| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Areen Sassel
103
   |
Posted - 2016.05.22 05:11:33 -
[1] - Quote
Pandora Carrollon wrote:My own tests have shown that nose or tail on, weapons are pretty accurate. Broadside is garbage if you're moving or your target is. I have tested orbital processes, where I am orbiting a stationary or low speed target at max velocity. The theory is that my guns tracking should be irrelevant at that point since the targets angular velocity compared to my relative velocity is ZERO.
I think you are confused. If you're orbiting at max velocity, you will have a high angular velocity (depending on range). It doesn't matter who's moving, only the relative velocity. |
Areen Sassel
104
|
Posted - 2016.05.22 20:48:53 -
[2] - Quote
Cristl wrote:Areen Sassel wrote:I think you are confused. If you're orbiting at max velocity, you will have a high angular velocity (depending on range). It doesn't matter who's moving, only the relative velocity. But only in this game is what that poster is saying. They are saying that trying to think about the mechanics from any real life perspective will fail, since the game physics uses its own formulae which don't have much connection with reality.
If so, why run their own tests? The pertinent game mechanics are hardly undocumented.
FWIW, the whole "weapon accuracy" thing seems to be a bit of a storm in a teacup; turret tracking was always effectively divided by weapon signature radius, and a figure that encapsulates that division conveys more directly useful information, not less. |
Areen Sassel
112
|
Posted - 2016.05.23 17:19:36 -
[3] - Quote
Tsukino Stareine wrote:With this new system it's much harder to figure out what your actual tracking is since there's no overview column for "accuracy score"
There's still one for angular velocity and you still need to be aware of a fiddle factor to see how that compares to your weapon. The only difference is that now the fiddle factor only needs to take account of the enemy's signature radius and not your gun's signature resolution. |
Areen Sassel
121
|
Posted - 2016.06.18 02:18:56 -
[4] - Quote
Blade Darth wrote:My frig has 500, omen 20, does that mean frig guns are 20 times better? It could say "LOL pizza" instead, that's how much info i get from this stat. Can we haz some useful tracking data back?
That is useful tracking data. It's better than the old data because the old data didn't have the better tracking of small guns figured into it. |
Areen Sassel
130
|
Posted - 2016.07.25 00:37:23 -
[5] - Quote
Sergey Hawk wrote:Accuracy score has a simple formula for converting into rad/s, but why i need to do this math?
It's one multiplication. To convert an old-style tracking into something you can actually compare with the target's tracking speed is also one multiplication. No change there. |
Areen Sassel
130
|
Posted - 2016.07.25 16:04:44 -
[6] - Quote
Sergey Hawk wrote:What's brought this change in the game? Nothings.
As mentioned above, the new score bakes-in the difference in accuracy between different sizes of weapons. It is an improvement. |
Areen Sassel
132
|
Posted - 2016.07.31 21:39:43 -
[7] - Quote
So that is a good example of the common error in this thread:
" If I know my artillery has a tracking value of 0.013 (radians/sec), then I know that IGÇÖll be able to track and hit anyone on my overview who has an angular velocity less than 0.013, assuming theyGÇÖre in my optimal range."
No, you don't, not unless you know the target's signature radius - and if you estimate that correctly you then have a fiddle factor to multiply by to find the angular velocity you can hit. Exactly the same is true in the WAS world - the fiddle factor is just different. |
| |
|