| Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Uglious
   |
Posted - 2005.07.17 18:17:00 -
[31]
 Originally by: Sentani
i think the cap recharge has the same system as the sheild...
in sheilds its: sheild capasity / recharge time x 2.4
and in cap: max cap / recharge time x 2.4
i think this is the rigth formula... i allways use it
Correct from my experience. You don't have to understand all the math brought up to understand recharge rates. Just take "total/recharge time*2.4" for both cap and for shields.
The implications of this is that adding total cap increases recharge rate, just as decreasing time does, and depending on the situation one approach will help more than another. Another implication is that adding cap/reducing the recharge time does NOT impact in a linear way. The chart below (using base stats for an apoc) show how much cap/second you get with the addition of 15% cap recharge modules (used since there are 15% for mid and low slots), and the cap/second delta each module gives over the previous module--notice that a single recharge modules does very little on the actual rate, but as you decrease the recharge rate, it becomes much more dramatic.
caprecharge timemodulecap/s Delta
4800923 na12.48104009
4800784.55 -0.1514.683576572.202536486
4800666.8675-0.1517.274795972.591219395
4800566.837375-0.1520.323289373.048493406
4800481.8117688-0.1523.90975223.586462831
4800409.5400034-0.1528.129120244.219368036
4800348.1090029-0.1533.093082644.963962395
4800295.8926525-0.1538.93303845.839955759
4800251.5087546-0.1545.803574586.870536187
Now, if we put in three cap battery 2's in the mid slots we get
capseconds bonuscap/s Delta
4800923 12.48104009
5360923 0 13.937161431.456121343
5920923 0 15.393282771.456121343
6480923 016.849404121.456121343
6480784.55 0.1519.822828372.973424256
6480666.86750.1523.320974563.498146183
6480566.8373750.1527.436440654.115466098
6480481.81176880.1532.278165484.841724821
6480409.54000340.1537.974312325.696146849
You can see that batteries provide a much more "stable" increase vs. the rechargers. The rule of thumb is to use a battery if/when it provides a bigger boost overall on the recharge rate vs. a recharger (which in this case doesn't happen) OR you want a large initial cap at the expense of recharge rate, which may apply for example when you are traveling and you run out of cap often mid-jump.
|
ELECTR0FREAK
|
Posted - 2005.07.17 20:14:00 -
[32]
Jesus people. Just use This
|
Nosferatu Zodd
|
Posted - 2005.07.17 23:20:00 -
[33]
This is an excel sheet with the calculations and graphics
CapRecharge.xls
You can view a picture of it here
CapCalc.jpg
I believe this is still not 100% correct, but it gives the same results as the formula with x2.4 factor
I think the curves are pulled up a little to decrease the cap drain outside the max cap recharge zone. If they wouldn't have done that your cap would go down realy fast till around 40%, under 15% the cap would again drop too fast.
I'll need more time to test and confirm
|
Niklas
|
Posted - 2005.07.17 23:49:00 -
[34]
Just use the simple method.
Total cap / cap recharge rate X 2.5
this will give you your maximum recharge rate. So anything below that number will be sustainable. This is used for shield recharge rate also.
|
Admiral Pieg
|
Posted - 2005.07.18 02:54:00 -
[35]
this thread is older then sliced bread
______________________
Pod from above. |
Dust Puppy
|
Posted - 2005.07.18 09:44:00 -
[36]
Originally by: Nosferatu Zodd
Edited by: Nosferatu Zodd on 17/07/2005 17:36:47
Edited by: Nosferatu Zodd on 17/07/2005 17:24:01
Edited by: Nosferatu Zodd on 17/07/2005 17:23:28
Originally by: Dust Puppy
I think I have the formula figured out. It would make sense that it is
C = C_0(1-exp(-t/tau)
but I think it is
C = C_0(1-1/cosh(tau*t))
where C_0 is max capacity. I would give you fancy pics if I could host them somewhere.
Your first formula is not correct. It should be:
C = C_0*(1-exp(-t/R*C))
tau is only equal to R*C when the capacitor is charged at C_0*(1-EXP(-1)) or C_0*0.63 or 63%
I'm sure your formula is correct (I can see that on the graphic) but you don't use the correct naming.
Could you explain more in detail how you come to those values? Step-by-step formula?
Why in the name of all that is holy did you resurrect this thread to correct an error that is trivial and not even an error. tau is just a constant, I saw no reason to add two constants R and C because people don't need to know that tau is made up of R and C.
|
Nosferatu Zodd
|
Posted - 2005.07.18 18:13:00 -
[37]
Why do you live?
|
Pottsey
|
Posted - 2005.07.19 05:14:00 -
[38]
Edited by: Pottsey on 19/07/2005 05:15:32
ôJesus people. Just use Thisö
ItÆs wrong for shields. Due to the way shields work you are better off using 2.5 you can even get away with 2.6. I did a lot of testing and my shield regen at 2.4 was 100dps yet even when people hit me for 105 or 110 DPS which is over 2.5 my shields still hold. So now I use 2.5.
But for cap I got between 2.4 and 2.5.
_________________________________________________
Nominate famous people in Eve who had an impact on you. |
| |
|
| Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |