Just started playing again after a few year break and one of the changes I’m struggling to get to grips with is the change to turret tracking.
Under the old system turret tracking was given in rads/sec and since the overview displays angular velocity in rads/sec those values could be compared directly. Theoretically you also needed to factor in the turret’s sig resolution to the target’s sig radius, but in reality unless you were trying to hit a smaller ship class with a larger weapon class this was largely irrelevant since in all other cases there was either no effect (same class turret attacking same class target) or an effective tracking bonus (smaller class turret attacking larger class target).
I’ve read everything I can find on the new system and I’m finding it tough going. The Eve Uni page on it gives the formula as terms to the exponent of other terms to the exponent of other terms. Stacked exponents in other words. I’ll struggle to reproduce it but here goes.
I’m not interested in the range part, but what I want is some way to determine the my turret’s effective tracking in rads/sec against a variety of target sigs, so that I can determine what angular velocity to the target I need to maintain in order to obtain an effective hit chance, (all assuming range is within optimal so the range component element is irrelevant.
So assuming it’s safe to discard the range element of the formula, I need to transpose
…to isolate for AngVel so that I can plug the Turret tracking, target sig and desired hit chance and determine what angular velocity I need to maintain in order to achieve that hit chance.
If the tracking formula was a little bit simpler I could probably do it, but I don’t know how to transpose that complex exponent. Can anyone help me out please?
If you take the coefficient of the radian and multiply it by the mass*(2R^2) you come to what is called the optimal drag qualifier.
From there you just apply Mittens’ 3rd Law of Thermodouchebaggery and you should come to a number you are looking for… rounding up of course.
Now I have a secret for you :
there is still turret tracking. It’s just been set at the same value for all turret, that is 40 000 m.
so now if your sig is 40m, your 40% dmg (50% apply) is at angular = your tracking/1000
if sig is 400, your 40% dmg is at angular= your tracking/100
So how do you know the sig ? You don’t. And it was already the case before. Hitting a scalpel or an incursus was never as clear as you make it sound. The formula is EXACTLY the same.
Just to clarify for future readers. Exact formula for turret tracking is kind of irrelevant as you do not know several of variables of equation, nor one could control Angular velocity or range precisely enough. In the end even if you have perfect conditions there is another roll on amount of damage you inflict with each turret independently. That is even in perfect conditions there is quite good chance to score glancing blow
EDIT: believe me. I spent years hacking that formula in Excel and then on test server trying to optimize the damage.
That looks along the lines of what I came up with, although when I tried to apply the logarithm power rule to transpose the exponent I got bollocks results, possibly I was using a natural log function instead of the common log though, I’ll try it again.
I wouldn’t need to calculate anything on the fly though. For a given ship setup I would calculate AngVel for frigate, destroyer, cruiser, BC, and battleship sized sigs and just make a note of it which I could then refer to without having to do any on the fly calculations at all.
It’s not that bad because I have no need to speed tank NPC rats, I’m looking for info I can use in PvP. Player ship classes have reasonably consistent sig radius bands.
The system didn’t change, they just unified the numbers, before you had no way of working out what tracking vs transversal meant, now they use the same numbers, nothing actually changed
Doesn’t that depend on how you define consistent? Every T1 frig has a sig within 6m of 36m with 80% of them within 35-40m. In the absence of anything better that’s a pattern that’s obvious enough for me to work with.
Also the old way could be misread as larger weapons having better tracking due to the system only showing the tracking speed and not taking the signature resolution into account.
Idk why they simplified tracking into a score without making a visible evasion score on overview. Only benefit of the new system is quickly being able to tell that the medium neutrons track ten times better than larges, but isn’t this obvious?
you dont need all those numbers just use your intuition
and youre wrong about same size ships hitting eachother
frigates never could hit other frigates if they didnt pass the tracking check and they still cant
first, this does not take fitting into account. nor mwd. and does not apply to T2 fits.
secondly, this does not take into account that the effect of signature radius is 0.5^(c/sig^2)) with c a constant factoring tracking and angular speed ; then put into x->x²/2+x/2+0.025
The effect of sig being non linear, the span of the sig can not be used based on the linearity of the sig.
if you hit a target with 30m 25% of time , that means that (angular*40k/tracking/sig)=2 .now with a gain of 12m in sig, that’s *1.4 so apply is multiplied by 0.5^1.4⁻² = 3.89 (you hit it 97% of time).
So a target in that range gets hit from 25% to 97%. That means, application goes from 18.1% to 98%. I say this is a multiplication range from 1 to 5.4, so this is not “consistent”.
I pretty much just use the force for all of my blaps. Regarding transversal it used to be directly tied to rads/sec tracking was it not? The new score is just arbitrary.
