EVE Search - Accuracy Falloff and Optimal range.

All Channels

Ships and Modules

Accuracy Falloff and Optimal range.

» 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)
Elrathias	Posted - 2004.02.11 18:08:00 - [1] due not being able, to anywhere fidn a decent answer, of to what there two attributes do, i sent a petition to the gms about it, and here the answer: removed the GM answer -Eris Discordia --------------------------
Eris Discordia	Posted - 2004.02.11 19:04:00 - [2] Private communication between the Game Masters, Eve Team members, moderators and administrators of the forum and the forum users is not to be made public on these forums or by any other venue Please do not quote bits of coversation from GM's. You can tell in your own words what they have answered on your questions. Thank you I ♥ my pink dreadnought of pwnage Mail [email protected] if you have any questions.
Cindy Goodwill	Posted - 2004.02.11 19:05:00 - [3] Optimal range = range where you deal most dmg Falloff = the amount you can be off the Optimal Range to hit (below AND ABOVE) ----------------------------------------------- Watch my leet everchanging dynamic signature \o/ http://www.games-on.nl/~cu2moro/evesigphp/icon.php?blaat=.GIF
Elrathias	Posted - 2004.02.11 19:28:00 - [4] sigh, what a dumb rule. The 24km fallof range is a +/- modifier to the optimal range. and optimal range is modified by amunitiond and other things. --------------------------
Krendig	Posted - 2004.02.11 19:46:00 - [5] Quote: Private communication between the Game Masters, Eve Team members, moderators and administrators of the forum and the forum users is not to be made public on these forums or by any other venue ... in spite of the fact that the communication in question had no damaging info, and was instead a useful comment by a representative of CCP, and answered a question I can't find anywhere else! sigh --Krendig
Naal Morno	Posted - 2004.02.11 19:46:00 - [6] Well, this is the first time this was officially confirmed, eg. the fact that you can hit good only at optimal, not optimal and BELOW down to 0... All these mighty mighty warriors claiming that the only reason for guns to hit bad well under their optimal is because of tracking... Which I discarded as not correct myself after about first 5 real NPCs I killed. Thanks for this post. Lesson: Stay in optimal or don't hit at all. Your Heavy Neutron Blaster II perfectly strikes Serpentis Chief Sentinel, wrecking for 660.4 damage.
Elrathias	Posted - 2004.02.11 19:51:00 - [7] Quote: Quote: Private communication between the Game Masters, Eve Team members, moderators and administrators of the forum and the forum users is not to be made public on these forums or by any other venue ... in spite of the fact that the communication in question had no damaging info, and was instead a useful comment by a representative of CCP, and answered a question I can't find anywhere else! sigh --Krendig EXACLTY --------------------------
Beseb	Posted - 2004.02.11 20:23:00 - [8] Eria, wouldn't it have made sense to simply snip the part of my reply that quoted the original poster? Instead, you wiped out the entire post which had important, contrary information in it. I have np with the fact that you are bound by whatever rules you must follow, but surely removing informative, non inflammatory material is not part of those rules? In any case, the response the GM gave was not accurate. Since I'm kinda peeved that good sense was not used in editing the posts, I think I won't bother further.
Shamis Orzoz	Posted - 2004.02.11 20:42:00 - [9] What a silly act of censorship...especially for something like accuracy falloff, which is probably the most misunderstood attribute in eve.
Shoopy	Posted - 2004.02.11 21:30:00 - [10] Agreed, its one of the most idiotic rules...unless it some how releases some STATE secreats, i don't see how it can harm anyone...considering the information is also useful for the general public.
Jim Raynor	Posted - 2004.02.11 22:21:00 - [11] Edited by: Jim Raynor on 11/02/2004 22:23:08 Quote: Private communication between the Game Masters, Eve Team members, moderators and administrators of the forum and the forum users is not to be made public on these forums or by any other venue Please do not quote bits of coversation from GM's. You can tell in your own words what they have answered on your questions. Thank you this is about the dumbest example of excessive forum modding ever. anyways, this is something i pretty much suspected for a while, over or below your optimal, you lose damage, especially over (on railguns) ------ ROBBLE ROBBLE
Psychic Sue	Posted - 2004.02.11 22:57:00 - [12] Edited by: Psychic Sue on 11/02/2004 22:58:06 I am just confused. if it were +/- why oh why do I miss all the time with my 1400mm which with a falloff 2x the optimal should give me decent hits at 0m distance if the above is correct.
pooti	Posted - 2004.02.11 23:09:00 - [13] Quote: Edited by: Psychic Sue on 11/02/2004 22:58:06 I am just confused. if it were +/- why oh why do I miss all the time with my 1400mm which with a falloff 2x the optimal should give me decent hits at 0m distance if the above is correct. tracking
K'thang	Posted - 2004.02.11 23:21:00 - [14] I use 250mm Compressed Coil Guns I on my moa with Iridium ammo and my optimal range is 48km atm. Although I can see lesser damage 3km or more above, from 48km down til about 7km I honestly can't see much difference in damage and to-hit ratio. K.
