Raven base sig: 460
Loki bonus: -35.16%
LSE: +25
Domination TP with max skills: +41.25%
Shield rig: +5%

Unmodified sig: 460+3*25 = 535
With Loki bonus: 535*0.6484 = 346.894
TP 1: 346.894*1.4125 = 489.988
TP 2: 0.4125%*0.87 = 0.359, 489.988*1.359 = 665.832
TP 3: 0.4125*0.57 = 0.235, 665.832*1.235 = 822.386
TP 4: 0.4125*0.28 = 0.1155, 822.386*1.1155 = 917.371
Rig 1: 0.05*0.105 = 0.00525, 917.371*0.00525 = 922.188
Rig 2: 0.05*0.03 = 0.0015, 922.188*1.0015 = 923.571
Rig 3: 0.05*0.0064 = 0.00032, 923.571*1.00031 = 923.867

35.25% bonus from proteus on TPs

Doesn't have a jump drive

Remember we are considering here sitting duck. If it take a whole fleet of supercap to alpha an immobile BS, I think we pretty much did it.
I also think tier 3 BC may see an increase in their price...

5-10 TPs

Hi, my name is stacking penalties. Have we met?

Even if you have that bonus, only doing 38% (minus a bit more for hit quality) of the current damage one a small number that has to be primaried to apply TPs on instead of just blapping everything is a pretty huge change, and that's against (one of?) the largest sig sub-cap ship in the game.

I used EFT for that, but I'll do it manually if you prefer (you may not be able to jump in half way trough and confirm the values since I'll post rounded values here but use the exact ones given to me by my calculator when I continue).
Raven base sig: 460
Loki bonus: -35.16%
LSE: +25
Domination TP with max skills: +41.25%
Shield rig: +5%

.

There's your problem... you give the raven the best opportunity to reduce it's sig, but give target painters no bonus. Throw a proteus bonus on those painters and see if it's 41.25% every time.

And saying a proteus bonus isn't common with supers just because in current eve mechanics it's not needed is horrible. I'll throw a damn Ewar command bonus on a frickin Avatar and mind link it if it means my entire fleet will hit for massive amounts more damage per shot on every target painted.

Greyscale states that double the sig has the exact same effect in the tracking formula. He's an idiot.

Doubling the signature resolution is the same as halving the tracking. My math isn't brilliant but I asked one of our math PhDs and he assured me that (a/0.5b)*(x/y) was equivalent to (a/b)*(2x/y).

Doubling the signature resolution is the same as halving the tracking. My math isn't brilliant but I asked one of our math PhDs and he assured me that (a/0.5b)*(x/y) was equivalent to (a/b)*(2x/y).

Doubling the signature resolution is the same as halving the tracking. My math isn't brilliant but I asked one of our math PhDs and he assured me that (a/0.5b)*(x/y) was equivalent to (a/b)*(2x/y).

...

Dude, you can't be serious. Increasing signature by x times has the same effect as increasing tracking x times, or decreasing signature resolution x times, or decreasing angular speed x times. It doesn't rely on any other conditions like does target have 0 speed or not.

You have just shown that you have no clue how actual turret chance-to-hit is calculated, congratz on that.

Do you even know why the wormhole exploit worked for perfect hits before it was removed? The formula as currently coded has a variable in it that can sink to 0 creating an undefined slope on chance. This was recognized by the client and allowed infinite range, and perfect damage. The patch to get it out of game had to adjust the wormhole effect that created the undefined slope. This in fact had 0 to do with signature of ships. The way it was exploited was to **** with the tracking variables on ships.

I'm honestly reluctant to push this change any further at this point, and we're reasonably hopeful that the combination of the locked-targets reduction, the damage reduction and the tracking nerf will give people enough wiggle room to fly a dictor through without touching the sides. Obviously it'd be nicer to know for sure, but we feel that the changes as-is are the best balance of effectiveness and risk right now. We'll keep an eye on developments on TQ and see where we go from there, but we'd very much like to see these changes actually get properly explored in practice before making them more extreme.

Magnetar effects were removed to make it impossible to achieve < -100% TD effect. Most likely getting negative product of all four components was enough condition to get this issue, it doesn't matter which one of 4 becomes negative. TD could control just one out of four, and there was no way to do the same for turret sigres / target sigrad / angular speed, so obviously it was possible only via tracking speed component. Negative value wasn't explicitly checked in c-style switch block (python elifs or similar structure), thus code flowed to the else clause which processed hit as normal, 100% x1 damage.

Also, client has nothing to do with it :)

a would represent angular velocity, or transversal velocity
b would represent turret tracking
x would represent ship signature
y would represent gun resolution.

If you notice, signature has no means of approaching infinity in game.
Tracking, had a way to approach 0.

If you just approach zero - nothing will break, you need to make the value negative.

Anyway, what does it change? Nothing, it's question of tools used to change any member of formula. I think i clearly said that TD had such tools while others didn't. Availability of tools to achieve negative tracking doesn't turn tracking speed iself into unique member of formula.

dude, plug any number / 0 on your calculator.

tracking variable was defined to have a value between 0 and X

You don't know how python's float works, such lower cap at 0 should be enforced manually, it's not part of data format. There's some extremely minor data loss implied by format itself, but it's definitely not enough to force td strength rounding to -100 / tracking speed rounding to 0.

And if there's some artificial cap on number, like you assume, then why ccp just didn't change cap from 0 to, say, 1E-10, and removed magnetar's ew bonuses instead?

Regardless, when variables hit values that should not be possible and were thus not accounted for, so it starts throwing errors etc

While we're at it, let's fix doomsday devices

• Firing the DD invokes the "no assists" limitation for a period, like siege and triage.

I don't know exactly how long would be appropriate, but certainly more than the 30s immobility timer. I'm thinking a few minutes, but not the whole cool-down period.

Titan: "PPPPPPPPPEWWWW! EAT IT!"
Remaining dreads: "Damn, but now it's our turn. Let's see how good your local rep is."

Yeah, I'd like to see that.