masses... resulting speeds render bunch of them useless and unable to put up a balanced fight from the very start. I whined about it in this thread already. will post the list of ship speeds under the same conditions in a while, once am done with training.
Ardor	Posted - 2003.12.07 16:13:00 - [69] The problem with MWD is their penalty for (close range) fighters who really want to fight and not to run away. 50% less shield and 25% less cap are a big penalty. On the other hand MWD are still to powerfull for those who only want to run away. I have an idea i want to share with you. 1.) no cap and shield penalty on MWD 2.) a pilot with High Speed Maneuvering level 1 can use a MWD for 1 cycle. Each level of HSM grants another bonus cycle. 3.) After using the MWD, the MWD needs a reload time for 40 seconds. 4.) using more then 1 MWD works like targetting. Example: You are chain killing and you target NPC A and one second later you target NPC B. Your target time with your ship is 5 seconds. NPC A will be a valid target after 5 seconds and NPC B will be a target after 10 seconds. Do the same with MWD and you have more cycles to get out of the range of an webifier by brute force (maybe) but not with insane speed.
Babar	Posted - 2003.12.07 17:05:00 - [70] Edited by: Babar on 07/12/2003 17:10:24 Quote: The problem with MWD is their penalty for (close range) fighters who really want to fight and not to run away. 50% less shield and 25% less cap are a big penalty. On the other hand MWD are still to powerfull for those who only want to run away. Long range gunships also need MWD's to stay at optimal range.
TomB	Posted - 2003.12.07 17:58:00 - [71] The speed boost maintained by MWD can be very damaging for game play and for the physics engine in EVE. Players are able to keep a MWD going none stop with leet fitting skills, it's not the biggest problem as I don't want to damage the travelling capabilites, but players should not be able to escape stasis webifier modules easily ... there for I'm looking into reducing the speed boost for using MWD but instead reducing the shield penality to 25%. Normal MWD: 450% speed boost Best Rare Drop MWD: 500% speed boost I will also change 2 of the least frequent rare drop AB and MWD to being medium and large. Thoughts? "Where is my hat?"
Edea Lorien	Posted - 2003.12.07 18:49:00 - [72] Tomb Are there any way to reduce some of the cap penality as well? Instead of just reduce the shield penality to 25% cant reduce the cap with some % and the shield with some % ? Btw i think all the changes to locking and speed and combat over all are so good, i cant wait till it all comes into Tq=)
McWatt	Posted - 2003.12.07 19:03:00 - [73] finally finding out that the target of the changes is to bring in race specifics, i d like to say: minmatar ships can always run, caldari get always banged is not a desireable result!!! please be carefull with these changes!!!
Babar	Posted - 2003.12.07 19:38:00 - [74] Edited by: Babar on 07/12/2003 19:39:10 Quote: Tomb Are there any way to reduce some of the cap penality as well? Instead of just reduce the shield penality to 25% cant reduce the cap with some % and the shield with some % ? Btw i think all the changes to locking and speed and combat over all are so good, i cant wait till it all comes into Tq=) Please don't, lasers are uber!!1! If you want an mwd on your apoc, you should be forced to use projectile or hybrids.
Halo Jones	Posted - 2003.12.07 19:48:00 - [75] okay, went thru the thread on MWDs etc, looking promising, but if your corp is based in deepspace, and the patch arrives, it means a journey with ****poor boosters for 50 jumps to gte a BP to manufacture the medium of large boosters, this doesnt seem the wisest thing, as a rat blockade halfway home cannot be outrun and basically leave hundreds trapped in deepspace by a patch, so whats happening the existing BPs. COuld be remedied I guess by the boosters in game converting to their equivalent module depending on what ship they are currently fitted to Like an impression on what will be happening, as deep space rat corp sttaions generally dont sell blueprints for devices such as this, and if i have to go 50 jumps unaided to gte a piece of equipment I previously had several of, it will be most irritating. Oberon Incorporated.
Jash Illian	Posted - 2003.12.07 20:07:00 - [76] Quote: ... COuld be remedied I guess by the boosters in game converting to their equivalent module depending on what ship they are currently fitted to ... I'd imagine that you'd find most of your equipment offline if that were to happen. Or the drive itself. The fitting requirements are proportional. I'd say when the patch gets close to actually arriving it'd best to use communications instead of some hotfix that's liable to cause problems itself. Reminding people every day through the Ingame News that in X days, your battleship will be a turtle with its currently equipped MWD. I mean its like you want corporations to oblige each other like its sex or something. Pffft I would rather *** my enemy.- Rohann Be careful out there. That other guy waiting in the queue for the gate MIGHT be a baby-munching frock-burner, YOU JUST DON'T KNOW!*- Lallante
Jash Illian	Posted - 2003.12.07 20:43:00 - [77] Edited by: Jash Illian on 07/12/2003 20:44:30 Quote: The speed boost maintained by MWD can be very damaging for game play and for the physics engine in EVE. Players are able to keep a MWD going none stop with leet fitting skills, it's not the biggest problem as I don't want to damage the travelling capabilites, but players should not be able to escape stasis webifier modules easily ... there for I'm looking into reducing the speed boost for using MWD but instead reducing the shield penality to 25%. Normal MWD: 450% speed boost Best Rare Drop MWD: 500% speed boost I will also change 2 of the least frequent rare drop AB and MWD to being medium and large. Thoughts? I don't think it's the speed boost granted by a single MWD. Any ship a class below the MWD equipped ship has a decent chance of catching that ship. With the lock timer changes, maybe even surviving too. It's when people start activating 2+ is when things get ridiculous. After all, if a person is intent on catching and killing you and you're both travelling 1200m/s, the only thing really ruled out are missiles. Time isn't that big a factor. Is there no way to restrict activating multiple mwds at the same time? For example the 1st could be activated regardless of speed. But activating a 2nd would require you to reach a % of your new max speed. Same with activating a 3rd. Call it time required for the previous field to stabilize. A Tempest + MWD does not accelerate fast enough to out run a Rupture + MWD + Webifier. But a Tempest + MWD * 2 stands a very high chance of doing so simply from the instant and rapid acceleration towards the new max speed activating both modules causes. I don't mind much losing a cruiser or 2 in catching a running bship. I do mind nobody being able to catch a running bship without having to enter the Stupid Zone on fittings to do so. I mean its like you want corporations to oblige each other like its sex or something. Pffft I would rather *** my enemy.- Rohann Be careful out there. That other guy waiting in the queue for the gate MIGHT be a baby-munching frock-burner, YOU JUST DON'T KNOW!*- Lallante
j0sephine	Posted - 2003.12.07 21:19:00 - [78] Edited by: j0sephine on 07/12/2003 21:22:03 "The speed boost maintained by MWD can be very damaging for game play and for the physics engine in EVE. Players are able to keep a MWD going none stop with leet fitting skills, it's not the biggest problem as I don't want to damage the travelling capabilites, but players should not be able to escape stasis webifier modules easily ... there for I'm looking into reducing the speed boost for using MWD but instead reducing the shield penality to 25%. Normal MWD: 450% speed boost Best Rare Drop MWD: 500% speed boost I will also change 2 of the least frequent rare drop AB and MWD to being medium and large. Thoughts?" ... A possibly different approach to consider: There's currently two problems related to MWD/AFB, especially to stacks of them. * People are able to reach too fast the jump gate and jump, before people guarding/camping the gate are able to activate the webifiers and slow them down. * People are able to gain enough speed to break out of warp scramblers range, before those who try to catch them can put enough webifiers on their target to slow it down and keep within the warp scrambling range. Both problems have the single source: ship acceleration seems to be proportional to maximum speed of the ship. It means with activated stack of MWD/AFB the top speed of the ship reaches ridiculous values, which in turn results in ridiculously fast acceleration. Allowing the ship to gain speed very fast, and quickly cover the distance nedded for jump/warp out. Solution: make the acceleration ship class specific, constant, and not affected by the ship's top speed. I.e.: * frigate speed cannot grow by more than 40 m/s in one second * cruiser speed cannot grow by more than 20 m/s in one second * battleship speed cannot grow by more than 10 m/s in one second. Those values can be further affected by the player's skill which were up to now affecting ship agility, and maybe other factors like race which created the ship, installed modules etc. Game-wise the limitation can be justified the acceleration is computer-controlled to prevent situation where the ship breaks apart due to too much strain put on it by sudden speed changes. 'Tis mean no matter how many MWD/AFB modules are fitted, after starting them there's always period where the ship moves slow enough to give the opponent chance to lock on them and webify/scramble/drain them if the opponent is fast enough. Additional, imo positive side-effects: * since installing more than one MWD doesn't provide any real benefit, there's no need for extra code just to prevent people from doing that. If they want no shields and no cap on their ship, let them. They'll still be unable to travel to gate within a second. * since slower acceleration will result in somewhat longer travel times, people will be naturally inclined to travel in ships which provide faster acceleration and thus faster travel -- i.e. frigates, shuttles, cruisers.
McWatt	Posted - 2003.12.07 21:42:00 - [79] Edited by: McWatt on 07/12/2003 21:42:30 kisses to jo for the post above.
Ana Khouri	Posted - 2003.12.07 21:49:00 - [80] Quote: I don't think it's the speed boost granted by a single MWD. Any ship a class below the MWD equipped ship has a decent chance of catching that ship. With the lock timer changes, maybe even surviving too. It's when people start activating 2+ is when things get ridiculous. [...] Agreeing with Jash here. (Btw - anyone feeling cold? I think hell just froze over) So far every single person commenting on the multiple MWD issue said it would be better if we would only be able to activate one at a time. Please consider this change. free speech not allowed here
Paul Dubois	Posted - 2003.12.07 22:11:00 - [81] Jo One slight problem with your suggestion that I can see off the top of my head is that it would probably have to apply on the slowing down side as well, so if you tried to web something that was already travelling fast the decceleration might be so slow that it would continue out of web/warp jam range. Possibly have the webbers affect the acceleration/decceleration rate as well? Or possibly consider it as a tractor beam? In that as well as slowing down the ship you're trying to catch it speeds your ship up as well (force applies to both parties) which would keep you in range for longer.
TomB	Posted - 2003.12.07 22:11:00 - [82] Quote: * People are able to reach too fast the jump gate and jump, before people guarding/camping the gate are able to activate the webifiers and slow them down. We are still making changes to the gate jumping, expect them to land on Chaos tomorrow (hopefully) - we will detail them when they are testable. Quote: * People are able to gain enough speed to break out of warp scramblers range, before those who try to catch them can put enough webifiers on their target to slow it down and keep within the warp scrambling range. The changes with 450% for MWD lessesn the changes of a ship getting out warp scramble range and webifiers work much better on them as well, Frigates will have much more change though, so webifiying a MWD frigate will require 2 webifiers or a frigate with MWD with stasis or sumthing... Quote: It means with activated stack of MWD/AFB the top speed of the ship reaches ridiculous values, which in turn results in ridiculously fast acceleration. Allowing the ship to gain speed very fast, and quickly cover the distance nedded for jump/warp out. Mutliple MWD should be impossible to run for any ship for a long period and never wise to take with into combat situations, this needs testing and feedback from players testing on Chaos is wanted big time. Quote: Solution: make the acceleration ship class specific, constant, and not affected by the ship's top speed. I.e.: * frigate speed cannot grow by more than 40 m/s in one second * cruiser speed cannot grow by more than 20 m/s in one second * battleship speed cannot grow by more than 10 m/s in one second. This is not possible, the inertia (mass * agility) and the max velocity tells the ship how fast it accelerates, i.e. it always takes a ship as long to get to 1/2 speed for example, if it's 200 or if it's 600. Removing this would mean that MWD boosting for close combat battleships would be the end which I know is not desirable. "Where is my hat?"
Ana Khouri	Posted - 2003.12.07 22:19:00 - [83] Edited by: Ana Khouri on 07/12/2003 22:20:27 @ Jo: That a extremly bad idea IMO. Why is forcing people into frigs or shuttle for travelling a good idea? And you cannot simply switch to a shuttle/frig on most occassions. People trading with indys could as well leave their PC alone for an hour for a traderoute of 10 jumps+. When curse wants to make a friendly visit to stain the core of their fleet - the BS - will take more than a hour to arrive. Such a change would in fact make MWD unuseable for cruisers and BS. A typhoon can support a MWD for around 40-50 secs - and would have a max speed of around 1300 ms. But with a hardcoded 10 ms acelleration it would only be able to get to 400-500 ms in this time. It could as well use a AB (~400 ms max speed) then. It's pretty similar with cruisers. free speech not allowed here
Ana Khouri	Posted - 2003.12.07 22:28:00 - [84] Edited by: Ana Khouri on 07/12/2003 22:32:56 Quote: Mutliple MWD should be impossible to run for any ship for a long period and never wise to take with into combat situations, this needs testing and feedback from players testing on Chaos is wanted big time. You are oh so much completly missing the point here TomB. No offense TomB, but when I hear such comments from you I somewhat doubt that you are really playing Eve as combat pilot incognito. Noone is complaining about people using multiple MWD as combat maneuver alone the cap and shield penalities of 2 MWD make this very unwise. The problem is that people are using multiple MWDs as almost failsafe fleeing device. Sure, they can only use them for 10,20 seconds - but even 5 seconds are enough with 2 MWDs to get to the gate or out of warpscrambeling range. With a typhoon I travelled 350km with 2 MWDs in 20 secs (around 700km till I slowed down), 2500 km with 3 MWDs in 10 secs. free speech not allowed here
