| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
OmegaTron
   |
Posted - 2004.06.17 12:10:00 -
[1]
Edited by: OmegaTron on 17/06/2004 17:15:26
Edited by: OmegaTron on 17/06/2004 12:12:22
Not sure if this has been mentioned already, i'm sure it has but i'll explain in the best way i know how.
I've noticed lots of players not likeing the new turret balances CCP has implamented in the last patch, I don't really like it either. Though it does have its pro's and con's.
425mm rails
pro's:
at "Max Range" useing antimatter (60km give or take 4 or 5km's), 2x tracking mods and 1x dmg mod I was hitting all my targets for an average 100hp(barely hits)- 450hp (wrecking shots) 4 or 5 wrecking shots within 1 hour of hunting.
con's:
within optimal range (30km+) i was hitting nothing at all even after spending all my rounds in all 6 425's = 240 rounds of hitting air . Even at 30km - 45km still wasn't hitting anything and between 50km - 55km my barely hits drop from 120hp to 35 to 60hp.
Sorry i couldn't explain this better, but i can't seem to find the DOT formula that would have explained this a little better. I hope this helps some players out and if there is anyone that would like to explain this better or add/correct something i might have missed please do so.
------------------------------------------------
A Plague is comming.... |
Faldor
|
Posted - 2004.06.17 12:42:00 -
[2]
 Originally by: OmegaTron
Edited by: OmegaTron on 17/06/2004 12:12:22
at "Max Range" useing antimatter (60km give or take 4 or 5km's), 2x tracking mods and 1x dmg mod I was hitting all my targets
Forgive me for asking, but how the heck can you hit ANYTHING at 60km away when Antimatter = -50% range thus optimal range = 24km for 425mm??????
|
Gaijin Lanis
|
Posted - 2004.06.17 12:44:00 -
[3]
Click "Edit" beside "Quote" next to the date.... you can edit the post and the subject....
|
Gaijin Lanis
|
Posted - 2004.06.17 12:44:00 -
[4]
Originally by: Faldor
Originally by: OmegaTron
Edited by: OmegaTron on 17/06/2004 12:12:22
at "Max Range" useing antimatter (60km give or take 4 or 5km's), 2x tracking mods and 1x dmg mod I was hitting all my targets
Forgive me for asking, but how the heck can you hit ANYTHING at 60km away when Antimatter = -50% range thus optimal range = 24km for 425mm??????
The "Max Range" he speaketh of is the optimal + falloff, since ammo doesn't change that...
|
Loka
|
Posted - 2004.06.17 13:36:00 -
[5]
Originally by: Faldor
Originally by: OmegaTron
Edited by: OmegaTron on 17/06/2004 12:12:22
at "Max Range" useing antimatter (60km give or take 4 or 5km's), 2x tracking mods and 1x dmg mod I was hitting all my targets
Forgive me for asking, but how the heck can you hit ANYTHING at 60km away when Antimatter = -50% range thus optimal range = 24km for 425mm??????
Ok listen. If you have lvl 4 sharpshooter and 1 Tracking CPU II than you get an optimum range of around 33km with anitmatter. And with trajectory analysis lvl 4 you get a 28km falloff
33+28 = 61 ;) nothing more to say
_____________________________________
Dead or Alive
|
Aerick Dawn
|
Posted - 2004.06.17 14:18:00 -
[6]
I thought the hybrid turrets were bugged?
If you go to your Optimal + Falloff you will hit consistantly.
With neutron blasters with AM I was blasting the hell out of stuff at 15k.
Something is wrronnngggg. =)
______________________
What Aerick has been up to lately.. |
Techtv
|
Posted - 2004.06.17 14:41:00 -
[7]
I think it is only large hybrids are broke. Because a cruiser with 250mm railguns hits cruisers, bs's, and frigates (not completly great but still pretty good). So if a cruiser can hit one class below and its equal class the bs should be the same way. They should be able to kill BS 100% and a bit less against cruisers. Cruisers and med hybrids work fine. CCP just needs to fix large turrets.
|
Ishkur
|
Posted - 2004.06.17 14:58:00 -
[8]
I noticed this as well, sorta. With Blaster cannons, I'm shooting at stuff from the Accurracy Falloff number (whatever that means) and I'm hitting almost constantly. I haven't tried adding the two (sorta difficult in a Megathron to keep perfect range on things, oh well).
So I think a lot of people saying they're at Optimal range (which is the WORST possible place to be now) are just not where they ought to be.
At the very least, CCP should either fix whatever the problem is, or make "Optimal Range" the actual Optimal range, and therefore reduce confusion.
|
Alowishus
|
Posted - 2004.06.17 15:10:00 -
[9]
Edited by: Alowishus on 17/06/2004 15:13:26
Yes, something is wrong with the mathematics. You should get your best hits at the optimal of the gun (adjusted for skill and ammo of course) and you should be able to get decent hits, slowly degrading, on either side of the optimal as long as it's inside the falloff. Currently decent hits are happening all the way at one end of the falloff and degrading as it goes lower. That's just wrong.
It should be:
max range---optimal range---min range
bad - ok - good - best - good - ok - bad
Instead it is:
max range---optimal range---min range
best - good - ok - bad - bad - bad - bad
Raven 4TW! Rank(1) SP: 243745/256000 |
SILK EXIDE
|
Posted - 2004.06.17 16:09:00 -
[10]
I totally agree with Alowishus.. Things have become intolerable... my 1400's that used to hit for dmg relevant to the range and my skills now dont hit for s@*t especially if the target is around 25-30km even with EMP..
I can get osme good hits at 60km plus with titanium sabot but i think CCP have made the guns suck even against slow moving BS npcs..
|
OmegaTron
|
Posted - 2004.06.17 17:16:00 -
[11]
Originally by: Alowishus
Edited by: Alowishus on 17/06/2004 15:13:26
Yes, something is wrong with the mathematics. You should get your best hits at the optimal of the gun (adjusted for skill and ammo of course) and you should be able to get decent hits, slowly degrading, on either side of the optimal as long as it's inside the falloff. Currently decent hits are happening all the way at one end of the falloff and degrading as it goes lower. That's just wrong.
It should be:
max range---optimal range---min range
bad - ok - good - best - good - ok - bad
Instead it is:
max range---optimal range---min range
best - good - ok - bad - bad - bad - bad
exactly!
------------------------------------------------
A Plague is comming.... |
Diana Merris
|
Posted - 2004.06.17 17:23:00 -
[12]
Yes, the accuracy formula is totally messed up now. Tracking is so bad that no large gun (short range or long) can hit anything at optimal range without at least 3 tracking mods and maxed skills. When blasters hit better at 15km than at 5km it doesn't need tuning, its broken and needs to be fixed.
Using new formula for falloff, the "falloff" value specified on the gun is the 50% range. The actual maximum is at twice that added to optimum. So a 425mm with AM would be 24km optimum + 48km falloff (24km falloff times 2). Thats why projectiles got their falloff cut in half, otherwise the 1400mm would have had a 120km falloff. So they cut it to 30km to make the max the same 60km it was before. All the hybrid and laser weapons now have twice the effective falloff they used to have.
|
Techtv
|
Posted - 2004.06.17 17:24:00 -
[13]
If you want long range this is actaully a VERY good bug. Now we got a super long range with great damage. The only ppl that should be complaining are the blasterthrons
|
Gariuys
|
Posted - 2004.06.17 17:32:00 -
[14]
Originally by: Techtv
If you want long range this is actaully a VERY good bug. Now we got a super long range with great damage. The only ppl that should be complaining are the blasterthrons
Not really, I'm a blasterthron pilot and got no real reason to complain actually, expect for the little bit about what happens when my targets start orbiting me.
~{When evil and strange get together anything is possible}~
A tool is only useless when you don't know how to use it. - ActiveX
The grass is always greener on the other side. - JoCool |
Demos Q'algryph
|
Posted - 2004.06.17 17:53:00 -
[15]
I may be wrong, but....
Optimal is the optimal distance for full dmg on your volley, disregarding tracking.
Now, what confuses me, regarding hits, misses on stationary targets.
Why is it easier to hit something when its further away? If the target is stationary and you assume you have some sort of accuracy rating, you should miss more at longer ranges, vs hit more at longer range.
For example. I have a rifle, in .308 winchester. Fully tuned it is a 0.5 moa rifle. This means at 200 yards the rifle can put several rounds in a 1" circle. At 400 yards, it will put several rounds in a 2" circle. At 1000 yards in a 5" circle. Using this example, if I was hitting a 1" stationary target, Im more likely to hit it 200 yards, than at 1000 yards.
So exactly how does Eve's system work? At 5K I miss everything, at 25k I miss everything. At 27.5k I get consistent hits. Its quite bizare. |
Xavier Cardde
|
Posted - 2004.06.17 20:10:00 -
[16]
Originally by: Techtv
I think it is only large hybrids are broke. Because a cruiser with 250mm railguns hits cruisers, bs's, and frigates (not completly great but still pretty good). So if a cruiser can hit one class below and its equal class the bs should be the same way. They should be able to kill BS 100% and a bit less against cruisers. Cruisers and med hybrids work fine. CCP just needs to fix large turrets.
Incorrect, ive been messing with medium blasters for a frig hunter and they cant hit ANYTHING up close. And they have GREAT tracking.
|
Taumenka
|
Posted - 2004.06.17 22:26:00 -
[17]
Acctually at 0 range to Optimal i should (As long as you are standing still) good - good - good
then declining out to optimal + falloff.
But still all this is exactly what i noticed when i tested on TQ yesterday aswell.
No hits at optimal and way beyond hit occur frequently.
Drink StarsiÖ
Are you Caldari enough?
|
Mikelangelo
|
Posted - 2004.06.17 23:16:00 -
[18]
Yep.
Best hits seem to be BEYOND optimal range, into what one would consider to be the falloff range. Seems like best hits are toward the end of the falloff range too.
This seems to be contradictory to the hit graphs. But hey, now the 1400mm arty is a TRUE long range weapon. Won't hit for beans under 35km but beyond that it's golden.
|
von Steinroehder
|
Posted - 2004.06.18 07:23:00 -
[19]
Did anyone notice the signature resolution on guns? They got a new stat, 400 for large guns, 200 for mediums and 100 for small turrets if I'm not mistaken, and I've got a feeling the effect of this stat (which modifies 'hittability'  of different size targets) has a far too great effect on your turret hit results.
|
SC0RPY
|
Posted - 2004.06.18 08:43:00 -
[20]
My english is bad, but i can try to explain something. Do u know ppl what is radial speed ? I think no ! If target is moving around u in optimal range or closer - u cant hit it, because radial speed is high. U must fly to optimal+falloff range and then hit it. If target is moving to u directly, or it doesnt move - hit it in optimal range.
|
Tsual
|
Posted - 2004.06.18 08:54:00 -
[21]
Originally by: von Steinroehder
Did anyone notice the signature resolution on guns? They got a new stat, 400 for large guns, 200 for mediums and 100 for small turrets if I'm not mistaken, and I've got a feeling the effect of this stat (which modifies 'hittability' of different size targets) has a far too great effect on your turret hit results.
Maybe there is some chance-to-hit modifier in the formular with (signature of ship)/(signature resultion)
If that's true a large turret had would hit a shuttle in only 1/8 of all shots fired (Shuttle has Signature radius 50)
--------------------------------------
Tsual - Miner from faith, frigat junky for life.
Ritual of the Qua'nadhar. |
Bedla
|
Posted - 2004.06.18 09:12:00 -
[22]
Originally by: OmegaTron
425mm rails
pro's:
at "Max Range" useing antimatter (60km give or take 4 or 5km's), 2x tracking mods and 1x dmg mod I was hitting all my targets for an average 100hp(barely hits)- 450hp (wrecking shots) 4 or 5 wrecking shots within 1 hour of hunting.
con's:
within optimal range (30km+) i was hitting nothing at all even after spending all my rounds in all 6 425's = 240 rounds of hitting air. Even at 30km - 45km still wasn't hitting anything and between 50km - 55km my barely hits drop from 120hp to 35 to 60hp.
Experiencing exactly the same, the really odd thing is that at the 60km Im hitting things regardless of their size (doesnt matter if its BS or tiny frig). Also my scanner was showing me that a bs i was hitting at 60km had radial velocity of 1500 m/s .
However under cca 35 km i cant hit anything, and that includes a BS rat 30 km away with velocity 100 m/s and radial velocity 5 m/s. Now if I understand the math behind this corectly, this should behave almost like a stationary object for me, so what the ****
|
Krogo
|
Posted - 2004.06.18 09:22:00 -
[23]
Also i do agree something is a bit strange with the way guns hit, you should all start looking at radial velocity. The figures given are you best friends with distance to give you an idea of your chances of hitting a target. That is how a caracal can survive the constant pounding of a BS while eating away at its shields or getting away.
|
spurious signal
|
Posted - 2004.06.18 09:43:00 -
[24]
The accuracy falloff curve has been inverted. Lentia worked it out in this thread.
What this means is that at your optimal you will hit rarely and badly but as you move further away your hits & damage will increase *until* you reach Optimal + Falloff at which point going 1km further will drop your hits & damage to 0 again.
Hopefully this will get fixed with today's patch... fingers crossed 
|
Matanga
|
Posted - 2004.06.18 10:20:00 -
[25]
Originally by: Krogo
Also i do agree something is a bit strange with the way guns hit, you should all start looking at radial velocity. The figures given are you best friends with distance to give you an idea of your chances of hitting a target. That is how a caracal can survive the constant pounding of a BS while eating away at its shields or getting away.
How it shuld be ---->
Radial Velocity = W [1/s]
Transversal Velocity = Vt [m/s]
Distance = d [m]
W = Vt/d ----> The lower the W the better you hit
But....don't think that the stat Radial Velocity on the scanner is OK cause
yesterday i was 60km away and had a Transversal Velocity of 6m/s (you lower the Vt by approaching or "keeping at distance" to the target) and the radial velocity was -460m/s
Best thing to do is always check Vt (transversal velocity on the scanner) and try to lower that.
Also heres my idea of what's happening
You can say that
D (damage) = F1(optimal range,falloff) X F2(W,TRacking speed,Sig resolution)
This means that the damage is composed of to parts
The first one depends of optimal range and fallof
and the second one depends of W and your weapons tracking speed and signature resolution.
So............D = F1 X F2 (NOTE = X means a math operation)
After patch F2 has much more weight on D that F1 (so basically you can forget about F1 as long as you stay between optimal + fall off and sometimes not even that)
Conclusion = Keep W low (by increasing d or decreasing Vt)
Increase your tracking speed (Tracking computer)
Use the right gun for the right ship (small frigs,med cruisers, big BS)
NOTE: The system is buggy F1 should have more weight on the D calculation than it has now,so that the Optimal range and Fall off have any meaning again.
"ÆIn accordance with the principles of double-think it does not matter if the war is not real. For when it is, victory is not possible. The war is not meant to be won, but it is meant to be continuous.Æö
George Orwell ô1984ö |
| |
|
| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |