EVE Search - Weapon Accuracy Score is nice, but needs to go with Ship Evasion Sco...

All Channels

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Weapon Accuracy Score is nice, but needs to go with Ship Evasion Sco...

» 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)
Eli Stan Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation 457	Posted - 2016.04.14 19:26:24 - [1] - Quote On the test server there has been the introduction of the concept of a Weapon Accuracy Score for turrets. (Thanks Ja'e.) This new number utilizes both tracking and signature resolution to create a score that's directly comparable across different turrets. Previously, a gun with 0.12 rad/s tracking could have extremely different accuracy compared to a different gun with 0.12 rad/s tracking if the two guns had extremely different signature resolutions. With this new score, a gun with 40 WAS is known to be exactly as accurate as a different gun with a 40 WAS. However, it's now more problematic when comparing weapon accuracy to what's happening on the grid. Currently, if a pilot knows that their gun has a similar signature as their target, they know comparing the gun's tracking to the target's radial velocity is a very good indicator of the to-hit chance. With the Weapon Accuracy Score however, there's nothing about the ship that makes an easy comparison. A cruiser with 120 meter signature orbiting 1300 meters away at 200 m/s (0.15 rad/s) doesn't translate to an obvious to-hit chance when using a 40 WAS gun. Without doing some math it's not obvious whether it's 10% chance or a 90% chance. All we know is that a 90 WAS gun is more accurate than a 40 WAS gun. (It's a 32% chance to hit in this example, btw.) My proposal is to add an "Evasion Score" as an overview column. This Evasion Score would be calculated exactly like how the Weapon Accuracy Score is calculated. That is, 40000 * radial velocity / signature. In the above cruiser example, the ship has a 51 Evasion Score, which is slightly better than the gun's 40 Weapon Accuracy Score, so it's immediately obvious the gun has less than a 50% chance to hit. (When the two scores are equal, there's a 50/50 chance to hit.) This isn't a static value that can be added to the stats since it changes depending on the ship's speed and direction, which is why it needs to be an overview column. This will also help out with target painters, since as they dynamically effect a ship's signature radius they would dynamically effect a ship's Evasion Score. Similarly, MWD penalties would also show up on the overview. This is a very synergistic way to represent the turret chance-to-hit equation. If the above cruiser were to turn on its MWD and bloom its sig radius from 120m to 720m, it would have an Evasion Score of only 8.5, barely anything, until it was able to get up to full speed.
Robbert Smith Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation 2	Posted - 2016.04.14 20:56:20 - [2] - Quote While some will complain that this is dumbing down Eve, I think this has been to difficult for even veterans to understand. I laugh every time someone encourages a new bro to add transverse velocity to their overview... I think this is a great idea.
Iain Cariaba 2917	Posted - 2016.04.14 21:31:25 - [3] - Quote The problem with evasion score is that a good portion of that revolves around how you fly your ship. If you're flying straight at the person shooting at you, you're easy to track. If you're orbiting at 50km sniping, you're easier to hit than if you're at the same speed orbiting at 5km. And yes, Robbert, while adding the transversal column to your overview is rather silly, it is still important to know how your transverse velocity impacts your opponent's ability to hit you. EvE is hard. It's harder if you're stupid. I couldn't have said it better. Hello, Mr Carebear. Would you like some cheese with that whine?
Eli Stan Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation 457	Posted - 2016.04.14 21:43:22 - [4] - Quote Iain Cariaba wrote: The problem with evasion score is that a good portion of that revolves around how you fly your ship. If you're flying straight at the person shooting at you, you're easy to track. If you're orbiting at 50km sniping, you're easier to hit than if you're at the same speed orbiting at 5km. No, that's not a problem with the Evasion Score, since the Evasion Score takes that into account. An example with a frig: Ship signature radius: 42 m Ship speed: 4000 m/s Transversal speed: 0 m/s (since it's moving directly towards you) Radial speed: 0 rad/s Evasion Score = 40000 * 0 / 42 = 0. So the ship has an Evasion Score of ZERO. The Evasion Score tells you exactly what you're talking about - that is, how easy or difficult it is for your guns to track your target. Quote: And yes, Robbert, while adding the transversal column to your overview is rather silly, it is still important to know how your transverse velocity impacts your opponent's ability to hit you. Indeed, but it only matters in relationship to the engagement range, which is entirely what the radial speed column tells you. So you can put on range and transversal speed and manually calculate radial speed, or you can just show the radial speed column and have it calculated for you. There is NO other use for transversal speed info.
Iain Cariaba 2917	Posted - 2016.04.14 22:27:21 - [5] - Quote Eli Stan wrote: Iain Cariaba wrote: The problem with evasion score is that a good portion of that revolves around how you fly your ship. If you're flying straight at the person shooting at you, you're easy to track. If you're orbiting at 50km sniping, you're easier to hit than if you're at the same speed orbiting at 5km. No, that's not a problem with the Evasion Score, since the Evasion Score takes that into account. An example with a frig: Ship signature radius: 42 m Ship speed: 4000 m/s Transversal speed: 0 m/s (since it's moving directly towards you) Radial speed: 0 rad/s Evasion Score = 40000 * 0 / 42 = 0. So the ship has an Evasion Score of ZERO. The Evasion Score tells you exactly what you're talking about - that is, how easy or difficult it is for your guns to track your target. And when you change even one of those variables, the evasion score changes. You're looking at recalculating the evasion score every second for every ship on grid with every other ship in space on the entire server. That's a lot of load on the server there. Edit: Also, the formula used to determine tracking hit chance is a lot more complex than it appears you think it is. Edit 2: Sorry, I meant to research this more before posting. I blame sleep deprivation, and am currently working on this. Please be patient. EvE is hard. It's harder if you're stupid. I couldn't have said it better. Hello, Mr Carebear. Would you like some cheese with that whine?
Ja'e Ambraelle Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation 14	Posted - 2016.04.15 00:31:46 - [6] - Quote Iain Cariaba wrote: And when you change even one of those variables, the evasion score changes. You're looking at recalculating the evasion score every second for every ship on grid with every other ship in space on the entire server. That's a lot of load on the server there. Well that's a decision CCP has to make. The point still stands though, without an evasion rating, the accuracy score doesn't do or help much. Iain Cariaba wrote: This is incorrect. According to the wiki on turret damage, specifically the part about the to hit equation, radial speed is how the ship is moving along the radius of the circle around your ship. AKA, it is the movement towards or away from your ship, not it's movement as it transverses the circle. Yeah he probably meant angular speed, we don't really care about transversal nor radial with guns.
Iain Cariaba 2917	Posted - 2016.04.15 01:11:48 - [7] - Quote Ja'e Ambraelle wrote: Iain Cariaba wrote: And when you change even one of those variables, the evasion score changes. You're looking at recalculating the evasion score every second for every ship on grid with every other ship in space on the entire server. That's a lot of load on the server there. Well that's a decision CCP has to make. The point still stands though, without an evasion rating, the accuracy score doesn't do or help much. It's not really hard to figure out. Let's use a moderate sized fleet engagement of two fleets, one with 100 pilots and one with 101 (for ease of calculation in the example). For one ship, the server would have to recalculate the evasion score every second as it relates to each of the 200 other ships. This has to be done using the variables from each ship, as each one can potentially be different. This then has to be repeated 200 more times, for a total of 40,200 additional operations every second on top of the work the server already does. This is just for 201 ships, this gets magnified greatly when you account for the fact that this calculation would have to be done for every single ship in space as it relates to every other ship, NPC, structure, etc. that share the same grid. With tens of thousands of players spread over seven thousand systems, you'd be looking at adding a few million more calculations per second to servers that already have to use tidi to manage the load at times. Edit: Oh, drones. Can't forget drones. Add 5 drones to each of the ships in the example fleets. Can you do the math to figure how many calculations it'd take to work this when you add a thousand drones into the mix? EvE is hard. It's harder if you're stupid. I couldn't have said it better. Hello, Mr Carebear. Would you like some cheese with that whine?
Eli Stan Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation 457	Posted - 2016.04.15 01:37:32 - [8] - Quote Thanks Ja'e, I was indeed using the incorrect word. Gah. "Radial" replaced with "angular" above. Iain, the calculation to determine the Evasion Score is incredibly simple. The client can do it millions of times per second without breaking a sweat. Its simply 40000 * angular velocity (which is already known and shown on the overview) / signature radius of target (which is also known). That's it. One multiplication, one division, zero server cycles. Easy.
Helsinki Atruin Assisted Suicide Services Epicenter. 5	Posted - 2016.04.15 11:53:59 - [9] - Quote Someone could probably even make this as an overlay, that works in real time, that is if it wouldn't get them banned. Further, with the information the overview currently provides in addition to stats from the guns, ammo and ship bonuses combined with an estimate as to the targets sig radius, (you don't know if they are using shield extenders, halo implants, so this will only be an estimate) and display an estimated chance to hit.
Iain Cariaba 2920	Posted - 2016.04.15 14:29:11 - [10] - Quote Eli Stan wrote: Thanks Ja'e, I was indeed using the incorrect word. Gah. "Radial" replaced with "angular" above. Iain, the calculation to determine the Evasion Score is incredibly simple. The client can do it millions of times per second without breaking a sweat. Its simply 40000 * angular velocity (which is already known and shown on the overview) / signature radius of target (which is also known). That's it. One multiplication, one division, zero server cycles. Easy. So a server that already has to use time dilation to slow down time in game so that it can keep up with the load can suddenly handle millions of extra calculations per second on top of it's current load? EvE is hard. It's harder if you're stupid. I couldn't have said it better. Hello, Mr Carebear. Would you like some cheese with that whine?
Frostys Virpio KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation 2777	Posted - 2016.04.15 15:00:40 - [11] - Quote Eli Stan wrote: One multiplication, one division, zero server cycles. Easy. TIL: calculation don't require CPU cycles.
Eli Stan Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation 458	Posted - 2016.04.15 16:44:44 - [12] - Quote Frostys Virpio wrote: Eli Stan wrote: One multiplication, one division, zero server cycles. Easy. TIL: calculation don't require CPU cycles. You both missed "the client" in my sentence. And if has to be the servers that calculates (40000 * angular velocity / signature radius) and sends the results to the clients along with all the other overview data then YES I think the servers can EASILY handle that with absolutely ZERO noticeable impact to performance, even at 10% tidi. It's really an incredibly simple calculation, one multiplication and one division, and scales linearly. It's not some factorial behemoth.
Frostys Virpio KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation 2777	Posted - 2016.04.15 17:03:02 - [13] - Quote Eli Stan wrote: Frostys Virpio wrote: Eli Stan wrote: One multiplication, one division, zero server cycles. Easy. TIL: calculation don't require CPU cycles. You both missed "the client" in my sentence. And if has to be the servers that calculates (40000 * angular velocity / signature radius) and sends the results to the clients along with all the other overview data then YES I think the servers can EASILY handle that with absolutely ZERO noticeable impact to performance, even at 10% tidi. It's really an incredibly simple calculation, one multiplication and one division, and scales linearly. It's not some factorial behemoth. It's a behemoth when you realize each entity in space has to be calculated in reference to each other entity in space on the grid since the game has no way to know who is an enemy. Those entity include everything from ship to drones and cans because they can all get shot. Hundred of entity on grid create thousands upon thousands of 1v1 relationship that has to be calculated at all time on top of what is already chocking the server. You client side idea is also only viable if CCP accept to let the client do any calculation instead of leaving everything server side like it is right now.
Dirritat'z Demblin Aliastra Gallente Federation 33	Posted - 2016.04.15 17:19:56 - [14] - Quote He talks about doing a rough,, client sided calculation from the numbers that your overview allready gives You. A number the server prop. Never needs, since it already has all the numbers. 'keep all the data serverside' is BS in this case, the graphics are not serversidet, the cycletimes you see are not serverside. The whole idea needs, indeed, 0.0000% more load to the Server. If your Machine has problems with This, stop playing eve on a comodore PET.
Frostys Virpio KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation 2777	Posted - 2016.04.15 17:25:52 - [15] - Quote Dirritat'z Demblin wrote: He talks about doing a rough,, client sided calculation from the numbers that your overview allready gives You. That is, indeed, 0.0000 more load to the Server. Of your Machine has problems with This, stop playing eve on a comodore PET. It's not like the server has to feed us all the sig radius data so our CPU can do the math right? Sending hundred if not thousand of value to each client every ticks surely won't add any load...
Ebag Trescientas Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation 5	Posted - 2016.04.15 17:30:17 - [16] - Quote Frostys Virpio wrote: It's not like the server has to feed us all the sig radius data so our CPU can do the math right? Sending hundred if not thousand of value to each client every ticks surely won't add any load... You do know that sig size is already an available column in the overview, right? Client already has all the data required for the calculation. No server CPU used because the calculations can be done instantly on the client side. Since it's just data being displayed to the client (and not actually used for calculation on the server, which is already being done anyway), there's zero impact to TiDi, server ticks, server CPU, or anything else (other than making the client do a very minor amount of additional work).
Arla Sarain 763	Posted - 2016.04.15 17:31:12 - [17] - Quote Iain Cariaba wrote: And when you change even one of those variables, the evasion score changes. You're looking at recalculating the evasion score every second for every ship on grid with every other ship in space on the entire server. That's a lot of load on the server there. . Where do you think rad/s come from...? Especially considering that rad/s is relative to the the person's ship. i.e. it's calculating that for every person with an overview, for every ship on grid.
Dirritat'z Demblin Aliastra Gallente Federation 33	Posted - 2016.04.15 17:32:21 - [18] - Quote You mean all the data we already have ready in the overview? Yes, I'm sure it won't increase the load if the server has to send only what it already is sending.
Frostys Virpio KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation 2778	Posted - 2016.04.15 17:44:20 - [19] - Quote Dirritat'z Demblin wrote: You mean all the data we already have ready in the overview? Yes, I'm sure it won't increase the load if the server has to send only what it already is sending. I though we only had small, medium or large and not the actual numerical value.
Ebag Trescientas Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation 6	Posted - 2016.04.15 17:49:48 - [20] - Quote Frostys Virpio wrote: Dirritat'z Demblin wrote: You mean all the data we already have ready in the overview? Yes, I'm sure it won't increase the load if the server has to send only what it already is sending. I though we only had small, medium or large and not the actual numerical value. http://puu.sh/ojhG0/3523923a60.png You can even get the sig size of stations and stars, if you want.
Frostys Virpio KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation 2778	Posted - 2016.04.15 18:02:37 - [21] - Quote Ebag Trescientas wrote: Frostys Virpio wrote: Dirritat'z Demblin wrote: You mean all the data we already have ready in the overview? Yes, I'm sure it won't increase the load if the server has to send only what it already is sending. I though we only had small, medium or large and not the actual numerical value. http://puu.sh/ojhG0/3523923a60.png You can even get the sig size of stations and stars, if you want. Guess it changed since the last time I checked what all the tabs did. Then it would only be a matter of CCP wanting the cleint to do it.
Ebag Trescientas Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation 6	Posted - 2016.04.15 19:04:35 - [22] - Quote Frostys Virpio wrote: Guess it changed since the last time I checked what all the tabs did. Then it would only be a matter of CCP wanting the cleint to do it. To be fair, I have no idea when they ninja'd it in. All I know is it made me very happy (as a heavy missile user). \o/
Daichi Yamato Xero Security and Technologies 3201	Posted - 2016.04.17 12:39:43 - [23] - Quote This is instead of tracking? That could be misleading. With tracking i knew the way to avoid being hit was to orbit or spiral or whatever. With accuracy rating you could get people flying straight at an artie boat and wonder why they are being hit despite its low accuracy rating. 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" Daichi Yamato's version of structure based decs
Donnachadh United Allegiance of Undesirables 806	Posted - 2016.04.17 14:30:35 - [24] - Quote I am conflicted on these numbers. One side of me says that a ship with the advanced computers ours would have could easily and probably would provide such information so I say why not. The other side of me tends to agree with Iain Cariaba and the continual dumbing down of the game, thus eliminating another of the things left that clearly differentiate the good pilots from the great ones and setting server load argument aside that would be a bad thing so I say NO to this idea. A few response to things posted. Frostys Virpio wrote: Eli Stan wrote: One multiplication, one division, zero server cycles. Easy. TIL: calculation don't require CPU cycles. Actually they do. The CPU has to tell the memory and math portions of itself that they need to wake up and go to work. While the actual math may be handled by the math co-processor portion of the chip the cpu still has a lot of work to do to make it all happen. Eli Stan wrote: Frostys Virpio wrote: Eli Stan wrote: One multiplication, one division, zero server cycles. Easy. TIL: calculation don't require CPU cycles. You both missed "the client" in my sentence. And if has to be the servers that calculates (40000 * angular velocity / signature radius) and sends the results to the clients along with all the other overview data then YES I think the servers can EASILY handle that with absolutely ZERO noticeable impact to performance, even at 10% tidi. It's really an incredibly simple calculation, one multiplication and one division, and scales linearly. It's not some factorial behemoth. Ah actually it can be a technical behemouth. Given 500 ships, 100 drones and say 50 other objects in space on your grid we have a lot of "simple" math going on. 1st we have the calculations for the ships themselves so 500 x 500 = 250,000 2nd now the drones relative to the ships 500 x 100 = 50,000 3rd now the drones relative to each other 100 x 100 = 10,000 4th the ships and drones relative to the other objects 600 x 50 = 30,000 At this point we have 340,000 math operations per second, but as the informercials would say but wait there is more. To the computer your formula is actually handled as 2 separate math operations the multiplication and the division so we need to account for that so 340,000 x 2 = 680,000 Add in all of the other situations where this calculation may be needed on the same server and you could easily add several million more math operations per second and taken all by themselves that could initiate TIDI. And I do not know about you but I hate TIDI and increasing the chance of it happening for a gee this would be neat idea gets a NO from me. Some of you feel that this would not add to the server load because it could be handled client side and I wonder if that is really true? Since the damage calculations are run server side does your client have the signature data for every object? Does the client receive all the relevant data about the drones? If not then handling this client side simply replaces the math load on the servers with the data processing load required to move all this information to the clients of every active player in the node. Having gone through all of that CCP obviously has found a way to handle this without adding to much server overhead or they would not have brought it to your local test server. Either that or they need the data from the test servers to determine if the additional load can be handled by Tranquility.
Ben Ishikela 71	Posted - 2016.04.17 14:40:43 - [25] - Quote Helsinki Atruin wrote: Someone could probably even make this as an overlay, that works in real time, that is if it wouldn't get them banned. Further, with the information the overview currently provides in addition to stats from the guns, ammo and ship bonuses combined with an estimate as to the targets sig radius, (you don't know if they are using shield extenders, halo implants, so this will only be an estimate) and display an estimated chance to hit. All of this would be doable clientside, therefor no serverload Ideas are like Seeds. I'd chop trees to start a fire.
Robbert Smith Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation 4	Posted - 2016.04.17 19:40:43 - [26] - Quote Donnachadh wrote: Given 500 ships, 100 drones and say 50 other objects in space on your grid we have a lot of "simple" math going on. 1st we have the calculations for the ships themselves so 500 x 500 = 250,000 2nd now the drones relative to the ships 500 x 100 = 50,000 3rd now the drones relative to each other 100 x 100 = 10,000 4th the ships and drones relative to the other objects 600 x 50 = 30,000 At this point we have 340,000 math operations per second, as the informercials would say but wait there is more. To the computer your formula is actually handled as 2 separate math operations the multiplication and the division so we need to account for that so 340,000 x 2 = 680,000 All this talk is getting out of hand. All you need is one logical evaluation to see if the object is currently visible in the overview and a few trivial math operations by the client on values the server is already sending you. If you're worried about performance, turn that column off. I do however, recall from one of the Fanfest presentations that the overview code is particularly "legacy"... so that's the only real thing I could see holding it up.
Iain Cariaba 2925	Posted - 2016.04.18 04:26:30 - [27] - Quote Ben Ishikela wrote: Helsinki Atruin wrote: Someone could probably even make this as an overlay, that works in real time, that is if it wouldn't get them banned. Further, with the information the overview currently provides in addition to stats from the guns, ammo and ship bonuses combined with an estimate as to the targets sig radius, (you don't know if they are using shield extenders, halo implants, so this will only be an estimate) and display an estimated chance to hit. All of this would be doable clientside, therefor no serverload So you shunt the several hundred thousand to million more calculations per second off onto hardware that is inferior to the server, thus bogging down the computers running the client. Yeah, this is another great Ben Ishikela idea here. EvE is hard. It's harder if you're stupid. I couldn't have said it better. Hello, Mr Carebear. Would you like some cheese with that whine?
Nevyn Auscent Broke Sauce 3186	Posted - 2016.04.18 06:44:49 - [28] - Quote Ben Ishikela wrote: All of this would be doable clientside, therefor no serverload Funnily enough it's not. Client does not get information on the sig size of your target. We can argue over if it should or shouldn't, but this would actually give you relative information as to sig size of your target.
Ja'e Ambraelle Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation 15	Posted - 2016.04.18 15:46:25 - [29] - Quote Debating about whether or not it's feasible is really interesting, but I'm sure CCP can decide by themselves if it is or not. Keep in mind this is an answer to the Weapon Accuracy Score on sisi. As it stands today, the only value you have on sisi is that accuracy score and the standardized signature resolution of 40,000m. The current signature resolution isn't shown anymore, as well as the tracking speed value in rad/s. So if you think it isn't feasible to show that Evasion Score? Great! Go whine at CCP to bring back the old values. Because with only the Accuracy Score and nothing else to compare it to, it's super hard to tell if your guns can track something or not. You think that's feasible? Great too! I think the Evasion Score versus Accuracy Score idea is easier to manipulate, even if I agree that it obfuscates a lot of the actual numbers behind it.
Gigiarc Pandemic Horde Inc. Pandemic Horde 10	Posted - 2016.04.19 02:10:49 - [30] - Quote The change they have on sisi doesn't even make checking tracking easier to do. If you want to get a ballpark on what you can and can't track you still need to adjust for sig res/rad differences (because most ships don't have a 40km sig radius). I don't know if this is just me being "back in my day we had to learn tracking uphill both ways", but I don't think this change is needed because turret mechanics aren't that hard to understand.

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.