Ok what happened to tracking stat for turrets?

Recently came back after a few years break.

The old system had the tracking stat in rad/s which I could directly map against my targets angular velocity as that is also rad/s.

What the heck is the tracking stat supposed to be now?

Are they trying to make EvE into space DnD?
3 main things would affect the chance to hit/do damage.
Range. optimal and falloff, we can measure and control those (to a certain extent depending on circumstance)
Sig Resolution of weapon v target. Simple the small the weapon v the larger the target the more likely you will hit. (think of shotgun v bean tin at 30m)
And tracking. If my gun track at 2 rad/s and my target is travelling at 3 rad/s I’m very likely going to miss as my turrets just can’t keep up with them.

Decent smart pilot could mitigate the main factors that cause then issues to maximise damage application/output. But now with this single stat is feels more like ‘roll the D20 and compare against the targets THAC0’

Anyone got a simple explanation as all the stuff I’ve read is just making it more complicated to say a simple thing like, get in range, pick the right sized gun and don’t spin too fast!

While I assume the mechanics are basically the same it does mean that the cloud around what I have to match to get decent application is more confusing.

Just a side note, but don’t ever read patch notes because they usually contain secrets of the universe that mankind isn’t ready for.

yeah like I’m going to read 3+ years of patch notes that are often missing vital info…

glad to see the eve o forums haven’t changed much :stuck_out_tongue:


ok so mapping my tracking to my targets angular velocity was useless?

Hmm I guess all those fights I had where I had to manually work my movement to make my angular velocity drop enough so my turrets could track was just a waste then…

turret combat was simply a mechanism to figure out what was causing you to miss.

If you are in range and your turret sig smaller than your target sig then tracking which was a stat that WAS measure in rads/s which is angular velocity was the most important stat to work out if you were hitting your target. Without this my time as a frig pilot in FW would have been way way more difficult,

But now I have to mentally keep converting figures in my head when you can track all the others directly… seems like they are trying to dumb it down by adding complexity…

Ah well I guess I’ll just have to relearn the new numbers ……

This you see was easy… I checked my weapons sig stat and compared it to my expected target sig stat.

See simple comparisons of all the variables that constituted turret combat metrics…

Range, Sig and Tracking…

why take two and drop it into a single abstract figure that you can’t directly compare for combat without maths is just silly from as system analytic point of view.

(post withdrawn by author, will be automatically deleted in 24 hours unless flagged)

right so I compare a simple system where you actually compare directly stats and figures versus an abstract system that has no direct comparison and you get grumpy at me cos I’m saying it a dumb system… Go figure.

But no need to get rude about it. I’m only asking as it was a fairly big change in how I would carry out my combat operations now I have to keep track of abstract numbers rather than compare direct stats… but hey kids nowadays obviously don’t think literally anymore… ah well…

Actually it’s not useless. Most of the time, of the three variables you can only change 1. By manual piloting, you were able to quickly see if you were lowering you’re targets angular velocity enough to allow your guns to track. You couldn’t change your guns, nor your targets signature (since for most of it’s life Target painters were considered the most useless form of ew - now ecm has that title) so the old tracking number gave you instant feedback on the results of your actions - it’s why many of us have angular velocity selected as an overview column.

While I agree multiplying by 1000 or 100 is child’s play, I don’t have my x325 tables memorized. While I agree the new number makes is very easy to compare guns. It does not directly tell me if my 425’s can track that frigate as we’re both maneuvering (we now use, “if I get down to this…”). It doesn’t matter in the end, what’s done is done. I’m sure the OP will learn the new system.

1 Like

Again you are showing a lack of understanding here.

If you can compare directly the stats you need to manage then you have a simpler system than an abstract number reference.

I will learn the new system as apart from the numbers now mean way less than they ever did before the mechanics seem to be performing the same.

As a systems guy this change really is devolving the process to a Dungeon and Dragon dice roll mechanism…

Ah well…

Also just had a look at the new stats.
200m AC II has a base stat of 315 (in Pyfa) now x 1000 to give me 315000… what the heck is that supposed to represent? Which stat do I have to compare that to so I can actually make an impact the outcome of hitting the target?
Some of the scale representation of to hit chance v a targets signature that I have no idea about?

Now under the old system.
Range between 1200m and 5200m. Guess what I’m orbiting at 1km. So range has best chance to hit
My sig was 40, compared to 30-40 (unmodified) of my expected targets. So I’m not getting 100% chance to hit there ok so I mitigate that by
Keeping the angular velocity below the 0.25 rad/s (whatever the old stat number was) that my tracking had.

mechanics seems not to have changed but it’s much more difficult to explain to someone new how to track and manage what you do now than it ever was…

LOL and you know they have those fitted how?
Again showing a complete lack of how systems of comparison actually work.

Old system
compare 2 directly measurable known values. Range and angular/tracking
make a guestimate on target sig res.

New system
Get in range and hope for the best as they isn’t anything you to measure or compare.

No wonder people are more afraid than ever of combat in EvE.

Swapped it to PvP as people here will have a better understanding of the old v new system.

Well they would have back in the day when I last played :slight_smile:

I think you must be mistaken…

A value that you know (rad/s) and can directly compare to your target is useless??? You one of the F1 button mashing crowd?

So the old system you can track and compare 2 out of the 3 main factors yet under the new system you can only compare and track 1 yet the old system was useless… you and I have a very different definition of useless

So you are saying the new value is just as useless then seeing as it has completely no value that you can compare it to?

Yet being able to compare 2 known and measurable value is more useless than only being able to compare 1?

I agree with OP that the old information would be better to have than the new information and that CCP made a bad, but well-intentioned, decision in making this change.

The old system - You could directly correlate the turret tracking (as it was measured in radians/sec) to an overview column, and you could put the Size column in the overview as well in order to put in a ballpark guess as to whether your tracking number would be a bit high or low for any given target.

The new system - What the hell can I actually do with this number? There’s no real-time information in the overview (or anywhere at all) where I can cross-check whether this number indicates that I can expect to get hits on a target. I’m left completely in the dark with respect to any specific target in situ.

CCPlease admit you did a bad and either (a) revert this change or (b) implement some new gui element (in the overview or otherwise) which helps a player determine when opening fire might actually hit a target.

1 Like

This topic was automatically closed 90 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.