| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 .. 188 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Marqui De'Xentura
   |
Posted - 2007.12.09 17:23:00 -
[1021]
Gripen, YOU ARE THE MAN!!!
|
Lance Fighter
Amarr
|
Posted - 2007.12.09 17:23:00 -
[1022]
omg <3
|
Ed Anger
Weekly World News
|
Posted - 2007.12.09 17:25:00 -
[1023]
thanks for the update. is there any way to link to setup from an older version, or do they have to be recreated?
|
Prometheus Exenthal
Dirty Deeds Corp.
Axiom Empire
|
Posted - 2007.12.09 17:49:00 -
[1024]
 Originally by: Ed Anger
thanks for the update. is there any way to link to setup from an older version, or do they have to be recreated?
Keep the folder called setups.
Setups on ships with slot changes will need to be remade.
-
|
Liquid5n0w
Vanguard Frontiers
Imperial Republic Of the North
|
Posted - 2007.12.09 17:57:00 -
[1025]
Bug: There is only 3 highslots in the Ares, not 4. You do have the Turret count right though.
|
Ed Anger
Weekly World News
|
Posted - 2007.12.09 18:00:00 -
[1026]
Originally by: Prometheus Exenthal
Originally by: Ed Anger
thanks for the update. is there any way to link to setup from an older version, or do they have to be recreated?
Keep the folder called setups.
Setups on ships with slot changes will need to be remade.
danke.
|
Sofring Eternus
Amarr
|
Posted - 2007.12.09 18:02:00 -
[1027]
Woot, thanks for the update Gripen, sent a small donation as a symbol of my appreciation.
---
ΞνΞ ΘΠLІΠΞ
Amarr dont need Grr... and RAWR is definately too much, but some Oomph would be nice. |
Henry Sworddew
|
Posted - 2007.12.09 18:14:00 -
[1028]
thanks for fast update.  donation sent!
|
Horace Friendly
GoonFleet
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2007.12.09 18:48:00 -
[1029]
in a world of bugged poses and missing boot.ini files, gripen is number #1 gripen is #1
|
Tivookz
Caldari
The Singularity Amalgamation
Pure.
|
Posted - 2007.12.09 22:09:00 -
[1030]
How come u can add implants but some implants ( crystal set anyone? ) doesn't modify anything on the ship.
Tiv
|
Khlea
|
Posted - 2007.12.09 22:26:00 -
[1031]
Thanks a lot for the update !
Keep up the good work guy. This piece of software is greeeaat !
|
speedcat
Gallente
Human Liberty Syndicate
TALIONIS ALLIANCE
|
Posted - 2007.12.09 23:09:00 -
[1032]
Thank you Gripen, you are my hero. Nice work!
best regards,
Speed
|
Ademaro Imre
Caldari
Eye of God
|
Posted - 2007.12.09 23:47:00 -
[1033]
Sensor booster scripts are causing an "Invalid floating point operation." error. Using XP, and in a Rook.
|
Sahjahn
Caldari
Sicarri Covenant
|
Posted - 2007.12.09 23:59:00 -
[1034]
Great stuff, however i just wanted to point out that there seems to be some descrepency. My malediction on TQ does 10,089m/s when i fit the exact same setup on EvE Fit using all the right implants and modules it's only reported as 8400m/s ish. This also happens with my crow and the kitsune.
|
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
|
Posted - 2007.12.10 02:24:00 -
[1035]
Bugreport : Onyx "range of warp disruption field" bonus is not applied to the WDFG-I's range.
1|2|3|4|5. |
Dubious Drewski
|
Posted - 2007.12.10 02:29:00 -
[1036]
2.4 is here. Yay! Good Job!
Originally by: Slayton Ford
a Drake is normally primaried last
And that's why I love that homely boat! |
Yuk Anahari
Caldari
Caldarians Pride
Ka-Tet
|
Posted - 2007.12.10 04:33:00 -
[1037]
Thanks Gripen! That was fast, you¦re the man!
Found two bugs:
All scripts seem to cause "invalid floating point operation" so script bonuses are not applied and you have to remove the corresponding module to be able to fit anything more. If you try to fit another module after fitting a script you get the error aswell.
Bonus to Warp Disruption Field range of the Heavy Interdictors is not applied.
OS is XP pro.
|
Azuma Hijikata
|
Posted - 2007.12.10 04:45:00 -
[1038]
Edited by: Azuma Hijikata on 10/12/2007 04:46:12
The invalid floating point error occurs with all scripted modules, it seems. However, after you get the error box and click "ok", the module's attributes are changed to reflect the script you loaded into the module. For example, loading the single-target jamming script into the warp disruption field generator will cause an error, but will change the listed penalties from the unfocused effect to the focused script's penalties (of which there are none, to my knowledge).
Additionally, on the subject of the WDFG, the penalties aren't applied correctly when the module is active. The speed is still listed as ~250m/s, which is either a bug in EFT or a really, really bad design decision on CCP's part (-90% velocity for WDFG operation and a speed of 250m/s... Do the math).
OS: XP Pro, all system critical patches installed.
|
Shereza
|
Posted - 2007.12.10 05:54:00 -
[1039]
Why are cap and shield recharge values calculated at 2.4? Is the actual value for peak regen or is it 2.5?
I've heard people on both ends but I haven't seen conclusive proof either way. Haven't really tried to nail it down either but that's my fault.
|
Liang Nuren
The Avalon Foundation
Knights Of Syndicate
|
Posted - 2007.12.10 06:06:00 -
[1040]
Originally by: Shereza
Why are cap and shield recharge values calculated at 2.4? Is the actual value for peak regen or is it 2.5?
I've heard people on both ends but I haven't seen conclusive proof either way. Haven't really tried to nail it down either but that's my fault.
I believe the answer for tangential peak is 2.5 - however this is merely the value when the derivative is zero.
It is not really important except in as much as its a "peak" figure that is entirely worthless in realistic circumstances.
Modules take cap in discrete chunks, which has the "alpha" strike that puts it over this value.
In other words, you're better off calculating with 2.3 or 2.2 (depending how bad your cap consumption is as a ratio of your max capacitor).
Liang
--
Retired forum *****. Plz tell me to STFU.
Yarr? |
Elhina Novae
Amarr
Suns Of Korhal
|
Posted - 2007.12.10 06:12:00 -
[1041]
Keep up the good work
Somebody set up us the bomb |
Pottsey
Enheduanni Foundation
|
Posted - 2007.12.10 07:00:00 -
[1042]
ôIt is not really important except in as much as its a "peak" figure that is entirely worthless in realistic circumstances.ö
For PvE the 2.5 peak for shields is very important. The difference between 2.4 and 2.5 can be a tank that holds and a tank that doesnt.
Shields donÆt act 100% the same as cap partly because your dealing with much bigger buffer numbers and partly becuase the damage in PvE in mostly constent, not on and off in big junks like modules on a cycle.
Passive shield tanking guide click here |
Liang Nuren
The Avalon Foundation
Knights Of Syndicate
|
Posted - 2007.12.10 07:05:00 -
[1043]
Originally by: Pottsey
ôIt is not really important except in as much as its a "peak" figure that is entirely worthless in realistic circumstances.ö
For PvE the 2.5 peak for shields is very important. The difference between 2.4 and 2.5 can be a tank that holds and a tank that doesnt.
Shields donÆt act 100% the same as cap partly because your dealing with much bigger buffer numbers and partly becuase the damage in PvE in mostly constent, not on and off in big junks like modules on a cycle.
I think that a generic fitting tool shouldn't make such assumptions in how the fit and cap usage works.
At any rate, the difference between 2.4 and 2.5 is not "whether the tank holds or breaks" - that is strictly determined by how much you're hitting the shield/cap (and not some arbitrary number).
It's far better to arrange your ships to be safe rather than sorry.
2.4 is a better compromise.
-Liang
--
Retired forum *****. Plz tell me to STFU.
Yarr? |
Cilvius Sanctus
|
Posted - 2007.12.10 07:13:00 -
[1044]
I love EFT, been using it for quite a while. Good job getting this released so quickly, keep it up.
The one thing I would love to see added to EFT is some sort of cost calculation of the fitting. It would be quite a bit of work adding the prices for everything, but once it is completed it would be very handy to be able to see an estimated cost of your selected fitting. Anybody else like this idea?
|
Pottsey
Enheduanni Foundation
|
Posted - 2007.12.10 07:15:00 -
[1045]
ôIt's far better to arrange your ships to be safe rather than sorry.
2.4 is a better compromise.ö
But its a misleading number. Why not lower shield boosters by 5% to be safe rather then sorry?
People use fitting tools to work out whatÆs better. How can they compare passive to active tanking on the same ship when one has the numbers on the safe side.
In my mind you should have the correct number with an option to use the safe number. Not force everyone into the safe number.
Passive shield tanking guide click here |
Liang Nuren
The Avalon Foundation
Knights Of Syndicate
|
Posted - 2007.12.10 07:20:00 -
[1046]
Originally by: Pottsey
ôIt's far better to arrange your ships to be safe rather than sorry.
2.4 is a better compromise.ö
But its a misleading number. Why not lower shield boosters by 5% to be safe rather then sorry?
People use fitting tools to work out whatÆs better. How can they compare passive to active tanking on the same ship when one has the numbers on the safe side.
In my mind you should have the correct number with an option to use the safe number. Not force everyone into the safe number.
The problem is that in the overwhelming majority of the situations, you cannot realistically use the 2.5 number. You can't. Because it's wholly wrong.
It's not that its "better safe than sorry", it's that if you're going to use an aggregated number for your "DPS tanked" you can't really use an inflated number like that.
It's tangential - the limit. Realistically, you won't ever hit the limit anyway.
-Liang
--
Retired forum *****. Plz tell me to STFU.
Yarr? |
Pottsey
Enheduanni Foundation
|
Posted - 2007.12.10 07:31:00 -
[1047]
Edited by: Pottsey on 10/12/2007 07:34:28
ôThe problem is that in the overwhelming majority of the situations, you cannot realistically use the 2.5 number. You can't. Because it's wholly wrong.ö
ItÆs not wholly wrong. You can find out the max tank for your shield booster and you can find out the max tank for your passive tank. Why lower the passive tank numbers below the real max and not the active tank? You know the max dps output of the rats so its useful to have your max tank.
I agree with using 2.4 for cap. But I see no reason to use it for shields at least for PvE. So often I have used 2.4 and should have died but didnÆt. ThatÆs the hole reason I did the research into shields and found the true number to be 2.5.
EDIT:
Say you want to balance your tank on the max rats DPS. If you use 2.4 you might have to fit an extra tank module. If you use the true 2.5 number you might save 1 module and can tank the complex ok.
Passive shield tanking guide click here |
Ishina Fel
Caldari
Synergy.
Imperial Republic Of the North
|
Posted - 2007.12.10 07:44:00 -
[1048]
I too found 2.4 to be too low a number. Sure, the difference is not the most glaring one in the world, but it is there. And I do want to know the theoretical maximum.
EFT is a tool for the theory, and everyone should know that. There is no reason to artificially make the numbers look lower than they actually are, especially if you only do it for one out of several possible tanking methods. Anyone who takes the numbers from EFT at face value and expects the game to behave like them will die anyway, and deservingly so.
It's about knowing the theory, knowing the practice, and knowing the difference between the two. I don't want someone to hide the theory from me.
|
Jangizal
Caldari
NYIT Gangstaz
SMASH Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.12.10 07:50:00 -
[1049]
Thank you for the updated EFT.
Blog. |
Pottsey
Enheduanni Foundation
|
Posted - 2007.12.10 07:52:00 -
[1050]
Edited by: Pottsey on 10/12/2007 07:52:36
I wonder how hard it would be to let us choose the number? How much codeing would that take?
Being able to chose between 2.0 all the way to 2.5 would be nice. I can see why people might want to use 2.0 or 2.4. In PvP I like to use 2.0 along side 2.5 my self.
Still learning EFT here, how do you apply implants? They donÆt seem to be changing my HP regen. Is there an easy way to swap between 3%, 5%, 10%, 15% hitpoint boosts?
Passive shield tanking guide click here |
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 .. 188 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |