open All Channels
seplocked EVE General Discussion
blankseplocked tracking speed question
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Author Topic

Luf Yu'Wong
Black Wormholes of Apocrypha
TOGETHER WE STAND
Posted - 2011.01.05 18:49:00 - [1]
 

Hi

i have a question regarding the tracking speed. I am testing how to hit with a dread a battleship orbiting at 20km . After boosting and using the right ammo, the tracking speed of dread's turrets is 0.0063806 rad/sec, while the overview window shows only 0.0058207 rad/sec for the target battleship. The optimal range is 56.247 km and accuracy falloff 133.52 km. My impression was that i should be hitting the target without problems. Instead, out of over 50 shots, not even one landed on target - all missed. Can anyone enlighten me please ?

thank you

mkmin
Posted - 2011.01.05 18:57:00 - [2]
 

Signature resolution vs signature radius also ties into it. I'd bet if the dread had a couple target painters it should be pretty close to 1-shotting that BS. Also, maybe play around with DPS graphs on EFT and see what it predicts.

Doddy
Excidium.
Executive Outcomes
Posted - 2011.01.05 19:00:00 - [3]
 

Tracking also takes into account the sig radius of the target and the scan res of the weapon. To succesfully hit a bs (sig radius 400) with capital weapons (scan res 1000) you will need to have considerably better tracking vs transversal. Try setting the bs to the same speed but turn mwd on and u should get better results :)

MoonDragn
Caldari
J0urneys End
Posted - 2011.01.05 19:01:00 - [4]
 

Edited by: MoonDragn on 05/01/2011 19:15:07
Are you sure thats 133.52km accuracy falloff? I don't remember any guns having that kind of falloff no matter how much skill/buffs you have. It sounds like you are using a ion siege cannon, those have around a 15km falloff, that means you are almost at optimal range + 2x falloff, meaning you have almost 0% chance to hit your target even if both of you are standing still.


Luf Yu'Wong
Black Wormholes of Apocrypha
TOGETHER WE STAND
Posted - 2011.01.05 19:36:00 - [5]
 

after activating 2 target paintings, the sig of the target is 499m, while the scan resolution of the dread is 132mm. I am using a naglfar with artys, and the optimal/falloff is the one that is reported by the "show info" window on the fitted modules. With the modified signature, i got only one shot out of 50. I guess im wrong, but if the tracking speed is bigger than the angular velocity, the sig radius should not matter so much ?

mkmin
Posted - 2011.01.05 19:51:00 - [6]
 

Originally by: Luf Yu'Wong
after activating 2 target paintings, the sig of the target is 499m, while the scan resolution of the dread is 132mm. I am using a naglfar with artys, and the optimal/falloff is the one that is reported by the "show info" window on the fitted modules. With the modified signature, i got only one shot out of 50. I guess im wrong, but if the tracking speed is bigger than the angular velocity, the sig radius should not matter so much ?


Not the scan resolution of the dread, the signature resolution of it's weapons. On capital weapons it's base is 1,000m, and I'm pretty sure there aren't any skills to reduce it. I am not sure on the exact math, but my experience in PVE shows that battleship turrets will usually have reduced damage to frigs and they'll be harder to hit, even if below the tracking of the weapon. Sig radius is definitely more important than a lot of people give credit. It's why interceptors have a bonus to reduced sig penalty of MWD's.

Luf Yu'Wong
Black Wormholes of Apocrypha
TOGETHER WE STAND
Posted - 2011.01.05 20:01:00 - [7]
 

Edited by: Luf Yu''Wong on 05/01/2011 20:02:01
Originally by: mkmin
Originally by: Luf Yu'Wong
after activating 2 target paintings, the sig of the target is 499m, while the scan resolution of the dread is 132mm. I am using a naglfar with artys, and the optimal/falloff is the one that is reported by the "show info" window on the fitted modules. With the modified signature, i got only one shot out of 50. I guess im wrong, but if the tracking speed is bigger than the angular velocity, the sig radius should not matter so much ?


Not the scan resolution of the dread, the signature resolution of it's weapons. On capital weapons it's base is 1,000m, and I'm pretty sure there aren't any skills to reduce it. I am not sure on the exact math, but my experience in PVE shows that battleship turrets will usually have reduced damage to frigs and they'll be harder to hit, even if below the tracking of the weapon. Sig radius is definitely more important than a lot of people give credit. It's why interceptors have a bonus to reduced sig penalty of MWD's.


The signature resolution of the weapons is indeed 1000m and i could not find anything to change it. Interesting, then it means you cant hit anything thats under the signature radius of the weapons, no matter what modules/implants you use ?

mkmin
Posted - 2011.01.05 20:09:00 - [8]
 

Originally by: Luf Yu'Wong
Edited by: Luf Yu''Wong on 05/01/2011 20:02:01
Originally by: mkmin
Originally by: Luf Yu'Wong
after activating 2 target paintings, the sig of the target is 499m, while the scan resolution of the dread is 132mm. I am using a naglfar with artys, and the optimal/falloff is the one that is reported by the "show info" window on the fitted modules. With the modified signature, i got only one shot out of 50. I guess im wrong, but if the tracking speed is bigger than the angular velocity, the sig radius should not matter so much ?


Not the scan resolution of the dread, the signature resolution of it's weapons. On capital weapons it's base is 1,000m, and I'm pretty sure there aren't any skills to reduce it. I am not sure on the exact math, but my experience in PVE shows that battleship turrets will usually have reduced damage to frigs and they'll be harder to hit, even if below the tracking of the weapon. Sig radius is definitely more important than a lot of people give credit. It's why interceptors have a bonus to reduced sig penalty of MWD's.


The signature resolution of the weapons is indeed 1000m and i could not find anything to change it. Interesting, then it means you cant hit anything thats under the signature radius of the weapons, no matter what modules/implants you use ?



No, it just means it's harder to hit. You can still get glancing hits, or miss 49 out of 50 shots. The way I've heard it explained is it's like shooting a shotgun with a blast radius of 1,000m hitting a paper plates with a radius of 499m. Some percentage of that blast will always miss, and if it's moving even more of it will miss. There is probably some fancy mathematical equation but the short answer is, dreads are meant for hitting stationary targets.

MoonDragn
Caldari
J0urneys End
Posted - 2011.01.05 20:20:00 - [9]
 

Edited by: MoonDragn on 05/01/2011 20:24:14
Edited by: MoonDragn on 05/01/2011 20:23:30
Originally by: Luf Yu'Wong

The signature resolution of the weapons is indeed 1000m and i could not find anything to change it. Interesting, then it means you cant hit anything thats under the signature radius of the weapons, no matter what modules/implants you use ?



No, at optimal range, your accuracy is based on your weapon's tracking speed vs the relative angular velocity between you and your target. For example,assuming your optimal range was 20km, with .0058207 tracking, the minimum relative velocity between your ships have to be under 366 m/s. any faster than that and it is impossible to hit the target. Since both dreadnaughts and BS are slow ships, I doubt if you were orbiting each other fast enough to cause that problem.

Therefore the problem had to be range. I'm pretty sure that 133 km falloff is wrong, it should be something like 15-25kms

Luf Yu'Wong
Black Wormholes of Apocrypha
TOGETHER WE STAND
Posted - 2011.01.05 20:27:00 - [10]
 

Originally by: MoonDragn
Originally by: Luf Yu'Wong

The signature resolution of the weapons is indeed 1000m and i could not find anything to change it. Interesting, then it means you cant hit anything thats under the signature radius of the weapons, no matter what modules/implants you use ?



No, your accuracy is based on your weapon's tracking speed vs the relative angular velocity between you and your target. For example, at 20km with .0058207 tracking, the minimum relative velocity between your ships have to be under 366 m/s. any faster than that and it is impossible to hit the target. Since both dreadnaughts and BS are slow ships, I doubt if you were orbiting each other fast enough to cause that problem.

Therefore the problem had to be range. I'm pretty sure that 133 km falloff is wrong, it should be something like 15-25kms



nah, the falloff is not wrong, it is reported by the EFT program also.

Meanwhile i have finally found the formula :
ChanceToHit = 0.5 ^ ((((Transversal speed/(Range to target * Turret Tracking))*(Turret Signature Resolution / Target Signature Radius))^2) + ((max(0, Range To Target - Turret Optimal Range))/Turret Falloff)^2)

Interesting conclusion, is that it is 4x more likely to hit a BS with a dread turret in my setup than hitting a cruiser with BS weapons.

Spurty
Caldari
V0LTA
VOLTA Corp
Posted - 2011.01.05 20:39:00 - [11]
 

Quad 3500mm Siege Artillery I

133km fall off is completely possible with skills and correct ammo.

Anyway, try with Titanium Sabot or Depleted Uranium which has a tracking bonus of 1.2

Also, is your dread in Siege? If so, bad luck. As far as I can tell, when you are in siege, your tracking becomes 0

If you're not in siege and you are missing a 'bs' with painters on it that isn't moving fast, then .. well .. train amarr.

I remember well doing tests in my Tempest on a can. I *100%* of the time missed with the last shot. People reliably informed me that they 'never' missed with their last shot. Then CCP *FIXED* last shot not getting any bonuses applied to it Bug.

So .. take what people are telling you here with a grain of salt matey :-)

I trained amarr and never really looked back, although I am dabbling with Minmatar again. Took over a year to even want to undock in a minmatar ship that wasn't a huggin/rapier/jag lol.


MoonDragn
Caldari
J0urneys End
Posted - 2011.01.05 20:45:00 - [12]
 

well if that formula is correct, then any time your target is less than your optimal range, you do not get any bonuses for hitting it.

According to that formula, you would hit your target 100% of the time if you were both at 0 velocity.

Luf Yu'Wong
Black Wormholes of Apocrypha
TOGETHER WE STAND
Posted - 2011.01.05 20:49:00 - [13]
 

Originally by: Spurty
Quad 3500mm Siege Artillery I

133km fall off is completely possible with skills and correct ammo.

Anyway, try with Titanium Sabot or Depleted Uranium which has a tracking bonus of 1.2

Also, is your dread in Siege? If so, bad luck. As far as I can tell, when you are in siege, your tracking becomes 0


i was using faction ammo from arch angels with a 1.2 bonus. the high tracking speed was achieved by having modules, implants and also a logistic ship with 4 tracking link IIs running on the firing dread. And no, i was not in siege.

From what i can say from the formula, using an amarr dread instead of a minmatar one would not help. Even if the idea of a laser having a radius of 1km coming from 2-4 turrets mounted on a 3km ship seems hilarious.


Doddy
Excidium.
Executive Outcomes
Posted - 2011.01.05 20:52:00 - [14]
 

Originally by: Luf Yu'Wong
Edited by: Luf Yu''Wong on 05/01/2011 20:02:01
Originally by: mkmin
Originally by: Luf Yu'Wong
after activating 2 target paintings, the sig of the target is 499m, while the scan resolution of the dread is 132mm. I am using a naglfar with artys, and the optimal/falloff is the one that is reported by the "show info" window on the fitted modules. With the modified signature, i got only one shot out of 50. I guess im wrong, but if the tracking speed is bigger than the angular velocity, the sig radius should not matter so much ?


Not the scan resolution of the dread, the signature resolution of it's weapons. On capital weapons it's base is 1,000m, and I'm pretty sure there aren't any skills to reduce it. I am not sure on the exact math, but my experience in PVE shows that battleship turrets will usually have reduced damage to frigs and they'll be harder to hit, even if below the tracking of the weapon. Sig radius is definitely more important than a lot of people give credit. It's why interceptors have a bonus to reduced sig penalty of MWD's.


The signature resolution of the weapons is indeed 1000m and i could not find anything to change it. Interesting, then it means you cant hit anything thats under the signature radius of the weapons, no matter what modules/implants you use ?



They multiply together (can't remember the exact formula) so if you are using oversized weapons you will need more tracking than you would expect and vice a versa. If a cruiser size gun and a bs sized gun both have the same tracking the cruiser size gun will still have a better chance of hitting anything cruiser sized or less. MWD baloons sig up 6 times so a dread that can track a bs will hit it for full dps if it has mwd on (a mwding bs that gets webbed for example).

Spurty
Caldari
V0LTA
VOLTA Corp
Posted - 2011.01.05 20:52:00 - [15]
 

Originally by: MoonDragn
well if that formula is correct, then any time your target is less than your optimal range, you do not get any bonuses for hitting it.

According to that formula, you would hit your target 100% of the time if you were both at 0 velocity.


Where exactly is the function that calculates the 'hit' type here? I mean, you can be at 0 and the target at zero. The target can be 100x larger than your weapons' signature and you still get random damage.

Wreaking, Excellent, Well Aimed ,Hit, Lightly hit, Scratch & Miss.



Luf Yu'Wong
Black Wormholes of Apocrypha
TOGETHER WE STAND
Posted - 2011.01.05 20:57:00 - [16]
 

Edited by: Luf Yu''Wong on 05/01/2011 20:57:14
Originally by: Spurty
Originally by: MoonDragn
well if that formula is correct, then any time your target is less than your optimal range, you do not get any bonuses for hitting it.

According to that formula, you would hit your target 100% of the time if you were both at 0 velocity.


Where exactly is the function that calculates the 'hit' type here? I mean, you can be at 0 and the target at zero. The target can be 100x larger than your weapons' signature and you still get random damage.

Wreaking, Excellent, Well Aimed ,Hit, Lightly hit, Scratch & Miss.



http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Turret_damage

Its all there.

Doddy
Excidium.
Executive Outcomes
Posted - 2011.01.05 20:58:00 - [17]
 

Originally by: Spurty

Also, is your dread in Siege? If so, bad luck. As far as I can tell, when you are in siege, your tracking becomes 0




Not so, seige halves your tracking speed. Tracking zero (or even close) and a seiged dread dread wouldn't be able to hit a moveing supercap, which it certainly can.

Doddy
Excidium.
Executive Outcomes
Posted - 2011.01.05 21:06:00 - [18]
 

I don't know if this tool is correct or if ccp has changed the formula. It shows the above would hit at 1.3% at a transversal of 100 m/s. With MWD on this would be 94.7%.

Tracking calculator

MoonDragn
Caldari
J0urneys End
Posted - 2011.01.05 21:06:00 - [19]
 

Edited by: MoonDragn on 05/01/2011 21:19:51
Doing the calculation manually, at relative 0 m/s your chance to hit is 100%, at 100 m/s your chance to hit drops to 30% at 200 m/s your accuracy drops down to a mere 7%

Edit> oops you're right, it falls to .4% at 100m/s I gotta watch out for those Parentheses.

Tippia
Caldari
Sunshine and Lollipops
Posted - 2011.01.05 21:22:00 - [20]
 

Edited by: Tippia on 05/01/2011 21:25:50
Just to add a couple of rules of thumb to what has been said here…

The way the tracking formula works, if you have 1:1 tracking (i.e. the target is the exact size of the turret's signature resolution, and the angular velocity is the exact same as the turret's tracking speed), you don't actually have a good tracking solution. At 1:1 tracking, you have a 50% chance of hitting the target, which translates into ~40% DPS on target.

Only at perfect tracking (angular velocity = 0), and if the target is within optimal range, do you have 100% chance to hit, which translates into ~102% DPS on target. Note that you can never get perfect tracking by improving the turret's tracking speed — perfect tracking only happens when you manoeuvre your ship correctly (or the enemy flies his incorrectly).

Beyond optimal range, you start to get poor hits even with perfect tracking. At 1× falloff, you once again have a 50% chance to hit/40% DPS on target. At ½× falloff, you have 85% chance to hit, or 80% DPS on target. At 2× falloff, you're down to 6% chance to hit, and 5% DPS on target (and beyond 2× falloff, you have zero chance to hit).

All of this is before tracking is even included. Add tracking, and the numbers go down further. For instance, 1:1 tracking at 1× falloff, you get a predictable 25% chance to hit (-50% from tracking, -50% from falloff) for a sad 18% DPS on target.

Signature radius vs. signature resolution is a direct multiplier to your tracking value. A 400m sigres turret against a 100m sigrad target tracks at ¼ the speed.

Oh, and you cannot compensate for one with the other. You cannot remove falloff penalties by improving your tracking or vice versa because the two are separate parts of the tracking formula.

Matalino
Posted - 2011.01.05 21:39:00 - [21]
 

Originally by: Tippia
Just to add a couple of rules of thumb to what has been said here…

The way the tracking formula works, if you have 1:1 tracking (i.e. the target is the exact size of the turret's signature resolution, and the angular velocity is the exact same as the turret's tracking speed), you don't actually have a good tracking solution. At 1:1 tracking, you have a 50% chance of hitting the target, which translates into ~40% DPS on target.

Only at perfect tracking (angular velocity = 0), and if the target is within optimal range, do you have 100% chance to hit, which translates into ~102% DPS on target. Note that you can never get perfect tracking by improving the turret's tracking speed — perfect tracking only happens when you manoeuvre your ship correctly (or the enemy flies his incorrectly).

Beyond optimal range, you start to get poor hits even with perfect tracking. At 1× falloff, you once again have a 50% chance to hit/40% DPS on target. At ½× falloff, you have 85% chance to hit, or 80% DPS on target. At 2× falloff, you're down to 6% chance to hit, and 5% DPS on target (and beyond 2× falloff, you have zero chance to hit).

All of this is before tracking is even included. Add tracking, and the numbers go down further. For instance, 1:1 tracking at 1× falloff, you get a predictable 25% chance to hit (-50% from tracking, -50% from falloff) for a sad 18% DPS on target.

Signature radius vs. signature resolution is a direct multiplier to your tracking value. A 400m sigres turret against a 100m sigrad target tracks at ¼ the speed.

Oh, and you cannot compensate for one with the other. You cannot remove falloff penalties by improving your tracking or vice versa because the two are separate parts of the tracking formula.
This pretty much sums up the way that tracking works.

I would point out that tracking and falloff follow the same damage curve: being at ½× falloff with no angular velocity is the same as being at ½× tracking within optimal range = 80% DPS.

Also a minor correction: the chance to hit beyond 2x falloff (or 2x tracking) is not zero. There is always a small chance to hit. At 2.5x falloff you still have a 1.3% chance to hit, and because most of your hits at that point would be wrecking hits you still have 3.2% of your DPS. It is not much but it is something, and it could mean instant death to a smaller ship that underestimates the possiblity of a lucky shot from a larger ship.

Tippia
Caldari
Sunshine and Lollipops
Posted - 2011.01.05 21:59:00 - [22]
 

Originally by: Matalino
Also a minor correction: the chance to hit beyond 2x falloff (or 2x tracking) is not zero. There is always a small chance to hit. At 2.5x falloff you still have a 1.3% chance to hit, and because most of your hits at that point would be wrecking hits you still have 3.2% of your DPS. It is not much but it is something, and it could mean instant death to a smaller ship that underestimates the possiblity of a lucky shot from a larger ship.
I don't know if they've changed this, but somewhere around Empyrean Age or Quantum rise, they capped the max range to 2× falloff. It didn't matter what your chance to hit was at this range — beyond it, the chance was 0, not even with the 1% wrecking hits.

Matalino
Posted - 2011.01.05 22:10:00 - [23]
 

Edited by: Matalino on 05/01/2011 22:36:17
Originally by: Tippia
Originally by: Matalino
Also a minor correction: the chance to hit beyond 2x falloff (or 2x tracking) is not zero. There is always a small chance to hit. At 2.5x falloff you still have a 1.3% chance to hit, and because most of your hits at that point would be wrecking hits you still have 3.2% of your DPS. It is not much but it is something, and it could mean instant death to a smaller ship that underestimates the possiblity of a lucky shot from a larger ship.
I don't know if they've changed this, but somewhere around Empyrean Age or Quantum rise, they capped the max range to 2× falloff. It didn't matter what your chance to hit was at this range — beyond it, the chance was 0, not even with the 1% wrecking hits.
It must be very far past that point. I have personally tested ranges out to around 3x falloff and I was still getting the expect 0.2% hits with all of them being wrecking hits.

Edit: the first time that I tested it was back when Quantum Rise gave us grouped turrets: I found that grouped turrets gave a higher average DPS than ungrouped turrets because of some quirks in the way it handled low chances to hit. They then fixed that bug with one of the latter expansions, and I retested to confirm that grouped turrets now work the same as ungrouped turrets.

Given that any test to see if the chance-to-hit is so low that it automaticly misses must be applied to all shots, it is probably not worth coding such a test, as players will naturally avoid taking shots with such a low chance-to-hit.


Long long ago there was a bug that made 1% of all shots to be wrecking hits regardless of your chance to hit, this effectively gave everyone a minimum 1% chance to hit regardless of range or tracking. Perhaps that is what you are think about when they changed something regarding wrecking hits and a low chance to hit.

Nanferr
Posted - 2011.01.05 22:17:00 - [24]
 

Quote:
I would point out that tracking and falloff follow the same damage curve: being at ½× falloff with no angular velocity is the same as being at ½× tracking within optimal range = 80% DPS.


wrong actually. Lower then 80% Dps. Because once you start missing, you lose linearly more damage from damage quality (wrecking/lightly hit/hit well), despite losing(or gaining) damage negative exponentially (up to 1x falloff)

Thats why you only do 40-45% damage at 1x falloff instead of 50%.

Matalino
Posted - 2011.01.05 22:25:00 - [25]
 

Edited by: Matalino on 05/01/2011 22:34:43
Originally by: Nanferr
Quote:
I would point out that tracking and falloff follow the same damage curve: being at ½× falloff with no angular velocity is the same as being at ½× tracking within optimal range = 80% DPS.


wrong actually. Lower then 80% Dps. Because once you start missing, you lose linearly more damage from damage quality (wrecking/lightly hit/hit well), despite losing(or gaining) damage negative exponentially (up to 1x falloff)

Thats why you only do 40-45% damage at 1x falloff instead of 50%.
No! You have 79.895% = approximately 80% DPS at ½× falloff/tracking. Your chance to hit is 84%. I am well aware of the effects of hit quality and accounted for them before stating the damage output. Tippia had already included mention of the effects of hit quality, so I did not feel the need to expound on it further.

I suggest that you test the numbers before posting further corrections.

BTW - it is 39.995% DPS with a 50% chance to hit at 1x falloff. It is certainly not 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