Naz Farooq	Posted - 2003.12.07 22:29:00 - [85] Quote: Mutliple MWD should be impossible to run for any ship for a long period and never wise to take with into combat situations, this needs testing and feedback from players testing on Chaos is wanted big time. While I do hearby claim the title of 'fastest man alive' for my 50km/sec run in a 3x MWD Vigil (which will no doubt shortly be surpassed if it hasn't been already) the main problem with the MWD and frigates in general is lag. Running a Breacher with an MWD and 3 cruise missiles against my friend's Rupture in theory I should be able to zip by at 4km/sec unloading missiles and darting away from his torps, but one blink of lag and my ship was done (in the future I advise you to launch/reload/launch any drones you have to lag out a frig with torps chasing him, should work beautifully). You need a very stable fps to dodge torps and missiles, and any sort of combat environment where 'mixed' ships will be run will be laggy as heck, so I don't think the MWD makes frigates viable in fleet combat. If they're not viable in fleet combat (or anytime 10+ ships cause decent lag), what role do they have? I mean, they'll be more useful, but will they be useful enough that you'll want allies running frigates instead of cruisers or battleships? I'd like to test some bigger fights on Chaos but it lags terribly with more than 30 folks on it, so basically impossible. Just patch it to tranq and see. Sure, everyone supports saving Einstein's brain, but when you put it in the body of a Great White Shark, suddenly you've "gone too far".
Ana Khouri	Posted - 2003.12.07 22:34:00 - [86] Quote: While I do hearby claim the title of 'fastest man alive' for my 50km/sec run in a 3x MWD Vigil (which will no doubt shortly be surpassed if it hasn't been already) Was already suprpassed, check my posting on the 2nd page: 250 km/s with a typhoon free speech not allowed here
TomB	Posted - 2003.12.07 23:06:00 - [87] Quote: With a typhoon I travelled 350km with 2 MWDs in 20 secs (around 700km till I slowed down), 2500 km with 3 MWDs in 10 secs. Did you do this with 2X 450% speed boosting MWD, or a 700% one? 100 MegaNewton MicroWarpdrive I only boosts 450% now on Chaos. "Where is my hat?"
j0sephine	Posted - 2003.12.07 23:42:00 - [88] Edited by: j0sephine on 08/12/2003 00:00:48 "@ Jo: That a extremly bad idea IMO." Err... but nevertheless, you agreed with it when it was presented by Jash. -.o Limiting people to single MWD or artificial limitation of speed gain has the same result -- the acceleration of the ship is limited to somewhat sane range. The numbers i presented were just to get the idea of different acceleration rate across. The real numbers would be obviously different, perhaps to the point the performance would be similar to ships equipped with single MWD. (battleship with MWD already accelerates slower than the frigate) All in all 'tis moot considering what TomB says, but then if we can have people limited to one MWD at the time then it's just as good. ^^ TomB: "Mutliple MWD should be impossible to run for any ship for a long period and never wise to take with into combat situations, this needs testing and feedback from players testing on Chaos is wanted big time." Ana already said it, but the problem with multiple MWD running isn't that they can be ran for long (because they can't) The problem is they provide too huge acceleration in short time needed to get to gate or out of warp scrambling range. Although the smaller acceleration and higher fitting requirements on them now might help. I'll try to test later today.
TomB	Posted - 2003.12.08 00:19:00 - [89] Quote: Ana already said it, but the problem with multiple MWD running isn't that they can be ran for long (because they can't) The problem is they provide too huge acceleration in short time needed to get to gate or out of warp scrambling range. Although the smaller acceleration and higher fitting requirements on them now might help. I'll try to test later today. How does the current 450% speed boost seem like? "Where is my hat?"
TomB	Posted - 2003.12.08 02:58:00 - [90] Jump range reduced to 2,5 KM - so approaching stargate from 20 KM takes 17,5 KM to travel to jump. How ever we will try to take away warp disruption field in Empire Space to reduce the travelling time. I have been doing various tests with people running blockades and runners, using various ships and setups, solo camping is very hard how ever unless the player is ultimatily set up with sensor boosters, MWD, stasis and scrambler. Blockades of few people surrounding a stargate at X distance takes more thinking than before of course, cruisers and frigates were superb in camp team to stop runners coming from stargate and going for stargate. If possible, try to test blockade scenarios, runners, and also counter-attacks from pirate hunters. Specially with the reduced speed boost of the MWD vs. the reduced penality on shield All feedback is wanted "Where is my hat?"

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9 :: 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.