Warfare & Tactics

The idea of maneuver mechanics is to fly your ship in a fashion that benefits you and hinders your opponent. In order to understand how you want to maneuver your ship, you must first understand how damage is transferred in this game. I call this damage mechanics.

There are two key lessons that I teach under damage mechanics: Missiles and Guns. They transfer damage differently, so one must maneuver differently in order to beat them.

Lesson 1:

The first lesson I start people with is missiles because they are a simple start to damage mechanics.

Damage is transferred by missiles by an equation which has 2 components (not counting the target's resists).

The two factors that determine how much damage is transferred by a missile strike are 1) speed and 2) size.

The size factor works as a comparison of the target's absolute velocity and the missile's explosion velocity. The principle is this... if you're going slower than a missile's explosion velocity, you take full damage. If you go faster than it, then you take reduced damage.

To determine how much damage gets through the speed factor, you simple divide the explosion velocity by the ship's velocity (*this factor can never be greater than 1). So, for an explosion velocity of 100, a ship going less than 100 will take full damage. A ship going 200 will have a factor of 100/200 or 50% damage. In this fashion, you can GREATLY reduce damage taken by missiles just by keeping your speed up.

The size factor works similarly. The idea is that if your ship "signature radius" is smaller than the missile's "explosion radius" you'll take reduced damage. If your signature radius is equal in size or larger to a missile's explosion radius, you will take full damage. An example of this would be if you had a missile with an explosion radius of 100 and a ship with a signature radius of 100 (or larger), the target would take full damage. If you had an explosion radius of 100 and a ship with a signature radius of 50, the target would take 50% damage based on size.

Now, once you get these two factors, you have to multiple them together to figure out how much damage gets to the ships tank. In the cases of our examples, each example factor reduced damage by 50%. Therefore, .5 x .5 = .25... so if those examples were true, damage would be reduced to 25% of the original damage.

The take away for maneuver mechanics will ultimately be that higher speed and smaller size will help you survive against missiles.

Lesson 2, Guns:

I am not teaching you the actual gun equation. Gun damage works on probabilities and is reasonably complicated. I am instead teaching you a simplified version of the gun equation that will help you make good decisions in fights. It accounts (pretty accurately) for what you'll see when you start fighting.

No, you cannot calculate actual damage outputs with it. There isn't a lot of value in calculating that during fights. You just need to know your factors.

For guns, there are 3 factors. They are 1) size 2) angular speed and 3) range

Size - The size factor works exactly like it does in missiles. It is a comparison of "gun resolution" and "signature radius".

ex: a ship with a signature radius of 40 being shot by a gun with a gun resolutaion of 100 would take 40% damage from the size factor.

Angular speed - This factor is a comparison of the "angular speed" of the target as compared to the tracking speed of the guns. Angular speed in this game is measured in "radians/second". You can display angular speed on your overview if you want to get familiar with it.

So, a ship orbiting at 2 radians/second around a ship with guns that track at 1 radian/second would take 50% damage.

An important note here is that the closer your orbit, the higher your angular speed and the lower your absolute speed. You've probably noticed that when you orbit at 500, you fly about half speed. At that range, your angular speed is as high as you can get it... great for protecting against guns... but you're vulnerable to missiles at the low speeds you will be flying.

The last factor is range:
From the tip of the gun out to optimal range... the gun will do 100% damage for the range factor. From optimal to optimal + 1.5x falloff, the gun damage reduces linearly to 0 (approximately).

So, imagine you have a gun with an optimal range of 5k and a falloff of 10k. From 0k to 5k range, you do 100% damage. From 5k to 20k, your damage reduces to 0. At 12.5k, you do 50% damage. Make sense?

Now, just like missiles, you multiply those factors together. So if your size factor is 50% (sig resulution 50, gun resolution 100), your speed factor is 80% (angular speed 1 radian / second, gun tracking speed .8 radians / second) and your range factor is 20% (as described above)... then you would calculate that you should take .5 x .8 x .2 and get .08 or 8% damage.

So, to control inbound damage... you need to control one or more of those factors. You generally can only control 1 of them at a time.

Generally speaking, when you're fighting close range guns you will want to control range and when you're fighting long range guns you want to control angular velocity.

ex: you're not going to circle a rifter fast enough to outrun it gun tracking, so you're best off trying to control range. If you're fighting a battleship in a frigate, it wont' be able to track you so you're best off trying to keep your angular high so it won't hit you.

Lesson 4: Propulsion

This is a short lesson, but a vital one.

Afterburners increase speed by about 2.5x and leave you small.

Microwarpdrives increase speed by 5x, but also increase signature radius by 5x. Another disadvantage of the MWD is that a warp scrambler will turn it off.


So, lets use the example of trying to increase the tank of a frigate against battleship sized weapons. If I use an afterburner, I decrease inbound damage with my increased speed in accordance with the above equations.

If I use MWD I decrease inbound damage for speed by 5x if I'm going maximum speed, but my 5x increased signature radius will increase the inbound damage (if a large weapon is firing at me) by the same margin.

note: If I have my MWD on and I'm going slowly, my frigate will be the size of a large cruiser and won't have enough speed to mitigate the damage. A battleship can easily insta-pop a frigate that makes this mistake.

Alternately, if you're in a Raven (for example" and a MWD frigate tackles you and orbits at 500... do not warp scramble it. It will be very susceptible to your large weapons system with the MWD on. A warp scrambler will turn the MWD off and you don't want that.

So if I think a speed tank with a MWD will decrease inbound damage, I need to realize that it only decreases inbound damage if the weapons hitting me are small enough to max out the size factor (an explosion radius of 40 vs a signature radius of 40..., the weapon won't do more damage when your signature radius goes up so you can mitigate this type of damage with a MWD very well).

The other disadvantage of a MWD is that it can be turned off by a warp scrambler (but not a warp disruptor). That means that if you think your tackler is going to survive an engagement with only a MWD for propulsion... you better be ready to lose the use of that MWD when you tackle (assuming you are within 11k or so).

The important take-away here is that MWDs complicate maneuver mechanics. They are a vital part of pvp, but you need to realize that if used incorrectly, they can rapidly cause fatal results.

Afterburners always increase your tank. In most cases, you'll get a greater increase in tank from an afterburner than from any single tank module (as long as you use it correctly). There really is no downside to an afterburner... except that a well flown ship with a MWD can kite you and get the kill.

Lesson 6- Making a coherent build

I found it tremendously frustrating when I tried to get into PvP because people would tell me "just fly a rifter and you'll be fine" or "just use a build off battleclinic".

No ship or build will make you successful.

Those people do not know what they're doing. The guys I flew with in Light Adama were engineers, as am I. (Shoutout to Quaaid and Nolimit Soldier). We were pretty successful in that corp, as well as in other corps. Here is the view we shared on building ships.

1) When you build a ship, build it to be good at something. Decide how it will be used before you build it. Then, when you fly it, only use it in the manner in which you intended when you designed it.

What does it mean when a build is not "balanced"?:

Example: Suppose you fit a blaster boat (short range) with a MWD and a warp disruptor(long range point).

You are forcing yourself to engage within scrambler range, which means every time you encounter a ship with a scrambler, you will be dead in the water and they will be able to maneuver (because you have no scram to stop them with).

You will find at MWD speeds, blasters are difficult to use without proper tackle gear. This would be a very bad build in my opinion... but something that you will encounter.

An unbalanced build is what you get when the modules do not compliment each other.


What does balanced look like?

Generally, I recommend balanced builds for new players where all of the pvp modules are of similar range and compliment.

Long Range
If you are going to kite ( a term for staying at range (15-20k) and shooting your opponent), make sure all of your modules support that.
Use weapons that are most effective at 15-20k
Use a MWD
Use a disruptor
Fit for speed tank, use nano mods to ensure you can turn fast enough to stay out of range

note: if you do this, your enemy will try to approach you to get you to turn away from him and then turn away to get you to approach him as he turns back towards you. If he does this right, even though you're trying to hold range at, he can sometimes swing you within 10k so he can grab you or outside 20k so he can escape. Kiting takes practice. It's not easy.

Middle Range
I love mid-range builds because they are so versatile. Mid range builds are builds that focus on controlling range in all engagements. These builds plan to fight at 7-10k.
They usually use a scram to ensure they shut down MWDs.
They usually have at least one web, so ensure they can control range.
They usually use an afterburner.
They use weapons that are most effective at 7-10k. I like rockets for this. With rockets, you can do the same damage regardless of how close you are. That means if your enemy has long range guns, you can orbit close. If your enemy has short range guns you can orbit far out.

These builds need to be pretty tanky, because you often have to neut out your opponent in order to get to mid range. It can be worth dropping some DPS in order to get a neut or two.
A neut is important on these builds, as many close range brawler builds will have webs as well.

The traditional Battle Badger is actually a good example of this build. It was tanky, could fit a couple webs, scram, and a neut with one gun. It wasn't much to look at in close range, but it would get a solid tackle, neut out a frigate, and then go to 6-8k where it could slowly kill most frigates (over the course of about 10 minutes).

These same principles are applicable to frigates as well.

Short Range

These builds are usually very high DPS.
These ships demand that you engage up close, so a MWD runs a strong risk of being turned off by a scrambler. If you encounter someone with a MWD and want to kill them... you will need a scrambler.
Because this build is so popular, most engagements in this ship will be a close range DPS competition. You need a scrambler, probably a web, I recommend an afterburner, and you need gobs of DPS and tank.

These builds are often very weak against neuts (thorax, for example).

If you need a good version of this build, look anywhere on battleclinic.

I don't consider this build to be terribly artful. This ship has no options. Once you dedicate a build to this, your only option for the kill is to orbit at 500 and turn everything on. If that doesn't work, you lose the ship, End of story.


Take away:
Design your ship to engage at a pre-decided distance. Make sure all the modules support your maneuver and engagement plan. Then only engage in the manner in which you designed your ship to win.

Lesson 8 - ECM

It took me a while to really figure out how ECM works. I figured I'd put the explanation out for those who are interested.

The first thing you need to know about ECM is that it "FORCES" deagression. If you think you're going to win station games with ECM equipment, you're going to find that in the majority of instances, you're not going to be able to close the kill.

In high sec space, most fights happen on stations or gates. Those are the locations where people usually meet. So when you force deagression on those locations, you're naturally helping your target manage his "gate/station" timer so that he'll just dock/jump through.

Because of that, I don't recommend anyone who's out for killmails spends a lot of time in ECM boats (though there is an exception to every rule... ECM boats can be used very well).

Now, with that disclaimer out of the way, I recommend that everyone who is out for killmails keeps an ECM boat or two on standby at all times. They have some valuable applications.

Here is how ECM works:
Your probability of being successful for any given 20 second jam cycle is equal to the "jam strength of the ECM Module" / "sensor strength of the target".

So Imagine that I have a single ECM module with 7 points of gravimetric jam strength and my target has a sensor strength of 10 gravimetric points. In this case, I have a 70% chance of success with each jam cycle.

Most folks have no trouble figuring that out, but figuring out how that relates to multiple jammers is slightly more complex. Imagine you have 3 such jammers and you're trying to perma-jam the same target. For each consecutive jammer you're going to use, you apply it's probability of success(against the target) to the remaining percentage chance of failure (after the last jammer probability was applied.

So, in example. In this example, 1 Jammer gives me 70% chance of success. Adding a second jammer means that I can add 70% of the 30% chance the first jammer couldn't cover. That means with the addition of a second jammer, i now have a 91% chance. That is the 70% chance of success I had with 1 jammer, and 70% of the 30% chance of failure.

When I add the third jammer, I take the scenario I had with 2 jammers (91% chance of success), and I add 70% of the 9% chance of failure. (which means I get an additional 6.3% chance of success).

That means my overall chance of success is 97.3% per 20 second cycle. I consider anything in the 95% area to be truly perma-jammed. The assumption here is that you'll fail one jam cycle every 20 cycles(which is what 95% chance should equate to).

Always have a back-up plan in an ECM ship. You will drop jam cycles. Be ready for it.

Here is an aside that'll probably get me ridiculed, but I used to love to fly the Griffin. It's such a goofy ship, anyone will fight it. It's also a fun and volatile way to play (I've still got one, they're neat as hell).

Since pretty much everyone on the planet loves Rifters, I want to mention that Minmatar ships are typically weak in the sensor strength area. Because you can kill a Rifter in under a minute with a griffin, you can win GOBS of frigate fights with a Griffin (without typically losing kills by forcing deagression).

In addition, you can (though hard) use ECM to stall in multiple enemy scenarios. I once won a fight against a thorax and a cormorant (not skilled opponents) at the same time in a griffin. Here is the KM. In this case I used maneuver to protect myself from the thorax and ECM to protect from the cormorant. No, they're not great fits... but I was flying a griffin.

http://eve.battleclinic.com/killboard/engagement.php?id=10607371#involvedPilots

If you have any questions, please let me know.
Mo

Are you sure? Here is what they say:

Total gun range is optimal + 2 * falloff. Beyond that your chance to hit is zero.
within optimal = chance to hit = 100%
optimal + falloff = chance to hit = 50%
optimal + 2 * falloff = chance to hit = 0%

http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=1238857

So, for example, say you're firing a gun fitted which has 20km optimal range and 6km falloff at a target which is moving steadily straight away from you (zero traversal), starting at only 1km range. You will (if nothing else intervenes) always hit a target that is less than 20km (your optimal range) from you; your chance to hit will gradually decrease as your target moves between 20km and 26km (your optimal + falloff) from you, reaching 50% at 26km. By 32km (optimal + twice your falloff) your chance to hit will be down to 6.25% and decreasing.

http://wiki.eveuniversity.org/Gunnery_Guide

So your damage reduces to zero after 25k, and you do 50% damage at 15k.

5km optimal + 5km falloff = 15km maximum dps range

This is true.

No

50% hit chance, not 50% damage ofc! DPS average decrease is sharper as hit chance decreases to 50%. Thank you, I stand corrected.

Respect my authoritah!
In other words - learn to read

Good write-up but I would like a clarification on damage reduction vs. to-hit reduction in post #2: Guns:

Concerning Falloff it is already somewhat discussed but doesn´t high angular speed vs. low tracking reduce to-hit chance as well as opposed to "only" damage reduction?
Similar question on size: Can a Battleship always hit (albeit with little applied damage) a directly approching Frigate inside optimal or is there a to-miss chance as well based on differences of size?
Also something I have wondered for some time now: Is the "difference in size" factor only a one way thing? Example: Would there be a difference if a Frigate shoots a battleship with MWD on vs. a battleship without one?