| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Nova Fox
Gallente
Novafox Shipyards
   |
Posted - 2008.09.23 02:34:00 -
[211]
 Originally by: Strill
Edited by: Strill on 23/09/2008 01:57:11
That's what we've been saying from the very beginning. The hardening factor is the only thing that has practical use, and it requires you to use that formula over and over again every time you wanna see how good your tank is. If you're gonna end up using that formula all the time, why does the game bother with percentages in the first place? It's an unnecessary complication.
It's like having your optimal range listed in miles instead of kilometers. It's just a layer of tedium between you and the information you need.
You mean want?
I want my information in easily convertable asset, not some mathematical presolved spoon feed, which is probably why I failed power factor at a corporate sponsored class because they never explain where they get power factor variables from.
Knowing how much 'effective' hp isnt going to save my ass when its 99.99% resist and the guy shots me with a shell that does 10 damage and still kills me when I only have 10000 'effective hp' left all because the shell decided to punch though the hull.
Also the tone of the thread akita has presented has been in the 'my way or no way' tone. This is no good way to present any idea as you're going to get alienated. Toting that these numbers are the only thing that matters pvp are making you guys look less expert about pvp and more expert about etf.
I don't disagree with more information but seriously she needs to learn to crank her estrogen down when she's posting and maybe shell get lesser angry counter posting.
Calculating effective HP has yet to save my ass Ill tell you that for sure. In all cases where It may have I haven't been killed in those situations, call it luck if you will, in the few situations that I do get killed calculating effective hp wouldnt have mattered anyways where my mere presence was more than enough to get my objectives done.
Pre Order your Sisters of Eve ship today!!! |
Strill
|
Posted - 2008.09.23 03:15:00 -
[212]
Edited by: Strill on 23/09/2008 03:24:11
Originally by: Nova Fox
Originally by: Strill
Edited by: Strill on 23/09/2008 01:57:11
That's what we've been saying from the very beginning. The hardening factor is the only thing that has practical use, and it requires you to use that formula over and over again every time you wanna see how good your tank is. If you're gonna end up using that formula all the time, why does the game bother with percentages in the first place? It's an unnecessary complication.
It's like having your optimal range listed in miles instead of kilometers. It's just a layer of tedium between you and the information you need.
You mean want?
I want my information in easily convertable asset, not some mathematical presolved spoon feed, which is probably why I failed power factor at a corporate sponsored class because they never explain where they get power factor variables from.
Knowing how much 'effective' hp isnt going to save my ass when its 99.99% resist and the guy shots me with a shell that does 10 damage and still kills me when I only have 10000 'effective hp' left all because the shell decided to punch though the hull.
If you mean that the shell did 10 damage after being modified by your resists, then yes I'd say it's perfectly reasonable for a shell that deals 100,000 damage to pop a 10,000 EHP tank. If you mean that the shell did 10 damage before being modified by your resists, then it wouldn't pop you at all. Damage is calculated using decimals, so it would deal a fraction of a hit point in damage and you would survive.
However, what you're trying to say is that the possibility of damage leaking through to the hull invalidates EHP as a useful tool. That's not true at all. You'll get popped prematurely and lose hp you hypothetically should have had whether you measure your tank using structure, armor, and shields, and resists, or whether you use EHP. It really doesn't change anything, and is a pretty obscure situation regardless.
Quote:
Also the tone of the thread akita has presented has been in the 'my way or no way' tone. This is no good way to present any idea as you're going to get alienated. Toting that these numbers are the only thing that matters pvp are making you guys look less expert about pvp and more expert about etf.
On a strategic level, yes. Getting your opponent's HP below zero while keeping your hp above zero is the bottom line in a pvp battle. Everything else can be described in terms of how it achieves that goal. If you suddenly move your ship and cause your opponent to make a mistake which gives you an advantage in the fight, then you've done something which furthers your goal of getting your opponent's hp down and keeping yours up. If you smacktalk your opponent in local chat and cause them to play badly or run into a trap you've done something which furthers your goal of getting their hp down while keeping yours up. If you infiltrate their corp and steal all their money, they now have less isk to spend on ships and weapons, which means they're less capable of getting your hp down and keeping theirs up.
Having a consistent way to measure your hp is critical to being able to make pvp decisions. You can't tell whether your trap is strong enough to work on the guy you smacktalked if you can't tell what your survivability is. You can't tell whether it's a better idea to run away or go ahead with your plan to confuse your opponent if you don't know what your survivability is. You can't tell whether your corp's ships are strong enough to match your opponent's ships if you don't know what your survivability is. It's integral to anything you do.
|
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
|
Posted - 2008.09.23 15:32:00 -
[213]
Originally by: Nova Fox
but seriously she needs to learn to crank her estrogen down when she's posting and maybe shell get lesser angry counter posting
There are girls that play EVE ? 
_
SHOPS || Mission rewards revamp || better nanofix
|
Gnulpie
Minmatar
Miner Tech
|
Posted - 2008.09.23 17:22:00 -
[214]
People who do not understand percentages have no business in Eve.
To replace the current display of "resistance-percentage" is a bad idea.
To add the "hardener multiplier" to the current display is a good idea.
|
Ampoliros
Shadow Company
Axiom Empire
|
Posted - 2008.09.23 17:37:00 -
[215]
Originally by: Gnulpie
People who do not understand percentages have no business in Eve.
To replace the current display of "resistance-percentage" is a bad idea.
To add the "hardener multiplier" to the current display is a good idea.
Which is what I said on like page 4 before the thread devolved into some really awkward flamefest. Additional, easy to use info is good.
The hardening factor is useful - its similar in a way to the base armor/shield damage provided in showinfo for charges. Sure, we can all perform standard math and/or have a calculator on standby, but its a lot easier if the game helps you with a rough value.
Hardening makes it easy to calculate EHP on a specific resist. Shield HP * shield hardening + armor hp * armor hardening + hull hp * hull hardening. It makes it easy to calculate EHP tanked vs specific resistances. It's a useful quantity that should be easy to calculate, so there's no reason why it shouldn't be easy to put in.
-----------------------------
Signature for sale :o |
Odizzido
|
Posted - 2008.09.23 22:10:00 -
[216]
How how this terrible idea gone on for 8 pages?
|
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
|
Posted - 2008.09.23 22:37:00 -
[217]
Originally by: Odizzido
How how this terrible idea gone on for 8 pages?
Explain what exactly is terrible about it.
_
SHOPS || Mission rewards revamp || better nanofix
|
Tarron Sarek
Gallente
Biotronics Inc.
Alternative Realities
|
Posted - 2008.09.26 00:22:00 -
[218]
Originally by: Strill
Originally by: Tarron Sarek
Originally by: Akita T
You won't hear anybody say "I can tank 95% damage on 50 base repair"... you'll hear "I can tank 1000 DPS".
Erm.. I hear "I have xx% EM, xy% Thermal, yx% Kinetic and yy% Explosive Resistances. What do you think, is that enough?" all the time.
That question is exactly the reason the system needs to change. That question goes beyond having difficulty understanding how resistance relates to survivability. A question like that means that the person asking it can't tell how much survivability they're getting from those resistance percentages at all. The current system is failing to convey any useful information to them. You think that's not a problem?
Wrong.
The information given is sufficient.
However.
A lack of experience, mirrored by the above question, can't be compensated by the system.
Or do you want the EVE UI/AI to also lend a helping hand at fitting or combat decisions?
Many if not most battles are decided at the fitting screen, or by means of numbers.
Both can't be given as information by the system, at least not in the form of simple 'tanking stats'.
For a halfway experienced player the current informations are enough to let him decide, by intuition (based on experience), whether or not his tank is sufficient.
There is, except in missions, no way to tell what's going to happpen and how much tank or which resistance type you'll need. Rule of thumb: more is better.
Making a change like it is proposed here would merely, and only possibly, help unexperienced mission-runners. At least that's my opinion.
___________________________________
Balance is power, guard hide it well
"Ceterum censeo Polycarbonem esse delendam" |
Kransthow
Sage Industries
|
Posted - 2008.09.26 02:41:00 -
[219]
perhaps a hybrid idea is called for
having the option of resistance being replaced by %damage being let through
aka (100%-resistance)
|
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
|
Posted - 2008.09.27 05:45:00 -
[220]
Originally by: Tarron Sarek
Wrong. The information given is sufficient.
Sufficient ? Yes.
In an easily usable form ? No.
Quote:
Many if not most battles are decided at the fitting screen, or by means of numbers.
Both can't be given as information by the system, at least not in the form of simple 'tanking stats'.
It's not like it's rocket science, it's basic info and basic math.
However, why the hell does everybody HAVE to do that basic math each and every time ?
It's nothing but annoying, nothing more, nothing less.
Quote:
There is, except in missions, no way to tell what's going to happpen and how much tank or which resistance type you'll need. Rule of thumb: more is better.
And resists are a VERY POOR (visually-speaking) indicator of that.
Just take one page back to see how the resists fare against the hardening factor, VISUALLY.
How much easier it is to determine "which tank is better" with a listed hardening factor as opposed to a listed resist.
Quote:
Making a change like it is proposed here would merely, and only possibly, help unexperienced mission-runners. At least that's my opinion.
Goddamit, it's NOT A CHANGE. It's an additional visual indicator.
One which you could take a couple of seconds to derive yourself.
It just makes everybody's life life SLIGHTLY easier, especially newcomers.
It gives nobody any significant advantages nor disadvantages.
_
SHOPS || Mission rewards revamp || better nanofix
|
Odizzido
|
Posted - 2008.09.27 07:08:00 -
[221]
Originally by: Akita T
Originally by: Odizzido
How how this terrible idea gone on for 8 pages?
Explain what exactly is terrible about it.
You claim to want to make things easier for newbies right? Imagine how many will look at the resists, then look at the hardening factor and say "what number effects tanking? Both?"
Adding more numbers wont make things any easier....and for me it's about as easy as it gets. %'s are perfect and exactly how I like my information.
|
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
|
Posted - 2008.09.27 09:24:00 -
[222]
Originally by: Odizzido
Imagine how many will look at the resists, then look at the hardening factor and say "what number effects tanking? Both?"
And it would be oh-so-much-easier to say they rpresent in fact the same thing, at which time they would start to get the idea easier.
Yes, it WOULD be much easier for newbies (it would be much easier if ONLY the hardening factor was listed, actually, but the vets cry out for resists because they're used to them).
Quote:
%'s are perfect and exactly how I like my information.
No, it's how you're USED TO get your information.
Yet you also do this very same calculation in your head.
You probably start with the repair/second or total HP, that's why you're maybe not realizing the fact you ARE actually calculating this number already yourself all the time anyway.
_
SHOPS || Mission rewards revamp || better nanofix
|
Odizzido
|
Posted - 2008.09.28 09:00:00 -
[223]
Originally by: Akita T
Quote:
%'s are perfect and exactly how I like my information.
No, it's how you're USED TO get your information.
Yet you also do this very same calculation in your head.
You probably start with the repair/second or total HP, that's why you're maybe not realizing the fact you ARE actually calculating this number already yourself all the time anyway.
You're trying to tell me that I don't know what I like? haha you will lose that argument for sure. I like %'s. I've played games with your preferred method, and I don't like it as much. This is my personal preference, so I don't know how you can be arguing about it with me.
I am not going to bother writing some long post explaining why because this idea will never make it into EVE. Course if it ever did, and it was just additional info and gave me my %'s still then I wouldn't care. Put a bunch of dildo's on the info sheet if that's what you like, as long as I get my info.
|
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
|
Posted - 2008.09.28 20:50:00 -
[224]
Originally by: Odizzido
I've played games with your preferred method, and I don't like it as much.
Name a couple.
_
SHOPS || Mission rewards revamp || better nanofix
|
Odizzido
|
Posted - 2008.09.29 14:27:00 -
[225]
Originally by: Akita T
Originally by: Odizzido
I've played games with your preferred method, and I don't like it as much.
Name a couple.
The game I am playing right now, EQ2, does. |
Strill
|
Posted - 2008.09.29 15:52:00 -
[226]
Originally by: Odizzido
Originally by: Akita T
Originally by: Odizzido
I've played games with your preferred method, and I don't like it as much.
Name a couple.
The game I am playing right now, EQ2, does.
Which stats are you referring to? EQ2 uses percentages for its damage reduction stats.
|
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
|
Posted - 2008.09.30 03:19:00 -
[227]
Edited by: Akita T on 30/09/2008 03:22:47
To this day, I don't remember ever seing a game that uses the proposed "hardening" indicator as an alternative of (or in addition to) percentage resists.
And therefore I doubt you ever played one such game.
Yeah, funny isn't it... he claims to have played gameS that use the system I proposed but he "doesn't like that", I ask to name at least two, he manages to only name one, which doesn't even use the system I propose (but instead a percentage system and an even more obfuscated per-item indicator)... really funny, eh ? 
_
SHOPS || Mission rewards revamp || better nanofix
|
Odizzido
|
Posted - 2008.09.30 09:05:00 -
[228]
I don't mean the tanking, I was talking about resist rates....which I guess is tanking.
For my necro, I can get master2 of a spell and it is "24% harder" to resist, or a x1.24 factor. Same idea.
As to other games, I don't know which games do what, but I have played them. If I don't remember off the top of my head which ones use what method it doesn't mean they don't exist. If I happen to play one and I happen to remember you I will post back here with the name, since you seem to care so much. |
Kagura Nikon
Minmatar
Infinity Enterprises
|
Posted - 2008.09.30 10:37:00 -
[229]
For god sake anyone that spent 10 minutes trying to understand the game can easily figure how much resistances represent and how much they will affect your survivability. If they cannot then I can't understand how they can find EVE icon on their desktop since that is a much more complex task.
-------------------------------------------------
If brute force doesn't solve your problem... you are not using enough
|
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
|
Posted - 2008.09.30 16:10:00 -
[230]
Originally by: Kagura Nikon
For god sake anyone that spent 10 minutes trying to understand the game can easily figure how much resistances represent and how much they will affect your survivability.
Yesm and just because you KNOW that a 95% resist means a 20-times better tank doesn't mean you have to HAVE resists listed ONLY as "79.64513% explosive resist" when "x4.9128 explosive hardeningfactor/damagereduction/resistance/whatever" makes at least as much sense AND is easier to VISUALIZE when trying to determine actual tanking power.
_
SHOPS || Mission rewards revamp || better nanofix
|
Odizzido
|
Posted - 2008.09.30 19:27:00 -
[231]
I think only for you aki.
|
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
|
Posted - 2008.10.02 08:07:00 -
[232]
Originally by: Odizzido
I think only for you aki.
Tell that to the countless people who still make the mistake of saying "T2 hardeners are 5% better than T1 hardeners", for instance. And to those that are slightly better off and say they're 10% better. When we actually know they're 11.11111% better in reality.
Just one recent example of just how unintuitive a resists display is compared to a hardening factor / damage reduction factor / whatever you like to call it would be.
_
SHOPS || Mission rewards revamp || better nanofix
|
Strill
|
Posted - 2008.10.02 08:28:00 -
[233]
Edited by: Strill on 02/10/2008 08:28:37
Originally by: Kagura Nikon
For god sake anyone that spent 10 minutes trying to understand the game can easily figure how much resistances represent and how much they will affect your survivability. If they cannot then I can't understand how they can find EVE icon on their desktop since that is a much more complex task.
That's not true at all. It's easy to misunderstand resistances.
For example, if you're comparing a 55% hardener and a 50% hardener. The 55% hardener negates 10% more DPS than the 50% hardener. So it must be 10% better right?
Well the answer is no. The percent increase in damage negated doesn't correspond linearly to your survivability at all. In order to compare them you have to see how much longer you'll survive with the 55% than the 50%, in which case it turns out that the 55% hardener is 11.11% more effective than the 50% hardener.
That kind of mistake is certainly something a halfway competent player could make.
|
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
|
Posted - 2008.10.03 02:37:00 -
[234]
The forums are FULL with vets that still miss the finer points of tankability precisely because working with resists is unintuitive.
Hardening factors or damage reduction factors or whatevere the heck you'd like to call them are far more intuitive.
And in the end, it's the same thing... just a display difference.
Like I said, you don't even have to remove the resists display... just also display the 1/(1-resists%) number somewhere near.
_
Alternate resist display || Mission reward revamp || better nanofix
|
Freya Runestone
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2008.10.05 19:35:00 -
[235]
I don't get the reason behind the idea. I really don't.
You want to make it simpler. Right?
Assume for a second this was the way it was ingame, and you were suggesting a %-display. the entire suggestion could be summed up with "when shot you negate X%, and take only 100%-x% of that damage".
And even worse, having 2 values show. If 1 is confusing, having 2 numbers with seemingly no relation would certainly not help.
|
Strill
|
Posted - 2008.10.05 23:17:00 -
[236]
Edited by: Strill on 05/10/2008 23:21:41
Originally by: Freya Runestone
I don't get the reason behind the idea. I really don't.
You want to make it simpler. Right?
The objective of this change is to display resistances in a format that can be directly converted into survival time. As it is, resistance percentages do not correspond linearly to survival time or any other practically applicable stat, which means you have to go through a bunch of annoying math every time you want to be able to compare them. Furthermore, people who don't know about the annoying math tend to be tricked into thinking that resistances do correspond linearly to survival time, and think that they're getting diminishing returns because the resistances didn't stack additively or some other nonsense.
Quote:
Assume for a second this was the way it was ingame, and you were suggesting a %-display. the entire suggestion could be summed up with "when shot you negate X%, and take only 100%-x% of that damage".
You still have to do the other explanation anyways if you want this person to be able to make any intelligent decisions with that information. Suppose they ask "Ok so which is better for my buffer tank? A 55% hardener or +1,000 armor?" You'd have to go through the same explanation Akira posted.
|
Tarron Sarek
Gallente
Biotronics Inc.
Alternative Realities
|
Posted - 2008.10.06 00:53:00 -
[237]
Somehow I doubt that a player who fails to understand how resistances work will be able to make a better decision based on that new hardening factor.
Plus I'd like to see a (fake) example of someone using the hardening factor to illustrate it's usefulness. Up to now all that's been said is 'it's better', which is still merely more than a claim.
How would someone use it to find out how much tank he has and how much he needs?
___________________________________
Balance is power, guard hide it well
"Ceterum censeo Polycarbonem esse delendam" |
Strill
|
Posted - 2008.10.06 01:52:00 -
[238]
Edited by: Strill on 06/10/2008 02:01:03
Originally by: Tarron Sarek
Somehow I doubt that a player who fails to understand how resistances work will be able to make a better decision based on that new hardening factor.
Understanding that resistances negate that percentage of incoming damage is not enough to understand how much tank they give you.
Quote:
Plus I'd like to see a (fake) example of someone using the hardening factor to illustrate it's usefulness. Up to now all that's been said is 'it's better', which is still merely more than a claim.
What do you mean by fake?
Quote:
How would someone use it to find out how much tank he has and how much he needs?
You multiply your hp by the hardening factor to find how much tank you have. If your tank is higher than someone else's tank, then you will survive longer than them. It's that simple.
Furthermore, it makes it clear that a 50% hardener is doubling your tank. For example, if you start out with 50% resistances you will have a hardening factor of 2 because the 50% resistances allow you to take twice as much damage. If you add a 50% hardener you will have a hardening factor of 2 * 2 = 4. 4 is two times as much as 2, so you know that your tank is twice as good as it was before.
With resistances, however, you would start out with 50% resistances, add a 50% hardener, and have 75% resistances. It's not very clear that going from 50% -> 75% is doubling your hp, and as your resistances get higher and higher the numbers go up slower and slower even though you're still doubling your tank.
Basically, the thing with resistances is that the value of 1% resistance is constantly changing as you get more and more resistance, but the value of 1 hardening factor is constant. So it's much clearer how much tank you have if you use hardening factor.
|
Tarron Sarek
Gallente
Biotronics Inc.
Alternative Realities
|
Posted - 2008.10.06 22:58:00 -
[239]
Originally by: Strill
What do you mean by fake?
I mean 'to act as if'. Just pretend you were fitting your ship for a PvP operation and write down your thoughts and actions while you go through the steps of 'calculating' your tank.
Quote:
Quote:
How would someone use it to find out how much tank he has and how much he needs?
You multiply your hp by the hardening factor to find how much tank you have. If your tank is higher than someone else's tank, then you will survive longer than them. It's that simple.
Hmm, if your resistances are higher than those of someone else, you will (probably) survive longer than him. I don't see that much difference tbh.
After all there are also four resistances. That little fact shouldn't be left out. And the bigger=better holds true for both.
Ok, so it's easier for players to get that x2 is double the tank instead of 50%->75%.
Nevertheless, how does said newbie figure out just how much tank he needs?
That's a questioon of experience and knowledge. Knowledge which can easily be as hard to obtain as the functionality of resistances. Or harder.
I'm still not convinced.
___________________________________
Balance is power, guard hide it well
"Ceterum censeo Polycarbonem esse delendam" |
Strill
|
Posted - 2008.10.07 02:00:00 -
[240]
Edited by: Strill on 07/10/2008 02:05:12
Originally by: Tarron Sarek
Originally by: Strill
What do you mean by fake?
I mean 'to act as if'. Just pretend you were fitting your ship for a PvP operation and write down your thoughts and actions while you go through the steps of 'calculating' your tank.
Quote:
Quote:
How would someone use it to find out how much tank he has and how much he needs?
You multiply your hp by the hardening factor to find how much tank you have. If your tank is higher than someone else's tank, then you will survive longer than them. It's that simple.
Hmm, if your resistances are higher than those of someone else, you will (probably) survive longer than him. I don't see that much difference tbh. ...And the bigger=better holds true for both.
That's not true. HACs and HICs have huge resistances but their tanks are inferior to buffer-tanked battleships with lower resistances. Just trying to get "lots" of resistances and "lots" of hp isn't going to get you the best tank.
Quote:
After all there are also four resistances. That little fact shouldn't be left out.
If you want to deal with the four resistances you can either compare each of them individually or compare the averages. If you can come up with statistics on how often people use any given damage type you could even come up with a weighted average to give you a better idea on what you might face in any given situation.
In any case, it's not really related to the percentages vs multipliers debate.
Quote:
Ok, so it's easier for players to get that x2 is double the tank instead of 50%->75%.
Nevertheless, how does said newbie figure out just how much tank he needs?
That's a questioon of experience and knowledge. Knowledge which can easily be as hard to obtain as the functionality of resistances. Or harder.
I'm still not convinced.
What do you mean by "how much tank he needs"? What situation would there be in which he would only need a certain amount of tank? I'd expect that he'd always want the most tank he can get in any given situation, which is certainly something multipliers can do.
Originally by: Tarron Sarek
Somehow I doubt that a player who fails to understand how resistances work will be able to make a better decision based on that new hardening factor.
Plus I'd like to see a (fake) example of someone using the hardening factor to illustrate it's usefulness. Up to now all that's been said is 'it's better', which is still merely more than a claim.
How would someone use it to find out how much tank he has and how much he needs?
Now to answer your question.
Let's say I wanna tell which of my two ships has a better tank for thermal damage.
Ship 1:
1,900 HP
4.17 hardening
Ship 2:
2,300 HP
3.80 hardening
Ship 1:
1900 * 4.17 = 7923
Ship 2:
2300 * 3.8 = 8740
8740 > 7923 which means that ship two will last longer under fire from thermal damage.
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |