| Forum Index > General Games |
|
abominare
United States1216 Posts
On April 19 2013 04:41 Body_Shield wrote: 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. Does Chessur or Def weigh as much as a duck? Its a fair cop. | ||
|
419
Russian Federation3631 Posts
text text text text text TL;DR if CCP combined the explosion radius of rage torps and the explosion velocity of precision light missiles, you would get a balanced cruise missile weapon system? | ||
|
abominare
United States1216 Posts
On April 19 2013 06:54 419 wrote: TL;DR if CCP combined the explosion radius of rage torps and the explosion velocity of precision light missiles, you would get a balanced cruise missile weapon system? I gathered it was an accidental argument for ditching the current missile damage equation. Hell my first degree was applied mathematics and that equation is a god damn mess to leave that way and hopes of having anyone associated with development to make sense of in a meaningful game design way. I suppose the idea of a consistent damage platform is somewhat interesting to some people, but I'd really just rather they reworked it. Perhaps a system that focused more on positioning? Ditch explosion velocity, ditch sig resolution, focus solely on missile velocity and whether or not it can catch or intercept a target. Flying straight into a target? get splattered, reward players for taking manual control and getting the missile behind them and out running it. Rather that dealing with the ongoing convoluted system and worrying about sig which ccp stop caring about shortly after they fired the guy to create it, the ship size equalizer should simply be missile speed, the bigger it is the slower, keeping it more inline with matching/overtaking its desired ship class target. Smart positioning or dumb baddies still let you blap. | ||
|
DefMatrixUltra
Canada1992 Posts
On April 19 2013 06:54 419 wrote: TL;DR if CCP combined the explosion radius of rage torps and the explosion velocity of precision light missiles, you would get a balanced cruise missile weapon system? Since no one guessed it, I'll spill the secret. Since it's a battleship-sized weapon system, I based cruise missile stats on the stats of a battleship. In this case, I just picked a Raven, though I'm sure there is some more middle-of-the-road BS that is more appropriate for this that I would take my time carefully to pick out if I was collecting paychecks from CCP. A completely unfit Raven has a signature of 460m - so that's the new Er. Working under the assumption that every ship is fitted with a prop mod, I have a handful of choices for the Ev. I could use a MWD (but that skews both the sig radius and the velocity numbers) or I could use an AB. I used a T2 AB since I work with all 5 skills. The speed of a Raven with a T2 AB is 317m/s - and that's the new Ev. And somehow it magically works out so that you do 100% or close DPS to battleships and then linearly scales down from there based on ship class - even when you bring MWD skewing into it. It's like that's was the original intention of the person who crafted the damage equations or something. | ||
|
abominare
United States1216 Posts
On April 19 2013 07:21 DefMatrixUltra wrote: Since no one guessed it, I'll spill the secret. Since it's a battleship-sized weapon system, I based cruise missile stats on the stats of a battleship. In this case, I just picked a Raven, though I'm sure there is some more middle-of-the-road BS that is more appropriate for this that I would take my time carefully to pick out if I was collecting paychecks from CCP. A completely unfit Raven has a signature of 460m - so that's the new Er. Working under the assumption that every ship is fitted with a prop mod, I have a handful of choices for the Ev. I could use a MWD (but that skews both the sig radius and the velocity numbers) or I could use an AB. I used a T2 AB since I work with all 5 skills. The speed of a Raven with a T2 AB is 317m/s - and that's the new Ev. And somehow it magically works out so that you do 100% or close DPS to battleships and then linearly scales down from there based on ship class - even when you bring MWD skewing into it. It's like that's was the original intention of the person who crafted the damage equations or something. I just recently escaped work and started playing around with your math work. If what you're suggesting about the magical linearity of the equation is true, either the person in question for creating this is either an amazing narcissist or the most vindictive game designer of all time. In short, basically any attempt to rework fundamental systems like sig radius/overal velocities in eve consequentially breaks missiles. This is like pyramid scheme of core game system design, the poor sod probably thought he'd guaranteed employment for life. | ||
|
DefMatrixUltra
Canada1992 Posts
On April 19 2013 07:33 abominare wrote: I just recently escaped work and started playing around with your math work. If what you're suggesting about the magical linearity of the equation is true, either the person in question for creating this is either an amazing narcissist or the most vindictive game designer of all time. In short, basically any attempt to rework fundamental systems like sig radius/overal velocities in eve consequentially breaks missiles. This is like pyramid scheme of core game system design, the poor sod probably thought he'd guaranteed employment for life. The joke was on him. And us. | ||
|
Body_Shield
Canada3368 Posts
If you look closely, the Nyx has faction fighter-bombers, and the Revenant does not. | ||
tofucake
Hyrule19059 Posts
| ||
|
SWPIGWANG
Canada482 Posts
DefMatrixUltra wrote V = (Ev/Vel * Ts/Er)^k 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. Haven't done math in a while, so might have made some error somewhere. That said: I'm looking at the equation and it appears to me you can switch the terms so that V = (Ts/Vel * Ev/Er)^k Ev/Er is purely determined by the missile and is a constant, so we can further simplify it into: C= Ev/Er V = (Ts/Vel * C)^k And as such the ratio between Ev/Er makes the biggest difference for the S equation, since it lacks a Ev term. S = Min(Ts/Er, 1) So, for the function of the V term, what really happened is the change in Ev/Er number. Previously: (Ev = 104m/s) / (Er = 225m) = 0.46 After the change (Ev= 317m/s) / (Er = 460m) = 0.68 Which is equivalent to at 50% buff to explosion velocity or 35% reduction in explosion radius, while decreasing effectiveness of missiles in PvE in some cases due to increased application of the S equation. ------------------------------------ And somehow it magically works out so that you do 100% or close DPS to battleships and then linearly scales down from there based on ship class - even when you bring MWD skewing into it. It's like that's was the original intention of the person who crafted the damage equations or something. Looking at the design of missiles equation, that is exactly what it is suppose to do. However there is a simple tweak that changes this. Simply change the k term. V = (Ts/Vel * Ev/Er)^k With K above 0.5 the damage scaling is flat. However with a smaller value the numbers can change dramatically. For example if we take your example and change the k value to 0.2. The best way to visualize the changes is to graph it but I'll plug it in instead: Taking the old Ev/Er value of 0.46, with new k = 0.2 Naga 1600m / 1463m/s -> 0.87 Bd Talos 1600m/ 1720mms -> 0.84 Bd Link Talos 1000m / 2226m/s -> 0.72 Bd Link lot 731m / 2728m/ -> 0.65 Bd Merlin 294m / 3285 -> 0.52 Bd Link Merlin 191/4280 -> 0.45 Bd Where the damage drop off is VASTLY reduced to a factor of 2 only as opposed a factor of 15 with your changes. Certainly this factor is far more powerful since it is a root function and not a linear one. ---- Not good enough at pvp to know what kind of values would be good for the game, but I think this opens a better path for tweaking. | ||
|
DefMatrixUltra
Canada1992 Posts
On April 20 2013 13:36 SWPIGWANG wrote: Haven't done math in a while, so might have made some error somewhere. That said: I'm looking at the equation and it appears to me you can switch the terms so that V = (Ts/Vel * Ev/Er)^k [1] ... Which is equivalent to at 50% buff to explosion velocity or 35% reduction in explosion radius, while decreasing effectiveness of missiles in PvE in some cases due to increased application of the S equation. [2] ------------------------------------ Looking at the design of missiles equation, that is exactly what it is suppose to do. However there is a simple tweak that changes this. Simply change the k term. V = (Ts/Vel * Ev/Er)^k With K above 0.5 the damage scaling is flat. However with a smaller value the numbers can change dramatically. For example if we take your example and change the k value to 0.2. etc. [3] ---- Not good enough at pvp to know what kind of values would be good for the game, but I think this opens a better path for tweaking. [1] There are 4 numbers, 2 in the numerator and 2 in the denominator. Splitting them up is a visual thing and rewriting the order in which they're split up is only really good for sparking intuition. I prefer the comparative writing (missile stat vs. target stat) because that's the way I think about it, and that's the way the terms should be balanced 1:1. [2] Making S relevant is strongly related to making armor relevant. The fact that S is almost never used except to default to 1 when a target is hard-tackled is one of many factors making armor just plain suck in this game. [3] First off, the smallest possible k-value is .56, and I wouldn't call damage scaling above .5 "flat". It seems to me the whole reason k is used is to improve the damage being done beyond what it "should be". The equation basically says (comparedValues * comparedValues) ^ (exponent). If you multiply the comparative terms together and get something like .5 (which would otherwise be 50% damage), the exponent will bump it up slightly (e.g. to .55 or 55% damage). I don't think the k term is problematic except possibly in the case of the "high-damage" missiles who have really badly nerfed stats as a tradeoff for getting a big shiny number in EFT. http://i.imgur.com/w7EU74A.png + Show Spoiler [Code if desired] + x=0:.01:.99; plot(x, x.^(log10(3)/log10(5.5))) hold all plot(x, x.^(log10(4.5)/log10(5.5))) plot(x,x) Ignore the aliasing on k=1, it's a straight line. "High-damage" ammo has a k closer to 1 in addition to having penalties more likely to make the argument smaller. "High-damage" ammo is really only useful against targets that are larger than you or targets that are heavily painted and hard tackled. My issue with missile damage (for battleship-sized missiles) is they generally start with an argument below .5. This means their listed damage is a silly fabrication except in extreme circumstances. It hardly matters what you do to the k term if your argument is gonna be .4 at best - you're not going to approach your listed damage. By changing the terms in the argument (i.e. the missile stats instead of the DRF which changes the k-factor) it shifts the area of interest over to the right rather than "artificially" trying to draw the bowstring tighter. Rather than fixing the problem that most of the DPS listed on BS missile ships is a fabrication, CCP is making the problem worse by giving them raw DPS and making their arguments even lower. While this is, technically, a buff to damage in most cases, it is an incredibly ugly way to "fix" BS missile damage. | ||
|
Skilledblob
Germany3392 Posts
all skills V 425mm Prototype Gaus Gun x7 Caldari Navy Antimatter 100mn Afterburner II Heavy Capacitor Booster II Cap Booster 800 Tracking Computer II x2 Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane II x3 Magnetic Field Stabelizer II x3 Large Armor Repairer II Damage Control II Large Trimark Armor Pump I Large Hybrid Metastasis Adjuster I Large Hybrid Burst Aerator I ~100k EHP 78,6% E, 72% T, 72% Kin, 61,5% Exp 873 DPS with Garde I or 722 DPS with Hobgoblin II I wanted to use this for L4 missions. I cant use T2 BS weapons yet and those EANM will be swapped accordingly to the mission enemy. Did this fit in EFT with all skills V which of course I dont have yet so the EHP, Resists and DPS will be lower. But I'd appreciate some input if I am going in the right direction with this fit and what I should change | ||
Firebolt145
Lalalaland34491 Posts
| ||
|
Skilledblob
Germany3392 Posts
 | ||
|
Warri
Germany3208 Posts
1270dps without drones 4,4+77km falloff 1618m/s with mwd 391 burst tank and....41(149 with mwd off) sustained tank With everything on the cap lasted 1m28s, with just tanking modules it lasts 3m39s. + Show Spoiler + [Machariel, lvl4 blitz, dps] Republic Fleet Gyrostabilizer Republic Fleet Gyrostabilizer Republic Fleet Gyrostabilizer Republic Fleet Gyrostabilizer Tracking Enhancer II Tracking Enhancer II Tracking Enhancer II Gist C-Type X-Large Shield Booster Tracking Computer II, Optimal Range Script Adaptive Invulnerability Field II Adaptive Invulnerability Field II Gist C-Type 100MN Microwarpdrive 800mm Repeating Artillery II, Republic Fleet Fusion L 800mm Repeating Artillery II, Republic Fleet Fusion L 800mm Repeating Artillery II, Republic Fleet Fusion L 800mm Repeating Artillery II, Republic Fleet Fusion L 800mm Repeating Artillery II, Republic Fleet Fusion L 800mm Repeating Artillery II, Republic Fleet Fusion L 800mm Repeating Artillery II, Republic Fleet Fusion L Small Tractor Beam II Large Core Defense Capacitor Safeguard I Large Projectile Burst Aerator II [empty rig slot] If you feel uncomfortable with the tank, you can upgrade the invulns to pithum c-types to get 659burst tank and 56/239 sustained tank or even higher with a-types. However, i was fine dualboxing those in different missions at once. Edit: you could of course fit mission specific hardeners, but who does that.. | ||
|
Firebolt145
Lalalaland34491 Posts
| ||
|
DefMatrixUltra
Canada1992 Posts
On April 20 2013 22:24 Skilledblob wrote: that is not an option for now. If the Megathron Navy is just a crap boat than so be it but I'd appreciate a bit longer explanation Here is the longer explanation which you seek. http://i.imgur.com/LH1drji.png Something which got left out is the Mach can go 2100m/s while the Mega Navy only 1500m/s. EHP is almost completely useless in missions. Missions should be done using an active tank to counteract incoming DPS while you remove it or while you ignore it in favor of the quick objective. Many missions include sections where frigates must be killed one way or another, and the Machariel (particularly with MWD heat) is fully capable of doing this while the Mega Navy will have to rely 100% on drones. If you want to do high-sec missions and you're thinking of spending more than 500m, you want a Machariel. It uses the same skills apart from a) large projectiles and b) Minmatar battleship. Everything else is the same. The thought of doing missions in a Mega Navy like the one you posted made me physically recoil in disgust. | ||
|
Firebolt145
Lalalaland34491 Posts
On April 21 2013 08:39 DefMatrixUltra wrote: The thought of doing missions in a Mega Navy like the one you posted made me physically recoil in disgust. Yep, even if 99% of the EVE populace thinks it's amazing, it really isn't. | ||
|
419
Russian Federation3631 Posts
| ||
|
Impervious
Canada4200 Posts
| ||
|
Warri
Germany3208 Posts
On April 21 2013 08:39 DefMatrixUltra wrote: If you want to do high-sec missions and you're thinking of spending more than 500m, you want a Machariel. It uses the same skills apart from a) large projectiles and b) Minmatar battleship. Everything else is the same. You forgot Controlled Bursts. | ||
| ||
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War Britney Dota 2  43620Sea  2884Rain 1916Barracks 739EffOrt  688Larva 338ggaemo 283Last 256Rush 130Hyun 103[ Show more ] Counter-Strike Super Smash Bros Heroes of the Storm Other Games singsing2160 B2W.Neo1434 Lowko442 DeMusliM429 crisheroes378 Happy334 XaKoH  244Nina204 Fuzer  176SortOf125 Hui .121 rGuardiaN48 Rex41 Trikslyr35 mouzStarbuck17 |
|
uThermal 2v2 Circuit
CSO Contender
[BSL 2025] Weekly
Sparkling Tuna Cup
WardiTV Summer Champion…
SC Evo League
uThermal 2v2 Circuit
BSL Team Wars
Team Dewalt vs Team Bonyth
Afreeca Starleague
Sharp vs Ample
Larva vs Stork
Wardi Open
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
