open All Channels
seplocked Test Server Feedback
blankseplocked Blasters still crap, 37 pages, OP Updated 25 Nov 2008
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: first : previous : ... 8 9 10 11 [12] 13 14 15 16 ... : last (45)

Author Topic

The Djego
Minmatar
Hellequin Inc.
Posted - 2008.08.02 19:52:00 - [331]
 

Edited by: The Djego on 02/08/2008 19:54:48
Ok here is a bit more of my testing, Rupture(Garmon Style) vs Thorax((my personal Style Razz). 2 Fights between me an Cpt Branko(that is a very capable Ruptore Pilote hands down).

My Setup:
5x Electons II
Web, Scrambler, MWD(ok normaly I use a Disruptor but simpy given up on this at the Thorax on Sissi, Branko used one to)
MAR II, 800mm RT, DC II, 2x MFS II
1x Anti Explo Pump I(not fitted specialy for this, I fit one on TQ also)
5x Valkyre II
(best mix of Gank/Tank/Agility i have for the Thorax)

Skills maxed exept Minmatar Drone Spec and Med Blaster Spec V.

First Engagement:

Started at about 30km Range, quite common atm on TQ asuming Belt piracy, as I timed the deactivation a bit bad, Branko moved up to 7km. Even without the Scrambler in place you are screwed in this very moment because of the reactivation Delay of the MWD taking away the chance to cover ground after you slowed down be a second boost(quite a good chance to get you back in the game now on T1 vs T1 Cruiser level) and dropt of to far. There was no chance of winning this at this range, ofc this is the same on TQ now, but with the MWD you have one more try on TQ to fix this, you donīt have on Sissi(Scrambler and reactivation will kill you).

Second Engagement:

Warpt in at 0, Rupture was 4km away(mostly the perfect way a Fight can start for the Blaster Ship), like warping at zero to a belt finding your Target at zero to. Because of the Range Issues I preloaded Null and tryed to keep my Target between 2-4km. Turrets and Repper was overloadet the hole fight, Drones dropt as soon as I had the lock and manuvering worked very well in my favour so not to mutch orbiting/trasversal. Fight ended with 16% Structure and 4% Armor left on my Thorax, what i admit is fare to close giving such a good Range the Fight started and Branko had won for shure if he started overheating the Weapons(he used Hail) sooner. With Faction Antimatter things could be fare better for the Thorax, but im not realy shure if you can make a Damage advantage now, that is not killed by the range disadvantage.

Shure a Rupture is quite a challange for a Thorax this days, but giving the fact that this happends as good as possible for a Thorax is simply out of line, looking at the Hits(as fare as the the log noted), i missed about 20% of all shoots and also a had many bad aimed Hits.



oniplE
MeMento.
Posted - 2008.08.02 20:53:00 - [332]
 

imo increase tracking on ALL close range weapons to compensate for the web nerf.

Its only fair, hitting targets now requires more tracking. Afaik this nerf wasnt implemented to kill close range combat so i see no reason why it should suffer.



The new scrambler feature and reactivation delay: Horrible. I want my MWD to function under all circumstances, i want to maintain close range to the target. I'm not using my MWD to kite around and outrun drones/missiles like the nano ships this nerf was aimed against. Nano ships fixed, close range ships broken. Replacing one problem with a new one isnt pretty.

Archivian Specialatus
Amarr
Fairlight Corp
Rooks and Kings
Posted - 2008.08.02 20:58:00 - [333]
 

Originally by: Gabriel Karade

DPS = (Dmg multiplier * Base ammo Dmg / RoF) * Hit %

50% hit chance occurs @ tracking (rads/sec) = target angular velocity (rads/sec)

angular velocity (rads/sec) = linear velocity (m/sec) / Radius (m)

You don't seem to understand the concept. Using a Railgun at 10km has nothing to do with 'effective tracking' because that's based upon how turrets perform at 100% DPS range (optimal) and 50% DPS range (optimal plus falloff), which as the numbers show, a Neutron Blaster is the only turret type to be outperformed by its long range counterpart at both.




Ok i want to get this straight ok. To make sure i get it.

So what your saying is DPS= DMG multiplier * Base Ammo DMG / RoF = a Hit% and not the amount of damage being thrown by the gun per second. Is that what you are saying.

And

Tracking * range (which ever range you input) = The peak speed a target can go at and still be hit by your guns. This is wrong? That is what you are saying?

And

And could you please explain. How working out the effective tracking as you have discribed it, applies to your ship. umm,, like, coz its effective tracking is lower why is that bad. Dumb question i know, but please answer so i can learn.

Ive been wokring under, Damage my guns throw per second and
The tracking equation judges what range you would have to be at from the target for your guns to be able to land on a speeding target (regardless of angular and transversal).

The reason i say this is because that it how i have worked it out, andi kill things in the estimated time predicted and hit ships that go at 4500ms with my turrets, across the front of my ship as it flys with 4500 Transversal.

Its possible i could have fluked all of it on every ship i build, so i would like to know the exact calculations and how it translates. so i can do it better.

or maybe im missing some fine details also.

Liang Nuren
Posted - 2008.08.02 21:59:00 - [334]
 

Edited by: Liang Nuren on 05/08/2008 23:53:29
Edited by: Liang Nuren on 02/08/2008 22:00:07
Originally by: Archivian Specialatus
Originally by: Gabriel Karade

DPS = (Dmg multiplier * Base ammo Dmg / RoF) * Hit %

50% hit chance occurs @ tracking (rads/sec) = target angular velocity (rads/sec)

angular velocity (rads/sec) = linear velocity (m/sec) / Radius (m)

You don't seem to understand the concept. Using a Railgun at 10km has nothing to do with 'effective tracking' because that's based upon how turrets perform at 100% DPS range (optimal) and 50% DPS range (optimal plus falloff), which as the numbers show, a Neutron Blaster is the only turret type to be outperformed by its long range counterpart at both.



So what your saying is DPS= DMG multiplier * Base Ammo DMG / RoF = a Hit% and not the amount of damage being thrown by the gun per second. Is that what you are saying.



No, he said:
DPS = chance_to_hit * dmg_multiplier * base_ammo_dmg / rate_of_fire

Quote:
Tracking * range (which ever range you input) = The peak speed a target can go at and still be hit by your guns. This is wrong? That is what you are saying?


Well, no. The chance of hitting is determined by a formula.


def turret_hit_chance(Sig_Res, Optimal, Falloff, Tracking, Transv, Range, Sig_Rad):
# Original Formula by Naughty Boy
# ((1.0/2.0) ** ((((Transv/(Range*Tracking))*(Sig_Res/Sig_Rad)) ** 2) +((max(0,Range-Optimal))/Falloff) ** 2))

tracking_penalty = Transv / (Range * Tracking)
sig_penalty = (Sig_Res / Sig_Rad)
optimal_penalty = max(0, Range - Optimal)
hit_chance = 0.5 ** ((( tracking_penalty * sig_penalty) ** 2) + ((optimal_penalty / Falloff) ** 2))

return hit_chance


We can see (with a typical Blaster Mega shooting a Typical Ishtar):

<<Snip Incorrect Chart. To see accurate chart, see my post below>>

That doesn't sound so bad, right? I mean, a 66% chance to hit at 10km!! Well, the problem then comes down to webs. They're not powerful enough to stop ships and keep them at that magical range.

Blasters have always had a tracking problem. A web nerf makes it much, much worse. I don't know... I've been thinking about it, and I'm not entirely sure that the Mega won't be the new Tempest after this patch hits.

-Liang


Ed: Well, blasters the new artillery? The Mega would still make an excellent rail platform and Artillery would still suck.

At any rate, Lg blasters would be (hands down) the worst weapon platform in the game.

Lilith Velkor
Minmatar
Heretic Army
B A N E
Posted - 2008.08.02 22:18:00 - [335]
 

Edited by: Lilith Velkor on 02/08/2008 22:25:13
Originally by: Liang Nuren

That doesn't sound so bad, right? I mean, a 66% chance to hit at 10km!! Well, the problem then comes down to webs. They're not powerful enough to stop ships and keep them at that magical range.



Exactly. Factor in scramblers that turn off your mwd and tracking disrupts that cut down your sweet spot dramatically (even if its only 1 mod!) and you're in deep trouble with a blasterboat.

Edit: having fooled around a bit the interesting thing is support cruisers like the scythe can keep up with a mwd-ing BS if fitting AB, but since survivability is not great that'll be not worth much in general.

Bellum Eternus
Gallente
The Scope
Posted - 2008.08.02 22:59:00 - [336]
 

I'm away from my home computer at the moment, but once I do get home I'll provide some graphs generated by EFT showing the relative damage/range of various BS vs. varoious target types.

Frankly the results were quite alarming. Generally speaking blasters were suffering from extreme short range and lack of peak DPS when compared to all other ships. Most ships were within 5-10% of a blaster ships' DPS figures, which is quite alarming. Blaster ships should prove to have a clear (35-40% minimum DPS advantage when used at their prescribed ranges when compared to other races weapon systems, and they do not.

The other three races have clear advantages in lack of cap use, no tracking requirement, selectable damage type, extended range, improved tracking etc. while the one saving grace of blasters is overwhelming firepower. Currently this is not the case. Peak DPS numbers for blasters have been reduced so many times over the past few patches and peak tanking numbers have been increased, along with the increase in DPS from medium ranged weapons (Caldari, Amarr) that blasters are becoming irrelevant in today's combat.

In my opinion the only reason current blaster ships are so successful is due to the skill of their pilots and their highly developed ship builds, not the capabilities of blasters.

If the patch goes through in it's current form, even that won't be enough to save blaster ships from the trash bin. We can put them right along side the Eos and Myrmidon.

Cpt Branko
Retired Pirate Club
Posted - 2008.08.02 23:08:00 - [337]
 

Edited by: Cpt Branko on 02/08/2008 23:08:52
Originally by: Liang Nuren

Blasters have always had a tracking problem. A web nerf makes it much, much worse.


It makes it worse for all turret BS tbh. The Mega is tracking bonused, so its blasters do have the best tracking of all short-range turrets. Since it is a battleship, what it should do is shoot battleships best (since no BS now shoots HACs effectively, try the geddon if you like, for instance) - it has to rely on a neut+drones + a bit of turret fire to fight back.

I could agree with the Mega (or blasters rather) needing a bit more short-range DPS to have a clear advantage, as Bellum said above (or rather; certain weapon systems toned down to give blasters a clear advantage).

Let's not forget doing something about the Tempest, though - while the Mega if things really go ugly might be the old Tempest, nothing matches up to the suckyness of the new Tempest. At least it used to be faster Laughing

Bellum Eternus
Gallente
The Scope
Posted - 2008.08.02 23:11:00 - [338]
 

Originally by: Liang Nuren


Mega has a 0.000000% chance to hit at 1000 meters
Mega has a 0.113304% chance to hit at 2000 meters
Mega has a 4.906550% chance to hit at 3000 meters
Mega has a 18.346856% chance to hit at 4000 meters
Mega has a 33.744096% chance to hit at 5000 meters
Mega has a 46.597137% chance to hit at 6000 meters
Mega has a 55.909954% chance to hit at 7000 meters
Mega has a 61.985436% chance to hit at 8000 meters
Mega has a 65.390884% chance to hit at 9000 meters
Mega has a 66.663860% chance to hit at 10000 meters
Mega has a 20.416192% chance to hit at 11000 meters
Mega has a 24.000134% chance to hit at 12000 meters
Mega has a 26.609786% chance to hit at 13000 meters
Mega has a 28.209229% chance to hit at 14000 meters
Mega has a 28.859400% chance to hit at 15000 meters
Mega has a 28.677215% chance to hit at 16000 meters
Mega has a 27.806546% chance to hit at 17000 meters
Mega has a 26.398717% chance to hit at 18000 meters
Mega has a 24.599965% chance to hit at 19000 meters
Mega has a 22.543777% chance to hit at 20000 meters
Mega has a 20.346631% chance to hit at 21000 meters
Mega has a 18.106084% chance to hit at 22000 meters
Mega has a 15.900493% chance to hit at 23000 meters
Mega has a 13.789849% chance to hit at 24000 meters
Mega has a 11.817336% chance to hit at 25000 meters
Mega has a 10.011341% chance to hit at 26000 meters
Mega has a 8.387692% chance to hit at 27000 meters
Mega has a 6.951942% chance to hit at 28000 meters
Mega has a 5.701593% chance to hit at 29000 meters
Mega has a 4.628146% chance to hit at 30000 meters



-Liang




Liang-

The above graph agrees with my current data that I have tested. I'm assuming you're using Electron IIs (best case compared with Ions or Neutrons) with standard (no T2 tracking penalties ) ammo, and a 90% web?

As the above indicates, large blasters are solely dependant on a massive reduction in target speed to be even remotely effective. Without it they are useless. I'm *for* reducing the webbing strength of webs, but something needs to be done with blasters to compensate.

Increased range isn't the answer. Increasing ship bonuses or changing ship bonuses isn't the answer either, as that changes other weapon systems and other ship setups. I think that a large increase to tracking and a medium to large increase in damage is in order to define the blasters role in combat.

Personally I think that small blasters are still fairly good. The issues are affecting medium and large blasters *much* more than smalls, so I don't think smalls need any changes. Maybe a damage buff, but their tracking is fairly good as it is, but that's more due to the ships that their mounted on (frigs) than anything inherently good with small blasters.


Cpt Branko
Retired Pirate Club
Posted - 2008.08.02 23:19:00 - [339]
 

Edited by: Cpt Branko on 02/08/2008 23:20:42
Originally by: The Djego
Fight ended with 16% Structure and 4% Armor left on my Thorax, what i admit is fare to close giving such a good Range the Fight started and Branko had won for shure if he started overheating the Weapons(he used Hail) sooner. With Faction Antimatter things could be fare better for the Thorax, but im not realy shure if you can make a Damage advantage now, that is not killed by the range disadvantage.



Yes. Well, I made the mistake of starting overloading when you hit armour rather then straight away (which lost me the fight). With CN AM, the close-range fight is something you'd probably have won more clearly (shame faction ammo is not available on SISI!) however. We need to try with ECM drones and gankier Thorax setups at some point to see how that does.

Since I was maneuvering up close to be in Hail optimal (basically, 1200m) it created a bit of transversal at times and I was missing shots as well, damn -50% tracking Evil or Very Mad

Overall some good fights, and very close. In my experience, little has changed in the Rupture vs Thorax fight compared to TQ (and little has changed in way of fittings, as well), except the increased difficulty for the Thorax to get in point-blank, and the impossibility for a Rupture to kite the Thorax anymore.

Overall, I'd conclude the best way to fight a Thorax in a Rupture now is to try to fight in edges of webrange, where blasters are in heavy falloff, but you are not (but still; Thorax derives a lot of DPS from drones, which don't care about range so you don't want to be too far out either, probably best off at 7-8km).


Bellum Eternus
Gallente
The Scope
Posted - 2008.08.02 23:27:00 - [340]
 

Originally by: Cpt Branko
Edited by: Cpt Branko on 02/08/2008 23:08:52
Originally by: Liang Nuren

Blasters have always had a tracking problem. A web nerf makes it much, much worse.


It makes it worse for all turret BS tbh. The Mega is tracking bonused, so its blasters do have the best tracking of all short-range turrets. Since it is a battleship, what it should do is shoot battleships best (since no BS now shoots HACs effectively, try the geddon if you like, for instance) - it has to rely on a neut+drones + a bit of turret fire to fight back.

I could agree with the Mega (or blasters rather) needing a bit more short-range DPS to have a clear advantage, as Bellum said above (or rather; certain weapon systems toned down to give blasters a clear advantage).

Let's not forget doing something about the Tempest, though - while the Mega if things really go ugly might be the old Tempest, nothing matches up to the suckyness of the new Tempest. At least it used to be faster Laughing



Branko, while the focus of this particular thread is blasters, make no mistake, I think that large ACs need a huge boost to tracking as well, and the Tempest in particular needs a boost. Also, arty needs like twice the volley damage with the ROF reduced by the 35% or so for it's DPS to be maintained at a constant level to further differentiate it from other weapon systems. The Muninn could also use another turret and the grid to fit an additional 720mm II, *AND* a high moved to a mid. And...and...and... ad nauseum.

There are plenty of little tweaks that would make each race more 'pure' and 'focused', making them more effective, while not creating overpowered and unfair conditions, but CCP seems to be more concerned with long reaching designs and large sweeping changes than smaller edits of their game design.

Cpt Branko
Retired Pirate Club
Posted - 2008.08.02 23:29:00 - [341]
 

Edited by: Cpt Branko on 02/08/2008 23:31:40
Edited by: Cpt Branko on 02/08/2008 23:31:09
Originally by: Bellum Eternus
I don't think smalls need any changes. Maybe a damage buff, but their tracking is fairly good as it is, but that's more due to the ships that their mounted on (frigs) than anything inherently good with small blasters.



The only issue is that, for small blasters vs other weapon systems (OK, talking about ACs here) the DPS advantage is quite high, so they don't need touching. Medium blasters and tracking? Well, yes a bit of it, - anything enabling medium blasters to hit smaller targets reliably would be OP, but hitting targets their own size better (read: almost fully when webbed) in optimal would be good*.

*Also, Hail M penalities needs a second look as well; -50% tracking kills in combination with 1200m optimal + low falloff now, and there's no other passable option for maximum damage (particularly if you want to fight armour tankers). Hell, all the T2 high damage ammos need their tracking un-nerfed atm.

Edited post to be shorted and more concise.

The Djego
Minmatar
Hellequin Inc.
Posted - 2008.08.03 00:12:00 - [342]
 

Originally by: Cpt Branko
Edited by: Cpt Branko on 02/08/2008 23:20:42

Yes. Well, I made the mistake of starting overloading when you hit armour rather then straight away (which lost me the fight). With CN AM, the close-range fight is something you'd probably have won more clearly (shame faction ammo is not available on SISI!) however. We need to try with ECM drones and gankier Thorax setups at some point to see how that does.

Since I was maneuvering up close to be in Hail optimal (basically, 1200m) it created a bit of transversal at times and I was missing shots as well, damn -50% tracking Evil or Very Mad

Overall some good fights, and very close. In my experience, little has changed in the Rupture vs Thorax fight compared to TQ (and little has changed in way of fittings, as well), except the increased difficulty for the Thorax to get in point-blank, and the impossibility for a Rupture to kite the Thorax anymore.

Overall, I'd conclude the best way to fight a Thorax in a Rupture now is to try to fight in edges of webrange, where blasters are in heavy falloff, but you are not (but still; Thorax derives a lot of DPS from drones, which don't care about range so you don't want to be too far out either, probably best off at 7-8km).




You have done well. Hail vs a Blaster ship is cleary a clever move, since it gimps the Tracking, but a Blaster ship wonīt orbit anyway so its DPS vs DPS in the end. Since ECM Drones now donīt only shut down DPS and Web but also the Scram it will be a even more a binary effect. If you get a cycle you win, if you donīt you will loose. Shure the DPS advantage(also on the Drone level) is still at the Thorax, but the tank advantage is on the Rupture, by the 1600mm vs 800mm Plate(that i compenstate by the overloaded Repper quite a bit Razz).

Everything that holds the Thorax from 2km is working for the other ship, Null extends this range but also reduces Tracking an DPS. If you get at 7km with MWD shout down or with the reactivation penalty, you won allready. It simply takes to long to get into range to use the DPS advantage to cover the Tank disadvantate.

So in the end, even under very good conditions, fight can start and progess all to the Thorax advantages, it was very close(and i think i battled on a equal Level on SP and Playerskill).
Donīt get me wrong, Fitting, piloting and related Skills was very good, also i would call my Skills, Fitting and piloting not to bad but this is yust to close to relay say Thorax is better in close Range. Things should turn out fare better in the favour of the Thorax within his Range, as things celarly turn out in favour of the Rupture on his Range.

The Djego
Minmatar
Hellequin Inc.
Posted - 2008.08.03 00:40:00 - [343]
 

Edited by: The Djego on 03/08/2008 01:01:57
Run down some tests with the Ishtar, old stlye tanked setup with some adjustments facing the new style of PVP in general. Its not that good like before Nano, it is pure awsomenes now.

Tracing Disruptor, AB, Med Blaster is way to go now. Razz

Ishtar vs Zealot, pure win.
Ishtar vs Sniper Muninn, pure win, starting it a 70km.
Ishtar vs Deimos, pure win.
Ishtar vs Deimos, well draw(would take fare to long). The pilote desveres my repect, even with Neuts and TD on him he concentrated his power agianst my Drones and changed this engagement in a rescoping battle. Tanked qutie well by useing a med Nos, tryed sveral times to dry him out but failed it the end, funny battle and quite a lot playerskill involved. Cool
Ishtar vs Muninn and Curse, win in the end, Curse Pilote was a bit bad(only T1 Drones).

Ishtar vs Raven(for real this is what i realy tested since so many posts about this HAC vs Missles). Well it takes Time, Raven had CMs(T1). With a Dualrep Setup you are fine, donīt realy diffent to anything other than Pirate Ishtar vs Mission Raven atm.

Isthar vs Raven round 2 vs Torps(the Pilote admited he has poor Missles Skills) well it was like getting hit with the sledeghammer compared to CMs. Mixed Explo/EM Torps done extrem well against me(EXP and EM are the worst resistances on the Ishtar). Dualrep, overloading, maxed Skills could hardly keep up at the Damage. AB on or off did make a diffrence but not realy a big one in the way of tanking the Raven. Dualrepp full Tank Hacs can handle it, ofc they got problems to taking the Raven down before they run out of Cap Boosters but it is doable. Single Rep Hacs -> you are down, quite simple. This needs fixing Torps are fare to effective against Crusier Class ships(T1 Torps, wonīt face some Jalvins).

This comes from someone that has a Jalvin T2 Explo Torp BPO...

Another quite entertaining 1o1, tanked Ishtar vs Nano Vaga(with some quite good modifications + LG Snakes). Since i could not dedicate Range, even with getting in Web Range 2 times, it was quite a good battle, rescoping, Turret vs Drones all over, for the Vaga and for me to. I would like to call this a draw. Vaga can take you down you but it takes forever(note we fighted for about 15 Minutes I still got 50% of my Cap Boosters, took his Drones out and he had take 3 of my Berserkers out). High SP, very good piloting at both sides, this turned in a very interesing Fight. Well done, nothing to add here, Nano in a 1o1 still stayes very effective on the Crusier vs Crusier level. Cool

Mike Yass
GoonFleet
GoonSwarm
Posted - 2008.08.03 02:46:00 - [344]
 

I think it's funny that CCP is justifying the nano nerf as a way to diversify game play, when the real result is eliminating blaster boats, eliminating nano ships, and pushing everything towards fleets of pulse apocs slugging it out.

I'm all for a nerf of nano ships, but breaking the entire game is not the way to do it.

Bellum Eternus
Gallente
The Scope
Posted - 2008.08.03 07:12:00 - [345]
 

Edited by: Bellum Eternus on 03/08/2008 07:12:53
As promised from earlier, I'm posting a damage graph I generated in EFT. Shown is a DPS graph for a Raven, Hype and Tempest all attacking an Ishtar.

Ishtar is AB fit, non nano dual rep armor tanked with 800 plate.

Hype, Raven and Tempest are all PVP fit as I would normally fit them out for general combat conditions on TQ. Raven fit DOES include an MWD and torps, not cruise. Tempest has 800 IIs and torp launchers and one damage mod, Hype is an Ion II fit with one damage mod. No drones were used. No implants were used, all skills at 5. Turret BS are fit with T1 web, the results would be even more in favor of the Raven if a 55% or 60% web were used instead of a 75% web.

All ammo is faction short range: CN AM, RF EMP, and CN torps.

Red trace is the Raven. 400+ DPS out to 30km, then it terminates.

Hype does 0 damage until right before 2km, peaks at just over 400 right before web range terminates, then does effectively zero DPS (peaks at less than 40 at about 16km.

Tempest does a bit better since it has two torp launchers, and while the ACs can continue to hit for over 100 DPS at 35km+, it's still pretty crappy.

GRAPH

Bottom line: the turret ships suck, with the Hype being the clear loser, while the Raven does excellent damage to the Ishtar, with Torps, out to well past 24km scram range, and suffers no tracking penalties what so ever.

Note that this test does NOT simulate the new lower performance webs. I estimate the performance with the new webs to be 20-30% of the info shown in the graph, if they can hit at all, and the 100% miss area of the graph will be drastically increased.

If course, CCP should already have all this data and be able to generate similar graphs themselves with what I'm sure is much more precise data and options for variables etc. Assuming this, it's obvious that either CCP checked all these issues and ignored them, or didn't bother to check in the first place.

Oh, just for grins: Cruise Raven does approx. 485 DPS out to 45km or so. All hail our new Caldari overloards. Rolling Eyes

The Djego
Minmatar
Hellequin Inc.
Posted - 2008.08.03 09:31:00 - [346]
 

Edited by: The Djego on 03/08/2008 09:32:03
Originally by: Bellum Eternus

Oh, just for grins: Cruise Raven does approx. 485 DPS out to 45km or so. All hail our new Caldari overloards. Rolling Eyes


Is this for Jalvins vs the Ishtar? Since Cruise Missles have a bigger range.

In my tests(on Sissi Ishtar vs Raven) Cruise where fare eysier to handle than Torps.

Ofc this canīt be a reference against solid numbers given equal levels of skills and equal good Fittings, but since it puts piloting and other factors in aswell that matters for the fight in general that is a nice adition to pure EFT based Data.

Theron Gyrow
Gradient
Electus Matari
Posted - 2008.08.03 11:08:00 - [347]
 

Originally by: Liang Nuren

No, he said:
DPS = chance_to_hit * dmg_multiplier * base_ammo_dmg / rate_of_fire


That's actually wrong, by the way. The hit chance also affects hit quality. With that (and wrecking hits, that's the 0.02) taken into account, the actual value for DPS is
DPS = ((0.5 + (0.5 + chance_to_hit)) / 2 + 0.02) * chance_to_hit * dmg_multiplier * base_ammo_dmg / rate_of_fire

Thus, at 100% to-hit chance, turrets will do 102% of the easily-calced DoT due to wreckings. Whee.

More importantly, at 50% to-hit chance, turrets will actually do 38.5% of the easily-calced DoT, not 50% as might be expected.

Yukisa
Posted - 2008.08.03 11:54:00 - [348]
 

Cruise missiles with skill/rig have what, ~200m explosion radius.

I think the Cruise raven you fought fitted very poorly if you claim to took less dmg than the torp raven.

Cruise will splatter hacs/cruisers very easily. Your testing show torps being able to dish a lot of dmg to these ships is suprising, CCP, are you guys looking?

The Djego
Minmatar
Hellequin Inc.
Posted - 2008.08.03 12:21:00 - [349]
 

Originally by: Yukisa
Cruise missiles with skill/rig have what, ~200m explosion radius.

I think the Cruise raven you fought fitted very poorly if you claim to took less dmg than the torp raven.

Cruise will splatter hacs/cruisers very easily. Your testing show torps being able to dish a lot of dmg to these ships is suprising, CCP, are you guys looking?


Well i was fitted with a Tank as strong you can go on a Hac(Dualrep T2, 2x Nano Pumps) under Cap Booster environment with high resists. Acording to EFT the Fitting can Tank 380 DPS(that is quite alot for a Hac, Omni Resistances based), 535 Overloaded(Repper + Hardner, and i overloaded quite a bit untill i finshed of his Drones). This ofc needs a lot more testing with more data about the Skills of the Player, the used Amno, the Fitting, Speeds etc.

Torp Raven will finish you as soon you have to stop overloading the Hardner and Reps quite easy by pure Missles DPS even with bad skills, wasnīt even able to kill all his Drones in this frame of time(but his most Damaging ones named 2 T2 Berserker).

Markas Crais
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Posted - 2008.08.03 14:47:00 - [350]
 

Edited by: Markas Crais on 03/08/2008 15:38:23

Originally by: The Djego
Originally by: Yukisa
Cruise missiles with skill/rig have what, ~200m explosion radius.

I think the Cruise raven you fought fitted very poorly if you claim to took less dmg than the torp raven.

Cruise will splatter hacs/cruisers very easily. Your testing show torps being able to dish a lot of dmg to these ships is suprising, CCP, are you guys looking?


Well i was fitted with a Tank as strong you can go on a Hac(Dualrep T2, 2x Nano Pumps) under Cap Booster environment with high resists. Acording to EFT the Fitting can Tank 380 DPS(that is quite alot for a Hac, Omni Resistances based), 535 Overloaded(Repper + Hardner, and i overloaded quite a bit untill i finshed of his Drones). This ofc needs a lot more testing with more data about the Skills of the Player, the used Amno, the Fitting, Speeds etc.

Torp Raven will finish you as soon you have to stop overloading the Hardner and Reps quite easy by pure Missles DPS even with bad skills, wasnīt even able to kill all his Drones in this frame of time(but his most Damaging ones named 2 T2 Berserker).


I think you're gettin a little off track from the original topic Djego.

The point is that a Raven can still hit you with his Cruise/Torps, right?

I ran some tests on SiSi to compare with the EFT graph that Bellum generated and I can indeed confirm this is what I was seeing with my Hyperion and Megathron vs. Ishtar. Anything under 2km while webbed with regular Antimatter (so no tracking penalties) simply couldn't be hit. While Dual Webbed I scored some hits, but they were still so far and between I might as well have not been hitting him at all. I can understand not hitting a frig that gets under your guns, but I think a cruiser sized ship being able to do exactly the same + have more overall survivability and dps than it's frigate counterpart is a bit awkward. This leaves your only line of defense to be your drones, which can be as we all know, easily picked off.

UPDATE: Did the same test with Ishtar orbiting Cruise Raven at 800m. The Raven was using normal Devastator Cruise Missiles + 3x Flare Catalyst rigs + 3x BCU (explosive resist on Ishtar = 71%). Well, the Cruise missiles were hitting every single time, of course, for around 80~81 damage consistently. The Ishtar was able to tank it well, but cap boosters ended up becoming a problem. This was an INCREDIBLY different scenario compared to an Ishtar vs. Turrets since the Ishtar never had to use any cap boosters because the turrets couldn't track at that range.

Cpt Branko
Retired Pirate Club
Posted - 2008.08.03 16:02:00 - [351]
 

Edited by: Cpt Branko on 03/08/2008 16:04:03
Originally by: Markas Crais

I ran some tests on SiSi to compare with the EFT graph that Bellum generated and I can indeed confirm this is what I was seeing with my Hyperion and Megathron vs. Ishtar. Anything under 2km while webbed with regular Antimatter (so no tracking penalties) simply couldn't be hit. While Dual Webbed I scored some hits, but they were still so far and between I might as well have not been hitting him at all. I can understand not hitting a frig that gets under your guns, but I think a cruiser sized ship being able to do exactly the same + have more overall survivability and dps than it's frigate counterpart is a bit awkward. This leaves your only line of defense to be your drones, which can be as we all know, easily picked off.



Well, the thing is, drones alone don't work anymore to dispose of a smaller T2 ship class with a tank (cruiser - AF, BS - HAC). Some sort of neutralizing or missile DPS (for instance, on minmatar ships which have spare highs) is preety much required, with (generally) drone micromenagement, meaning scoop if taking damage->deploy->scoop if taking damage->etc... dual webbing helps a lot, but if the target is AB fit he will survive under dual webs (naturally, he will have to web+scram you, and it only works if you're not AB fit too).

Naturally, HACs endure neuting better thanks to cap injectors, although a dual heavy neut BS will still ruin their day (as modules will shut off before next injector cycle, thanks to insta-nuking its cap) unless they're nossing.

Generally, though, if you wanted to make a HAC-killing machine from a BS, I guess the plated torp tempest with 2 heavy neuts and 2 medium ones would be the HAC murderer from hell... need to test that some more though, I wish the damn mirror would happen already ;)


Liang Nuren
Posted - 2008.08.03 16:10:00 - [352]
 

Originally by: Theron Gyrow
That's actually wrong, by the way. The hit chance also affects hit quality. With that (and wrecking hits, that's the 0.02) taken into account, the actual value for DPS is
DPS = ((0.5 + (0.5 + chance_to_hit)) / 2 + 0.02) * chance_to_hit * dmg_multiplier * base_ammo_dmg / rate_of_fire

Thus, at 100% to-hit chance, turrets will do 102% of the easily-calced DoT due to wreckings. Whee.

More importantly, at 50% to-hit chance, turrets will actually do 38.5% of the easily-calced DoT, not 50% as might be expected.


Hmmm... that actually lines out a bit better with what I've observed in TQ. I saw a proto formula for this, but I couldn't find the actual formula. Got a link to where you snagged it from?

-Liang

Sabine Demsky
Failed Diplomacy
B A N E
Posted - 2008.08.03 16:33:00 - [353]
 

Originally by: Gabriel Karade
It means blasters autocannons track too slowly for their short range.

Theron Gyrow
Gradient
Electus Matari
Posted - 2008.08.03 16:57:00 - [354]
 

Edited by: Theron Gyrow on 03/08/2008 16:59:12
Edited by: Theron Gyrow on 03/08/2008 16:57:10
Originally by: Liang Nuren
Originally by: Theron Gyrow
That's actually wrong, by the way. The hit chance also affects hit quality. With that (and wrecking hits, that's the 0.02) taken into account, the actual value for DPS is
DPS = ((0.5 + (0.5 + chance_to_hit)) / 2 + 0.02) * chance_to_hit * dmg_multiplier * base_ammo_dmg / rate_of_fire

Thus, at 100% to-hit chance, turrets will do 102% of the easily-calced DoT due to wreckings. Whee.

More importantly, at 50% to-hit chance, turrets will actually do 38.5% of the easily-calced DoT, not 50% as might be expected.


Hmmm... that actually lines out a bit better with what I've observed in TQ. I saw a proto formula for this, but I couldn't find the actual formula. Got a link to where you snagged it from?



It was from Scrapheap. I think it was from post http://www.scrapheap-challenge.com/viewtopic.php?p=114333#114333, but I seem to have misremembered it slightly. Not enough to really change the result, though. :)

Bellum Eternus
Gallente
The Scope
Posted - 2008.08.03 17:01:00 - [355]
 

Originally by: The Djego
Edited by: The Djego on 03/08/2008 09:32:03
Originally by: Bellum Eternus

Oh, just for grins: Cruise Raven does approx. 485 DPS out to 45km or so. All hail our new Caldari overloards. Rolling Eyes


Is this for Jalvins vs the Ishtar? Since Cruise Missles have a bigger range.

In my tests(on Sissi Ishtar vs Raven) Cruise where fare eysier to handle than Torps.

Ofc this canīt be a reference against solid numbers given equal levels of skills and equal good Fittings, but since it puts piloting and other factors in aswell that matters for the fight in general that is a nice adition to pure EFT based Data.


I never use any T2 ammo in any of my calcs. Always faction, and not the tier2 exotic hard to get stuff, just the standard LP store stuff. So for the cruise missiles I used Caldari Navy cruise missiles. Damage type was unimportant. Furthermore, Ravens get a range bonus.

Liang Nuren
Posted - 2008.08.03 17:37:00 - [356]
 

Originally by: Theron Gyrow

It was from Scrapheap. I think it was from post http://www.scrapheap-challenge.com/viewtopic.php?p=114333#114333, but I seem to have misremembered it slightly. Not enough to really change the result, though. :)



Hmm, I'd seen the rumblings of it. Thanks. Playing with this formula makes me a sad panda. At any rate, with the updated hit quality formula, the above hit chances I posted become:

Mega does 0.000000% of max turret DPS at 1000 meters
Mega does 0.339913% of max turret DPS at 2000 meters
Mega does 5.029581% of max turret DPS at 3000 meters
Mega does 13.177995% of max turret DPS at 4000 meters
Mega does 24.732927% of max turret DPS at 5000 meters
Mega does 36.194063% of max turret DPS at 6000 meters
Mega does 45.530492% of max turret DPS at 7000 meters
Mega does 52.088835% of max turret DPS at 8000 meters
Mega does 55.926371% of max turret DPS at 9000 meters
Mega does 57.390642% of max turret DPS at 10000 meters
Mega does 14.593039% of max turret DPS at 11000 meters
Mega does 17.145098% of max turret DPS at 12000 meters
Mega does 19.084199% of max turret DPS at 13000 meters
Mega does 20.306325% of max turret DPS at 14000 meters
Mega does 20.810431% of max turret DPS at 15000 meters
Mega does 20.668749% of max turret DPS at 16000 meters
Mega does 19.996227% of max turret DPS at 17000 meters
Mega does 18.924833% of max turret DPS at 18000 meters
Mega does 17.584774% of max turret DPS at 19000 meters
Mega does 16.092560% of max turret DPS at 20000 meters
Mega does 14.544776% of max turret DPS at 21000 meters
Mega does 13.016132% of max turret DPS at 22000 meters
Mega does 11.560370% of max turret DPS at 23000 meters
Mega does 10.212826% of max turret DPS at 24000 meters
Mega does 8.993742% of max turret DPS at 25000 meters
Mega does 7.911692% of max turret DPS at 26000 meters
Mega does 6.966736% of max turret DPS at 27000 meters
Mega does 6.153099% of max turret DPS at 28000 meters
Mega does 5.461321% of max turret DPS at 29000 meters
Mega does 4.879890% of max turret DPS at 30000 meters


def turret_hit_chance(Sig_Res, Optimal, Falloff, Tracking, Transv, Range, Sig_Rad):
# Original Formula by Naughty Boy
# ((1.0/2.0) ** ((((Transv/(Range*Tracking))*(Sig_Res/Sig_Rad)) ** 2) +((max(0,Range-Optimal))/Falloff) ** 2))

# Original hit quality formula by KzIg (http://www.scrapheap-challenge.com/viewtopic.php?p=114333#114333)
# Expected damage per shot = normal damage * [min(chance to hit, 1%)*3 + max(0,chance to hit - 1%)*(0.99+chance to hit)/2]

tracking_penalty = Transv / (Range * Tracking)
sig_penalty = (Sig_Res / Sig_Rad)
optimal_penalty = max(0, Range - Optimal)
hit_chance = 0.5 ** ((( tracking_penalty * sig_penalty) ** 2) + ((optimal_penalty / Falloff) ** 2))
hit_quality = (min(hit_chance, 0.01)*3 + max(0.0, hit_chance - 0.01) * (0.99 + hit_chance) / 2)

return hit_quality


Let me know if I'm misunderstanding how to apply the formula.

-Liang

Arkady Sadik
Minmatar
Electus Matari
Posted - 2008.08.03 18:06:00 - [357]
 

Edited by: Arkady Sadik on 03/08/2008 18:13:23
Hm. Just had an interesting fight with Tempest vs. Sacrilege (posting here because AC and blasters have similar tracking, so this is applicable to blasters just as well). Sadly, the pilot didn't respond to my questions, so I have to guess about his fit:

Double web from my Tempest brought the Sacrilege to 70m/s (probably AB fit), his webbing got me down to 50m/s (probably single web). I managed to keep him at 1-2km distance with some maneuvering (and forcing him to reduce transversal to follow me). Keeping transversal down otherwise was difficult, the speed difference (haha) was too big.

The fight ended with us being jumped by some other guys in BS who killed me first, so not very interesting end, but it was a longish fight, and I think I would have lost in the end.

From the combat log, my 6x800mm II (EMP L) with one gyro II and dual bonus from battleship 4 got outdamaged by the 2x arbalest cruise launchers (paradise cruises). Ammo chosen because a Sacrilege that fits a single therm hardener has EM resist as the lowest one, and EMP does most damage to it (more than PP).

Let me repeat that.

On the one side, we have:
- 6x 800mm AC II
- Gyrostab II
- 20% damage bonus
- 20% rof bonus
- 6.3m SP in Gunnery, nothing but projectiles
- Double t2 web on the target

On the other side, we have:
- 2x best named cruise launchers (the low-dps BS missiles)
- No damage mod
- No ship bonus
- 1.7m SP in Missiles

The latter out-damage the former (58 dps vs. 52 dps).

Edited to add: I do not mind losing a BS vs. a HAC in 1vs1 at all. I think that's actually what it should be (BS need support). This is just to illustrate the "slight" difference in missile performance vs. gun performance in close-range fights.

Gabriel Karade
Gallente
Noir.
Noir. Mercenary Group
Posted - 2008.08.03 18:46:00 - [358]
 

I don't believe a close-range Battleship i.e. Blasters/Autocannons should, by default, loose to a HAC. Their niche is more the solo role, medium-range weapons (read Pulse Lasers/Torpedos) are much more useful in a small gang environment, and arguably railguns are more useful in all encounters bar solo work.

Assault frigates gaining a role as heavy tacklers, good for them, but attacking a close range Battleship in a HAC solo should be exceptionally risky. The close-range Battleship is already vulnerable by virtue of being very slow with very short range guns, it’s shouldn’t be vulnerable to everything, otherwise it simply has no role anymore.

Bellum Eternus
Gallente
The Scope
Posted - 2008.08.03 19:18:00 - [359]
 

If any BS should be able to kill cruisers well it should be the short ranged blaster ships. IMO cruisers should be able to avoid long range ships and missile ships fairly well, but BS fit with short ranged guns should be effective against short range fast manouvering targets.

Right now the most effective ships against the widest variety of targets are missile ships, followed by anything that doesn't use cap (projectiles) in combination with heavy neutralizers.

A cruise Raven with dual heavy neuts or an 800 II AC Temp with dual heavy neuts is *extremely* effective. The Typhoon, tanked Scorpion and Rokh fit with a few neuts and torps are all very deadly to smaller ships as well as being extremely effective vs. BS and BCs.

The Armageddon does very well against smaller ships with a heavy neut in it's 8th high slot. The Apoc with it's crazy tracking and extreme range of it's Heavy Pulse II are death on a stick to cruisers, while the Abaddon has to drop a turret to fit a neutralizer. Personally I like the Geddon over the Abaddon for anti-cruiser work, but the Apoc smokes them both.

While the Minmatar, Caldari and Amarr BS enjoy nice medium range effectiveness and output 90-95% of Gallente's DPS while doing so, the Gallente BS performance is pretty poor, as their peak DPS isn't enough to offset the severe lack of range and high cap use with low tracking.

As my previous post with the graph has demonstrated, there is no clear advantage for using Gallente ships in particular, and Blaster ships specifically.

On the subject of the Dominix- while it can be effective vs. smaller ships, it's useless for pirating or any other sort of combat in low sec wehre you're being fired upon by gate/station guns.

Blasters need more DPS and tracking.

Kalintos Tyl
Minmatar
Bloody Amarr's
Posted - 2008.08.03 20:01:00 - [360]
 

i thought thought that ac tempest had 60% of mega damage at optimal. And mega ouydomaged it till 20km ?:D Fail


Pages: first : previous : ... 8 9 10 11 [12] 13 14 15 16 ... : last (45)

This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only