Busko Moonwalker	Posted - 2004.02.12 09:49:00 - [15] I read this and im so lost what was it the GM said ? I always thought that optimal is the range where u are most lilky to hit with a good Damage. and the falloff is the extra u can go but you do less damage. and Rails guns lost it long range edge if i use some thing that have 0% range penelty or +% i do damge of like 20 to 30 with my 250 comp Rail. and this is usaly at the optimal 50k range wich u have for thos ammos. The other thing is this almost makes the other hybrid guns (blasters) usles how often u go in with a cruiser at 2k range. The thing that you do less damage at close range may be do to the tracking speed.
bugeye	Posted - 2004.02.12 12:04:00 - [16] Quote: I read this and im so lost what was it the GM said ? I always thought that optimal is the range where u are most lilky to hit with a good Damage. and the falloff is the extra u can go but you do less damage. and Rails guns lost it long range edge if i use some thing that have 0% range penelty or +% i do damge of like 20 to 30 with my 250 comp Rail. and this is usaly at the optimal 50k range wich u have for thos ammos. The other thing is this almost makes the other hybrid guns (blasters) usles how often u go in with a cruiser at 2k range. The thing that you do less damage at close range may be do to the tracking speed. Blasters are NOT useless and many cruisers go that close to kill their target. business is war!
DREAMWORKS	Posted - 2004.02.12 12:30:00 - [17] Quote: Private communication between the Game Masters, Eve Team members, moderators and administrators of the forum and the forum users is not to be made public on these forums or by any other venue Please do not quote bits of coversation from GM's. You can tell in your own words what they have answered on your questions. Thank you So when i retype there answer its legimate? __________________________ http://www.nin.com/visuals/thtf_hi.html
TomB	Posted - 2004.02.12 13:40:00 - [18] The more outside your optimal range you are, the less chance you have to hit. Fall off is added to optimal range as extra range, when you leave optimal range + fall off range, your chances of hitting will be less than 1%. Fall Off looks like this: So you wanted to test out some boosters?
Serak Tur	Posted - 2004.02.12 14:17:00 - [19] Thank you
Busko Moonwalker	Posted - 2004.02.12 14:19:00 - [20] ok what dose it show ? what is X and whats Y ? But thanx for the info TomB ^_^
TomB	Posted - 2004.02.12 14:24:00 - [21] Quote: ok what dose it show ? what is X and whats Y ? X is range, Y is tracking So you wanted to test out some boosters?
Elrathias	Posted - 2004.02.12 14:55:00 - [22] thank you very much Tomb. this info should be relayed to a faq or something. --------------------------
Beseb	Posted - 2004.02.12 18:17:00 - [23] Thanks TomB for simply stating what many of us have been saying for damn near a year and that GM post in the beginning of this thread was contrary to. sigh
Nimrodel	Posted - 2004.02.13 02:54:00 - [24] I would say this is wrong somehow! With a tachyon at 41km with a optimul of 41km against a un-moving tempest I missed about 5 shots in 20 with a 1400mm howizer at 41km with an optimul of 21km missed 2 times out of 20!!! this is an apoc, same time place etc... 1400 has lower tracking! is the 1400 tracking marked wrong and its actually higher than the tachyon? --------------------------------------------- Nimrodel Dark Force User Joint Espionage & Defence Industries --------------------------------------------- Your Medium YF-12a Smartbomb hits Rusty Cloud, doing 0.0 damage.
Kaul	Posted - 2004.02.13 14:17:00 - [25] Quote: Quote: ok what dose it show ? what is X and whats Y ? X is range, Y is tracking and what do the colours represent? and (probably related) the multiple curves are of something expressed by tracking against range?
Ghandi	Posted - 2004.02.14 02:01:00 - [26] Edited by: Ghandi on 14/02/2004 02:04:35 Quote: The more outside your optimal range you are, the less chance you have to hit. Fall off is added to optimal range as extra range, when you leave optimal range + fall off range, your chances of hitting will be less than 1%. This makes perfect sence, thanks TomB, now what happens when you are shooting below your optimal range. Ie i tried shoot a secure can at 42k with 425 rails with ammo giving me about 90k optimal range and i was hitting grand. So finish of the below sentence for us less informed ppl. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- When shoot below your optimal range it is xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx that affects how well you hit.
TomB	Posted - 2004.02.14 02:47:00 - [27] Quote: This makes perfect sence, thanks TomB, now what happens when you are shooting below your optimal range. Ie i tried shoot a secure can at 42k with 425 rails with ammo giving me about 90k optimal range and i was hitting grand. So finish of the below sentence for us less informed ppl. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- When shoot below your optimal range it is xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx that affects how well you hit. 1. Transversal speed of object you are shooting at, i.e. how fast the target is "strafing", i.e. how fast the target is moving sidewards from you 2. Tracking Speed of your cannons 3. Signature Radius of object you are trying to shoot at So you wanted to test out some boosters?
TomB	Posted - 2004.02.14 02:51:00 - [28] Quote: I would say this is wrong somehow! With a tachyon at 41km with a optimul of 41km against a un-moving tempest I missed about 5 shots in 20 with a 1400mm howizer at 41km with an optimul of 21km missed 2 times out of 20!!! this is an apoc, same time place etc... 1400 has lower tracking! is the 1400 tracking marked wrong and its actually higher than the tachyon? Tracking Speed isn't much needed when the object you are trying to fire at is not moving, the 1400mm also has a huge fall off range, that way they have better chance at hitting longer outside the fall off range than any other guns. So you wanted to test out some boosters?
dalman	Posted - 2004.02.14 03:19:00 - [29] Quote: I would say this is wrong somehow! With a tachyon at 41km with a optimul of 41km against a un-moving tempest I missed about 5 shots in 20 with a 1400mm howizer at 41km with an optimul of 21km missed 2 times out of 20!!! this is an apoc, same time place etc... 1400 has lower tracking! is the 1400 tracking marked wrong and its actually higher than the tachyon? Since you said the target wasn't moving, tracking doesn't matter at all. The 1400mm should miss alittle more frequently in this situation. However, only 20 rounds is NOT enough for such a test. Fire at least 100+ rounds and look at the log of that. M.I.A. since 2004-07-30
Jim Raynor	Posted - 2004.02.14 03:24:00 - [30] TomB, just wondering, is the accuracy falloff in railguns fudged a bit so that the gun performs lower than normal when outside it's optimal? I mean the gun simply never hits outside it's optimal ever, I'm talking 2km outside. ------ ROBBLE ROBBLE
Lansfear	Posted - 2004.02.14 03:36:00 - [31] Edited by: Lansfear on 14/02/2004 03:38:30 Quote: TomB, just wondering, is the accuracy falloff in railguns fudged a bit so that the gun performs lower than normal when outside it's optimal? I mean the gun simply never hits outside it's optimal ever, I'm talking 2km outside. Agreed. I can be right at optimal or just under and get hits like in my sig. How can I hit for less damage than the ammo even states, without counting the damage modifier? This has always confused me. Edit: Forgot to mention this is with antimater.
INkog	Posted - 2004.02.14 04:38:00 - [32] Edited by: INkog on 14/02/2004 04:39:51 Quote: The more outside your optimal range you are, the less chance you have to hit. Fall off is added to optimal range as extra range, when you leave optimal range + fall off range, your chances of hitting will be less than 1%. Fall Off looks like this: snip Nice, thanks. Although it completly disproves my theories I bet you got all kinds of perdy graphs that we would love to see. Care to share some more?
Rasith	Posted - 2004.02.15 05:06:00 - [33] Given my limited understanding of the definitions, I'd think radial speed would be used, not transversal. Then again, I have only a vague idea of what radial speed is, and not even that about transversal. Can anyone reply with the differences, as EVE uses them? And I know transversal speed basically means sideways movement. But how does that differ from radial speed? I don't go to college, and my high school math was a long time ago... ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ In an ally, considerations of house, clan, planet, race are insignificant beside two prime questions, which are: 1. Can he shoot? 2. Will he aim at your enemy? -Excerpted from Cantra yos'Phelium's Log Book
dalman	Posted - 2004.02.15 05:15:00 - [34] Edited by: dalman on 15/02/2004 05:16:53 Quote: Given my limited understanding of the definitions, I'd think radial speed would be used, not transversal. Then again, I have only a vague idea of what radial speed is, and not even that about transversal. Can anyone reply with the differences, as EVE uses them? And I know transversal speed basically means sideways movement. But how does that differ from radial speed? I don't go to college, and my high school math was a long time ago... ......................^ ......................\| ......................t ......................\| X <-----r-----> Y X=you Y=target Y's speed in r-direction = radial Y's speed in t-direction = transversal M.I.A. since 2004-07-30
Rasith	Posted - 2004.02.15 05:18:00 - [35] So, radial is how fast target is closing/separating, and transversal is it's counterpart? I retract my statement about radial speed being more appropriate then. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ In an ally, considerations of house, clan, planet, race are insignificant beside two prime questions, which are: 1. Can he shoot? 2. Will he aim at your enemy? -Excerpted from Cantra yos'Phelium's Log Book
Etharion	Posted - 2004.02.15 06:45:00 - [36] what we can see on graph : Optimal range is not a unique value, it's a range. So what's the length of this "optimal range" range ? There's still no answer for what is going on above optimal range. And something is just puzzling me : considering not moving target and shooter, why should a gun do more damage at optimal than below ?
Dokk	Posted - 2004.02.15 10:07:00 - [37] It would make sense that the ammo can do the same damage at below optimal range as it can at optimal. I think the reason you cannot hit as well is simply because your turrets cannot track the target as well and so the hits are not as accurate. If an object was flying directly at you and was closing way within your optimal range, you would still be doing optimal damage.
Etharion	Posted - 2004.02.15 10:11:00 - [38] Edited by: Etharion on 15/02/2004 10:12:04 Quote: considering not moving target and shooter, why should a gun do more damage at optimal than below ? Question is when both sides aren't moving, no tracking needed here
dalman	Posted - 2004.02.15 10:21:00 - [39] Quote: Edited by: Etharion on 15/02/2004 10:12:04 Quote: considering not moving target and shooter, why should a gun do more damage at optimal than below ? Question is when both sides aren't moving, no tracking needed here And then you also hit as good at closerange as at optimal range. Simple as that. M.I.A. since 2004-07-30
Luc Boye	Posted - 2004.02.15 10:42:00 - [40] Would be cool to see the same graph for 425 rails. -- 2004.12.29 23:33:40combatMining Pollution Cloud hits you, doing 140.0 damage.
Dokk	Posted - 2004.02.15 10:49:00 - [41] I would think it should be the same for optimal and below so i have no idea.
Dirus	Posted - 2004.02.19 06:21:00 - [42] Dont forget the random factor when calculating damage. just because target is in optimal range, and not moving, doesnt mean every hit will do good damage, just that the average is a lot higher. ********** Everyone deserves to die. You go first.
Stue	Posted - 2004.02.26 08:24:00 - [43] Edited by: Stue on 26/02/2004 08:27:52 Okay, like someone concluded before: the optimal range is not a unique value but a range of values reaching from 0 to optimal range value. However, its still not clear how the rest of the graph can be interpreted. Well so here is my interpretation. As we can see there isnt only 1 graph, there are 2. The one starting at the top and falling down after optimal range. The other starting at 0, havings its peak at optimal range value and then falling down as well. The second graph can be interpreted as the "chance to hit", meaning the probability that a "hit" is being rolled. At 0km range the probability is 0 or close to 0. At a certain range (maybe 5km or something) this graph goes up until its finding its peak at the optimal range value (maybe 20km). This would equal to what has been said and concluded before, moving towards your optimal range your hit rolls get better and after the optimal range fall down again, down to a value ABOVE 0 at optimal+falloff. So even after optimal+falloff there is still a chance to hit (as TomB said: abour 1%). The first graph can be interpreted as the potential damage. Reaching from 0 to optimal range value, there is a constant maximum damage potential. (Note that the chance to hit (2nd graph) does affect if this potential is actually released.) After optimal range value the damage potential does down to a value ABOVE 0 as well. So there is still a little damage potential even after optimal+falloff. (Im a not sure what the colored area between the 2 graphs should be interpreted as) So the conclusion: From 0km <-> optimal range: there is always 100% damage potential. From 0km <-> optimal range: "chance to hit" goes up. At optimal range: "chance to hit" is optimal. From optimal range <-> optimal+falloff: damage potential and "chance to hit" fall down. After optimal+falloff: there is still a very small "chance to hit" and damage potential.
dalman	Posted - 2004.02.26 12:58:00 - [44] Edited by: dalman on 27/02/2004 14:35:59 I assume that the colors are "average damagemod", the X-axis are range and the Y-axis are tracking. The graph becomes very complicated though, as "tracking" depends on 3 variables: rad/sec on the gun, range to the target, and transversal speed of the target. I assume the Y axis shows ((rad/sec) / ("transversal speed" / range)) in the interval from 0 to 1, and with a fixed value of (rad/sec) for the gun you're using. And that you find your average damagemod by picking the transversal speed of the target as well as the range to the target. The black lines in the graph would then represent transversal speed and range. By following one of the "horizontal" black lines you see how good you will hit a target with that speed at different ranges. By following one of the vertical black lines you see how good you will hit a target at that range, depending on what his speed is. That's my thought on that graph. Though it makes no sence how the graph is drawn in the fallof range (the colors are correct, but it should continue to go upwards on the y-axis) M.I.A. since 2004-07-30

Pages: 1 2 :: [one 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.