EPTor if someone is missing a guy, contact me. hurdur.
EVE Corporation - Page 1521
| Forum Index > General Games |
|
Ueberlisk
Finland455 Posts
or if someone is missing a guy, contact me. hurdur. | ||
|
Ramiel
United States1220 Posts
| ||
|
Ueberlisk
Finland455 Posts
On April 18 2013 05:38 Ramiel wrote: ^ That sounds fun, if anyone wants / need me count me in are you going to fanfest? | ||
|
419
Russian Federation3631 Posts
On April 17 2013 22:35 Reborn8u wrote: For some reason the related kills on that fight shows someone else killing the nemesis. I killed it. Basically, I was running around with some milita guys, we went for a maller, then 2 more mallers a prophecy and random other shit showed up. We got a maller, caracal, and catalyst, and talwar. http://shieldbattery.killmail.org/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=17275607 http://shieldbattery.killmail.org/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=17275631 http://shieldbattery.killmail.org/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=17275427 After everyone else in my fleet was dead or left. I warped back on the field and got the nemesis http://shieldbattery.killmail.org/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=17275426 I was shooting a prophecy and maller, kiting their brains out, while the other maller was trying to get 150 away for a warp in. Eventually the prophecy gave up and left. The crusader was burning straight at me for tackle. I overheated and burned away from him. I've never flown an omen in combat before and I really just wanted to see how far I could push it. I could have got out, but I let the crusader tackle me because I was scram fit. So he tackled I scrammed, I switched to multi and put my drones on him. They killed the drones and I burned out my scram, oops. I was barely hitting him either way, once my drones died, I died. But all in all I was very happy with the ship, I probably killed 15 t2 drones in all of this while kiting. I kited the prophecy until he gave up and left and was just having some fun harassing the mallers. They had a merlin who I was hoping to get, but he just left. I guess they got sick of me messing with them and someone grabbed a crusader. I managed to get the maller into half armor before I died, and he was bait tanked. Hotpocket was crying in local, about my being bad, noob shield omen ect. I gave a GF and after he talked all that smack, I asked him if he was referring to my omen, that was kiting them alone for 15 minutes. I regret nothing. nice scram | ||
|
Ramiel
United States1220 Posts
Sadly not this year, I didn't realize you had to be in attendance to play in the turny. My bad | ||
|
Ueberlisk
Finland455 Posts
On April 18 2013 06:29 Ramiel wrote: Sadly not this year, I didn't realize you had to be in attendance to play in the turny. My bad yea. its pain in the ass to get to play without having bunch of friends going. | ||
|
Ramiel
United States1220 Posts
Old phoon, no implants, no heat, no rigs, Lv5 skills, T2 launchers, CN cruise. DPS: 384 Now lets look at damage application. All ships shown have level 5 skills, are unfit except for an MWD. No other effects Merlin: 22 DPS Thrasher: 43 DPS Thorax: 78 DPS Brutix: 236 DPS Drake: 307 DPS Tempest: 343 DPS (Still not applying full damage to an MWD BS) Please explain to me why the proposed changes include a 10% decrease to explosion velocity? Cruise missile already cannot apply full DPS to an MWD BS. Now that we have that established, lets look at the drake. Again with 2BCS HML II launchers, CN scourge no implants, no rigs, no drugs shoot at the same targets: Drake HML DPS: 341 Merlin: 69 Thrasher: 118 Thorax: 186 (Cruiser sized weapon applying barely half of on paper DPS) Brutix: 341 Drake: 341 Tempest: 341 I simply cannot understand what CCP is doing with missiles. Right now the best missile ships in the game are the 6 launcher RLM tengu, and the RLM cerberus / RLM Caracal. They both apply more damage to cruiser and smaller ships, while having comparable damage to BC / BS than HML currently have (after the nerf). Your current proposed cruise changes will help the PvE environment. However in the PvP environment, the current iteration of cruise missiles are in fact superior to the proposed- simply because they don't have to deal with that 10% decrease in explosion velocity. Please look at the simple maths I am providing. It doesn't matter how much of a damage bonus you give missiles, if you are not willing to look at the application of the damage. Cruise / torps / HML / HAM can already do very little in the PvP environment because these weapon systems apply so little damage, unless the target is hard tackled. However hard tackling a target is difficult when you are flying small gang / kiting / solo. So other than using 2/3 ships, how is a pilot going to apply any meaningful damage to targets? For those of you that are not as versed in missile damage, there are two deciding factors that determine missile damage: Explosion radius vs target radius Explosion velocity vs target velocity Both of these components are not equal. Explosion radius has a much more marginal effect on missile damage, than a comparable decrease in explosion velocity / target velocity. Because of the way missile damage is calculated and coded into EvE- giving a missile that already struggles to apply damage a HUGE 10% explosion velocity decrease, is going to turn any 'dps buff' into a joke when observed in the PvP area. Because the facts of the matter are this: Most ships carry an MWD. And while they do increase signature, this is not nearly enough to offset the fact that the same increase seen in the ship speed when compared to missile explosion velocity- throws damage application out the window. As I have stated before: If you increase the target velocity and the target signature radius by the same margin, target speed and explosion velocity play a much much larger role in deciding applied DPS to target than the same increase in explosion radius / target radius. So CCP please clarify this for me. 1. Are you planning on adding addition modules to the game that will allow a pod pilot to choose to decrease explosion radius / increase explosion velocity apart from rigs? 2. Are you currently happy with RLM missiles having superior damage application when compared to HAM's / HMLs against cruisers? 3. What are your thoughts on the difficulty faced by missile uses when attempting to apply full 'on paper' DPS to PvP ships with out using hard tackle? Please provide an answer that is relevant to solo / small gang or kiting play styles. (Not all of us have friends in rapiers, huginns, arazus that fly around with us on call.) Thank you for your time, and I await your response. Go like my post or something. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2896962&#post2896962 | ||
|
Omigawa
United States1556 Posts
Guy posts fun story about fighting outmanned in a FW plex Gets shit on by r/Eve anti- off grid boosting circlejerk best part: http://imgur.com/PX8LE5n | ||
|
Body_Shield
Canada3368 Posts
On April 18 2013 11:10 Omigawa wrote: http://www.reddit.com/r/Eve/comments/1ci81c/after_being_involved_with_test_for_over_a_year/ Guy posts fun story about fighting outmanned in a FW plex Gets shit on by r/Eve anti- off grid boosting circlejerk best part: http://imgur.com/PX8LE5n Well, that is /r/eve | ||
|
s0Li
United States406 Posts
| ||
|
DefMatrixUltra
Canada1992 Posts
On April 18 2013 11:10 Omigawa wrote: http://www.reddit.com/r/Eve/comments/1ci81c/after_being_involved_with_test_for_over_a_year/ Guy posts fun story about fighting outmanned in a FW plex Gets shit on by r/Eve anti- off grid boosting circlejerk best part: http://imgur.com/PX8LE5n I dislike the term 'circlejerk' (not directed at you, specifically) and especially how people use it. It's a term that's extremely easy to apply to any group. It's shorthand for saying "people reaching a consensus about something (that I disagree with) is inherently bad". People reaching a consensus is not bad. What's bad is that their position is implausible or indefensible etc. In this case, these people are ignorant of the concept that links create gamespace in EVE where solo and small-gang PvP can exist where otherwise they simply wouldn't. And the idea of disparaging someone for doing solo or small gang PvP despite the glaring problems with game mechanics set up to discourage its existence is in an expression of that ignorance. "Circlejerk" is like "white knight" in that the person using the term is trying to fill something with a negative connotation but not having a real argument against it. You could say that all of science is one giant circlejerk, and you'd be completely correct. To intelligent people, it's a meaningless insult and communicates absolutely nothing. But to people who haven't thought it over, it can influence their thinking just because the word has a negative connotation. On April 18 2013 09:06 Ramiel wrote: Missile mechanics problems And there are a few issues with your post, none of them with the post itself. The environment you're posting in is openly hostile to intelligent discussion. There are wide-ranging examples of this throughout every forum, including the Market forum - which is the place you'd expect people to be at least kind of sensible. If you're some incredible pilot named Liang in an elite organization like Heretic Army, you have a passionate following of people who will agree with what you say no matter how correct or incorrect it is. People don't like analysis, and the nature of EVE has turned the forums into a big political funhouse where people can repeat the same lies over and over until everyone agrees they're true. Not only that but your post is seen by forumgoers to be of the same value as a 1-liner from a Raven missioner. Posting something like this in EVEO forums is a 100% surefire way to get an ignorant 1-line reply from someone who has a) not undocked a character for PvP in 5 years b) never done any kind of PvP c) knows as much about string theory as they do about game mechanics or some combination. And since that 1-line reply is equal to you well-thought-out post, any dismissal present in the response will be viewed as enough to cancel out your issues so the next poster doesn't have to and can instead post their lazy EVE-related meme response to the thread. TLDR; Not enough political clout or sycophants to support your post, -1. | ||
|
Ramiel
United States1220 Posts
On another note, laing is arguing with me. And apparently the only way to properly make a PvP raven is to have 4BCS in the low slots... Dear lord why do I even try. | ||
|
DefMatrixUltra
Canada1992 Posts
On April 18 2013 13:21 Ramiel wrote: Well said def, well said. On another note, laing is arguing with me. And apparently the only way to properly make a PvP raven is to have 4BCS in the low slots... Dear lord why do I even try. Adding more BCS is the same as adding linear DPS by buffing - it doesn't solve the real problem of doing x% more damage when you do practically 0 damage to some targets. The problem with arguing with Liang is that he's not arguing for the sake of discussion. He has thrown in his chips with a particular notion and his identity now depends entirely on him defending that notion until he has to resort to insults and other forms of ungracefully admitting defeat. Battleships using turret weapons have no problem hitting everything except interceptors (in fact, I think they're a little too good at hitting frigates, but that's a minor complaint). If you have a Raven doctrine, it will be hard-countered by something like armor HACs or even just "kitchen sink" BC spam. Can't hard-counter Tempests/Maelstroms with the current state of game mechanics. The new Raven will be, at best, a battleship that is good at killing other battleships. Seems like exactly the kind of thing needed to make battleships versatile PvP options~~~. /edit - The silver lining in all this is that CCP doesn't need to discriminate when it comes to feedback. They have historically equally ignored good and bad feedback and went with their own particular ideas. | ||
|
polluxtby
Sweden207 Posts
I think that I'm starting to realize just a tiny bit how anoying you guys must find most eve players to be... sigh | ||
|
DefMatrixUltra
Canada1992 Posts
So I talked briefly about the problem with explosion velocity (Ev), but I didn't fully make the case of how awkward it can get. Ages ago, I dug through a lot of shit and did lots of experimentation in order to work out how damage actually works in EVE. The way missile damage works is as follows: Ex = Bd * Min(S, V) S = Min(Ts/Er, 1) V = (Ev/Vel * Ts/Er)^k k = log(DRF)/log(b) Ex = Expected Damage Bd = Base Damage (EFT damage) Min(x,y) = x if x<y, y if y<x Ts = Target's Signature Size Er = Missile Explosion Radius Ev = Missile Explosion Velocity Vel = Target Velocity DRF = taken from missile fired b = 5.5 (taken from game files) Back when I first did this, I don't think the concept of DRF was discovered so I did some work trying to get this number but made the mistake of using multiple types of missiles. Anyway, the S term is almost never used. The missile equation picks the worst result of S (signature-biased) and V (velocity-biased) and it's just about impossible for S to be the worst result. The exceptions are things like MWDing battleships where the V term ends up being greater than 1, and thus S is the minimum (because it has a maximum value of 1). That's right, armor ships. Your slightly lower signature is very useful~~~. The V term is where some very interesting shit happens. V = (Ev/Vel * Ts/Er)^k It's basically (R_v * R_s)^k where k is some fixed number depending on what kind of missile you're firing. R_v is the ratio of velocity terms (Ev/Vel) and R_s is the ratio of signature terms (Ts/Er). Let's look at a specific example of a Raven shooting a Naga. + Show Spoiler [Caldari Civil Strife] + The 'k' exponent in this case is about 0.8823. What's that mean? What does thing^.8823 look like? Well here are two examples. For a Raven shooting cruise missiles, Ev is 104m/s and Er is 225m. For some random Naga fit as the target, signature size is ~1600m (I made it big on purpose) and velocity is 1463m/s. We'll focus for a moment on these ratios. Er:Ts is 1 : 7 (far in the attacker's favor). Ev:Vel is 1 : 14 (far, far in the defender's favor). These numbers are way out of whack even if you look at MWDing battleships. These numbers need to be closer to 1 : 1 so that both signature and velocity mean something and can have a real effect on the damage application. Ok so let's finish the calcuation. R_v is .07109 and R_s is 7.1111. Thus our expected damage is Ex = Bd * (.5478). This means we are doing 55% of EFT damage to this (triple LSE) Naga. Even if the Raven can pump out 1000 DPS in EFT, the Naga is doing more DPS back and generally suffers no weaknesses associated with battleships. Ah but the Raven can fit rigs for better application of its DPS. It's got two choices. Rigors and Flares. Let's try double rigors first. The new Er is 163m (down from 225m). This is a 28% reduction in Er - roughly a third of its value shaved. What effect does it have on damage application? The only number changed is R_s which is now 9.8160. So our new expected damage is now Ex = Bd * (0.7280). This means we are now doing 73% of EFT damage to this Naga (thank Zeus it doesn't have links). That is a big improvement - roughly a 33% increase in DPS. So we reduce what is effectively the sig penalty by a 3rd and get roughly a 3rd more DPS. Alright now let's try TRIPLE FLARES. The new Ev is 146m/s (up from 104) - a 40% increase. The new R_v is .09979. Ex = Bd * (0.7389). 74% EFT damage - a 33% increase. -------------------------------------------------------------------- Now at first glance that seems reasonably sensible. But let's try it one more time on a ship that isn't a slow Caldari cow without implants or links. Let's assume the Raven can do 871 DPS (this is the maximum possible DPS after the new patch using CN ammo while leaving the rigs free). + Show Spoiler [Naga from above] + Vel: 1463 Sig: ~1600 Base Raven Ex = Bd * (0.5478) = 477 DPS Double Rigors Ex = Bd * (0.7280) = 634 DPS Triple Flares Ex = Bd* (0.7389) = 644 DPS This is actually reasonable DPS if you don't mind waiting for 20s and going 800m/s. + Show Spoiler [Shield Talos (no speed mods)] + Vel: 1720 Sig: ~1600 Base Raven Ex = Bd * (0.4749) = 413 DPS Double Rigors Ex = Bd * (0.6311) = 550 DPS Triple Flares Ex = Bd* (0.6406) = 558 DPS With triple flares, the 5 BCS Raven can do almost as much damage as a standard rail Naga! We've added about 200m/s and lost about 90 DPS. When the missile meta comes, I'm sure that armor will be more viable~~~. + Show Spoiler [Shield Talos with links] + Vel: 2226 Sig: ~1000 Base Raven Ex = Bd * (0.2498) = 218 DPS Double Rigors Ex = Bd * (0.3320) = 289 DPS Triple Flares Ex = Bd* (0.3370) = 294 DPS Fun fact: if you remove the Cruise Launchers and sub in RLM, it is doing more DPS than this. A shield Talos with links is about equivalent to an unlinked cruiser in terms of the damage it will take. I'm sure you can see the pattern with these numbers and extrapolate them to cruisers and frigates. + Show Spoiler [Looking at it a Different Way] + Take our original example, the Naga. R_v is .07109 and R_s is 7.1111. Why are these two numbers (which are just comparing attacker stats vs. target stats) so far from each other? R_v is hugely in the defender's favor while R_s is hugely in the attacker's favor. What if the Raven had a missile with Er 460m and Ev 317m/s (these are stats I picked off a particular Raven fit [see if you can guess it for bonus points]). + Show Spoiler [Naga from above] + Vel: 1463 Sig: ~1600 Ex = Bd * (0.7792) + Show Spoiler [Shield Talos (no speed mods)] + Vel: 1720 Sig: ~1600 Ex = Bd * (0.6755) + Show Spoiler [Shield Talos with links] + Vel: 2226 Sig: ~1000 Ex = Bd * (0.3554) + Show Spoiler [Linked Speedlot] + Vel: 2728 Sig: 731 Ex = Bd * (.2253) + Show Spoiler [Merlin] + Vel: 3285 Sig: 294 Ex = Bd * (.0856) + Show Spoiler [Linked Merlin] + Vel: 4280 Sig: 191 Ex = Bd * (.0463) + Show Spoiler [Summary for the Inattentive] + Without this stat change: Naga: 55% Shield Talos: 47% Linked Talos: 25% With the stat change: Naga: 78% (~80) Shield Talos: 68% (~70) Linked Talos: 36% (~40) Linked Zealot: 23% (~25) Merlin: 9% (~10) Linked Merlin: 5% (~5) Just changing those two numbers to match up to [thing you must figure out on your own] makes everything act with a certain consistency. This way we don't need to do something drastic like increase the raw paper DPS of a ship by 32%. With these numbers, cruise missiles act as consistent damage dealers (that's like... the philosophy of missiles or something... err...man) with their damage falling off linearly with ship class. + Show Spoiler [Bonus Look at Webs and TPs] + Take our original example, the Naga. R_v is .07109 and R_s is 7.1111. Recall that R_v is (Ev/Vel) and R_s is (Ts/Er). Why do target painters suck and why are webs so good? Target painters affect R_s. They affect the Ts (target signature) term, multiplying it by 1.3. How does this affect the outcome? R_s_new = R_s * 1.3. Webs affect R_v. They affect the Vel term in R_v, multiplying it by .4 - and Vel is being divided. R_v_new = R_v * (1/.4) = R_v * 2.5. 2.5 is a much bigger multiplier than 1.3. Doing (R_v * R_s)^k we get Neither: .5478 Target Painter: .6905 Web: 1.229 (which forces the equation to pick the S term instead of V) I think it'd be interesting if webs lowered your sig radius as well as your velocity. Then one day when the Elder Gods arise from the geothermal pits of Iceland and command CCP to make sig radius mean something, sig-tanking armor ships would be really cool. 100 Zen Master Points of Gleaming Epiphany to the person who figures out the source of my modified numbers. | ||
|
NathanEO
Germany254 Posts
I can't help but think there should be an alternative blog from Hatchery fixing all the bad Devblargs from | ||
Firebolt145
Lalalaland34501 Posts
| ||
|
Warri
Germany3208 Posts
On April 18 2013 18:34 Firebolt145 wrote: Def, I forget, what do you do for a job again? Must be an art major if he has time to do all this  Also, why bother arguing about PvP with anyone on the public forums, safe the nerves. | ||
|
DefMatrixUltra
Canada1992 Posts
On April 18 2013 18:34 Firebolt145 wrote: Def, I forget, what do you do for a job again? On April 18 2013 19:29 Warri wrote: Must be an art major if he has time to do all this Also, why bother arguing about PvP with anyone on the public forums, safe the nerves. I solve mathematical problems. Usually this is some general concept (like risk analysis/management) applied to a specific subset (a specific investment or action). To do this, I construct a set of rules, then I run simulations. The great thing about my work is that my computer does most of the work. I think up shit in my head and program it into a simulation. While it's chopping away at some problem, I am posting on forums. Computers are real bros. | ||
|
Body_Shield
Canada3368 Posts
On April 19 2013 03:42 DefMatrixUltra wrote: I solve mathematical problems. Usually this is some general concept (like risk analysis/management) applied to a specific subset (a specific investment or action). To do this, I construct a set of rules, then I run simulations. The great thing about my work is that my computer does most of the work. I think up shit in my head and program it into a simulation. While it's chopping away at some problem, I am posting on forums. Computers are real bros. I'd say post more math to the Eve forums, but they don't know how numbers work, and they would accuse you of being a witch. | ||
| ||
