hu ? no.
There is no “DPS” specific nor “alpha” specific formula in my post. d is the damage multiplier, applies to both alpha and DPS .
Not to the PvP gamblers out there who would stay in a fight hoping for a winning wrecking shot, rather than simply running the numbers and calculating their DPS/tank compared to their adversaries. Mutaplasmids have revealed eve contains this subset of players. At least, in the market.
Wrecking shots also ignore tracking penalties as long as a minimum hit threshold is met however IIRC, which means a wrecking shot % increase is slightly better than a DPS increase, as it increases effective DPS. That said, I ■■■■■■■ hate RNG, so I’m not a fan of the idea.
2 Likes
nope they don’t ignore anything.
You have a hit quality q between 0 and 100
If that q is lower that hit chance h you hit ; if not you miss.
THEN damage is set according to hit quality : if q/100 <c (c=critical hit chance, default in eve it’s 0.01), your damage mult is set to 3 ; otherwise damage mult = 0.5+q/100 (so between 0.5 and 1.5)
if several turrets are grouped, the q and d are set for each one individually, then average q and average damage is returned to the client.
That’s how the turrets work. From this you can make average damage multiplier formula, which are used eg by pyfa.
Using those average damage mult formula(which take into account he possibility to make a crit), an increase in critical chance c is exactly an increase in percentage point of damage added above crit chance. (no modification below crit chance).
If the target is moving with same evasion as your tracking (that is, angular * 400 000 / sig = tracking), then you deal average 40% of your damage to it with 1% crit ; using a 10% crit chance would instead make it 40+22 => 62% damage applied.
With target moving at evasion being half of tracking, it is now 80% damage ; with 10% crit it would lead to 102% damage.
and what’s more, at 10% chance to hit (I think it’s evasion=2 * tracking) now you deal ±10% of your damage. With crit =10% that means 30% of your damage instead. for this specific value it’s *3 in terms of applied DPS.
What ? no. just, no.
1 Like
Lol, missing the point. Try-harder.
1 Like
reported for inappropriate personal aggression.
Anticipated. Worth it. 2x lol.
You forget the abuse where you tracking disrupt your own guy until your below 0 tracking and then every shot is a wrecking shot, a hurricane can hit perfectly to end of lock range this way :]
CCP patched it but it really shows the strength of the wrecking shot it hits everything.
fixed bugs are not considered part of the game wrt balance.
The bug was the trigger for wrecking shot’s it didn’t change wrecking shots in any way it just highlighted it :], they are exactly the same as they always where.
please sober yourself before posting.
The bug was a very common one (using a signed as an unsigned) and as such is not relevant to anything in the game ; not does it “show” anything.
Don’t worry in a few years when you start to understand then I will await your more logical reply.
The logical reply was already present before : you can’t use a bug as an argument when talking about balance.Especially fixed one. NEVER.
doing that is just a complete nonsense. So go drunk, you’re home.
If your theory was correct then why when an inti is orbiting a stationary ship that it is unable to track that once in a blue moon it actually lands a hit and that hit just happens to be a wrecking, if your theory is correct then the chance of a wrecking on that hit would be extremely low but its not wrecking is one of the only type of shot’s that could land in that situation.
it’s not a theory. It’s fact. Bugs are not part of a balance, because bugs are not part of the design while balance is part of a design.
Again, do hunk, your drome.
What ?
- I did not provide a theory, just reminded the FACTS that are present on eve-uni and were provided by CCP in public presentations.
- the formula I gave does not say “[when low hit chance] the chance of a wrecking on that hit would be extremely low”, on the opposite : on low hit chance (below 1%), all the damages are critical (q<1% so d=3).
I wrote exactly the opposite of what you just said my “theory” says. I’m tired of explaining things for retard, reported for trolling.
1 Like
(post withdrawn by author, will be automatically deleted in 24 hours unless flagged)
Andersen, I like your posts and always feel you add to the conversation, but this thread is bringing out the worst in you. Hopefully CCP will clean up this mess and we can get back to the meaningful discussion on ACs as originally posed by Jin.
3 Likes
The "go drunk, you’re home " and later “do hunk, your drome” imply that I am the drunk one (and I become more and more so).
But thanks for your attention. (I am not really drunk, though)
Auto Cannons are easy to fix: give them more fall off. The fall off nerf in the past was really not needed.
Simply increase the fall off by 20% accross all autocannon modules.
3 Likes
That is insane. They are not quite as strong in raw dps as blasters yet apply out 3-5 times farther (depending on the hull) and track almost as well. They do not need a range buff.