These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Ships & Modules

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Blastos

First post
Author
Cyzlaki
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#41 - 2012-01-13 02:26:14 UTC
Sebastian N Cain wrote:
Liang Nuren wrote:
Aamrr wrote:
Would this be a bad time to bring up the fact that while the Talos does use blasters (which give it good tracking) and has a tracking bonus (which gives it better tracking still), this still doesn't make up for the fact that it's using large guns, which have a poor signature resolution?

That said, the Talos would totally rip apart that Hurricane. The trouble isn't BCs, it's tinier stuff.


No, I actually expected Tippia to make that comment when discussing tracking. I assure you, however, that the Talos has no trouble killing frigates.

-Liang

Ed: It could probably be held down by a 10km/s Ares at 50km. Just as anything else. :P

You are fighting too much against noobs, this is why you feel so pro.
You know, noobs don´t really know how tracking works. This is why they are happily turning on their mwd to get all that shiny speed. However, with that signature bloom they are getting the signature of a BC (for frigates, with cruisers this is far worse), which is -as was already mentioned- too much against large guns. An AB frigate or cruiser would kick your ass.

mwd is for pve, in pvp you use afterburners.

And then there's this *******.

Since when was it so popular to lie blatantly on the forums? Douche
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#42 - 2012-01-13 02:27:25 UTC
Liang Nuren wrote:
Do it, and then explain some ways in which a ship might mitigate having 400/125 worse tracking. :)
Sure, but that's not what he's saying, now is it? Blink

He's simply comparing tracking speeds, which only tells half of the story.
Cyzlaki wrote:
Wow this guy's a bonehead.
…who, unlike you, understands how tracking works. Do you want me to explain it to you? Or would you like to tone your attitude down a notch so you don't look like the complete idiot you are when someone else asks and I demonstrate why your numbers show the exact opposite of what your ignorant ass think they do?
Liang Nuren
No Salvation
#43 - 2012-01-13 02:28:59 UTC
Sebastian N Cain wrote:
Liang Nuren wrote:
Aamrr wrote:
Would this be a bad time to bring up the fact that while the Talos does use blasters (which give it good tracking) and has a tracking bonus (which gives it better tracking still), this still doesn't make up for the fact that it's using large guns, which have a poor signature resolution?

That said, the Talos would totally rip apart that Hurricane. The trouble isn't BCs, it's tinier stuff.


No, I actually expected Tippia to make that comment when discussing tracking. I assure you, however, that the Talos has no trouble killing frigates.

-Liang

Ed: It could probably be held down by a 10km/s Ares at 50km. Just as anything else. :P

You are fighting too much against noobs, this is why you feel so pro.
You know, noobs don´t really know how tracking works. This is why they are happily turning on their mwd to get all that shiny speed. However, with that signature bloom they are getting the signature of a BC (for frigates, with cruisers this is far worse), which is -as was already mentioned- too much against large guns. An AB frigate or cruiser would kick your ass.

mwd is for pve, in pvp you use afterburners.


It would be even worse for an AB frig, actually.

-Liang

I'm an idiot, don't mind me.

Cyzlaki
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#44 - 2012-01-13 02:29:18 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Liang Nuren wrote:
Do it, and then explain some ways in which a ship might mitigate having 400/125 worse tracking. :)
Sure, but that's not what he's saying, now is it? Blink

He's simply comparing tracking speeds, which only tells half of the story.
Cyzlaki wrote:
Wow this guy's a bonehead.
…who, unlike you, understands how tracking works. Do you want me to explain it to you? Or would you like to tone your attitude down a notch so you don't look like the complete idiot you are when someone else asks and I demonstrate why your numbers show the exact opposite of what your ignorant ass think they do?

2009 was the last time you pvp'd. your opinion is invalid. The game has changed bub, now run along and try to impress some kiddies with your math
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#45 - 2012-01-13 02:35:30 UTC
Cyzlaki wrote:
The game has changed bub
The tracking formula hasn't, and it still makes that Zealot track 2.7× better than the Talos. Do you want me to explain to you why?
Liang Nuren
No Salvation
#46 - 2012-01-13 02:37:16 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Cyzlaki wrote:
The game has changed bub
The tracking formula hasn't, and it still makes that Zealot track 2.7× better than the Talos. Do you want me to explain to you why?


No, but you could explain why theoretical knowledge is better than practical knowledge? You could also explain when was the last time that someone you know independently verified the tracking formula?

-Liang

I'm an idiot, don't mind me.

Khrage
#47 - 2012-01-13 02:39:37 UTC
so glad to see where this thread went...
Liang Nuren
No Salvation
#48 - 2012-01-13 02:41:58 UTC
I dunno Khrage, I think its time that people stopped living in EFT and started playing the game. Its all well and good to argue from the theoretical foundation that EFT gives, but there's entirely too little weight given to actual practical results. EFT and numerical analysis should be a basis for forming a suspicion of how things work - not the final arbiter of who is right on these intarweb forumz.

-Liang

I'm an idiot, don't mind me.

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#49 - 2012-01-13 02:42:24 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Liang Nuren wrote:
No, but you could explain why theoretical knowledge is better than practical knowledge?
It isn't, but that doesn't particularly matter. The problem is that this poor fellow is making incorrect claims due to his ignorance of the mechanic, and thinking himself greatly informed for doing so.

I don't particularly care for being called a bonehead for understanding something he has undeniably no clue about.

You know full well that his comparison is entirely inaccurate. You also know that I know how to mitigate for his error. It's a rather pointless distraction from the simple fact that he doesn't understand how tracking works and why his comparison fails.
Liang Nuren
No Salvation
#50 - 2012-01-13 02:44:48 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Liang Nuren wrote:
No, but you could explain why theoretical knowledge is better than practical knowledge?
It isn't, but that doesn't particularly matter. The problem is that this poor fellow is making incorrect claims due to his ignorance of the mechanic, and thinking himself greatly informed for doing so.

I don't particularly care for being called a bonehead for understanding something he has undeniably no clue about.


What I'm trying to point out is that both of you are making exactly the same argument from different perspectives. You're wondering when he's going to grow a clue about how the math behind Eve works and he's wondering when you're going to grow a clue about how the game is actually played

-Liang

I'm an idiot, don't mind me.

Liang Nuren
No Salvation
#51 - 2012-01-13 02:45:59 UTC
Tippia wrote:

You know full well that his comparison is entirely inaccurate. You also know that I know how to mitigate for his error. It's a rather pointless distraction from the simple fact that he doesn't understand how tracking works and why his comparison fails.


Ok well I think we can both agree that *I* know how the math behind eve works, at least reasonably well. And *I* am telling you that the practical application is a bit closer to his assertions than yours.

In game, I mean.

:)

-Liang

I'm an idiot, don't mind me.

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#52 - 2012-01-13 02:54:16 UTC
Liang Nuren wrote:
Ok well I think we can both agree that *I* know how the math behind eve works, at least reasonably well. And *I* am telling you that the practical application is a bit closer to his assertions than yours.
I'd dispute that because your practical application involves a factor that he seems quite oblivious to in his comparison… He may very well be able to make use of it in-game, but I am quite confident in saying that he doesn't know why. P
Quote:
What I'm trying to point out is that both of you are making exactly the same argument from different perspectives.
Not quite. He made a claim about tracking speed which is blatantly false. In practice, you can overcome the difference the reality of the situation creates, but that doesn't make his claim any less false.

I'll grant you that it took a while to grep what you were alluding to, but he wasn't making anything even resembling that kind of argument.
Cyzlaki
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#53 - 2012-01-13 03:01:44 UTC
Mad cuz you bad
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#54 - 2012-01-13 03:03:21 UTC
Cyzlaki wrote:
Mad cuz you bad

So… do you want me to tell you how tracking works, or do you prefer to remain ignorant?
A simple “yes” is all that's needed.
Cyzlaki
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#55 - 2012-01-13 03:23:10 UTC
This whole time you have assumed I do not know about signature radius and resolution, when you should have been wondering why I might have left that out of the discussion. Keep thinking you know more, when you don't even play or fly the ship in question. Stay mad.
Yan Li Mae
Doomheim
#56 - 2012-01-13 03:25:57 UTC
Posting in a Liang/Thick-Squad megathread.
Arcosian
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#57 - 2012-01-13 03:27:59 UTC
Posting in a Liang-Tippia forum battle

Epic thread is Epic
J Kunjeh
#58 - 2012-01-13 03:28:17 UTC
Tippia doesn't actually play Eve, she's too busy playing the forums.

"The world as we know it came about through an anomaly (anomou)" (The Gospel of Philip, 1-5) 

Aamrr
#59 - 2012-01-13 03:36:22 UTC
Forgive me, because I don't actually fly Gallente ships and I'm genuinely trying to learn something here. I understand that signature resolution and tracking are multiplied together in the turret accuracy formula, and for practical usage are combined to get the relevant number.

I also know that the blasters and lasers being discussed here work in entirely different ranges, and a web or two can solve that problem without much issue -- nevermind the difficulty of maintaining transversal when you're inside blaster range.

Is that all that's going on here? At the risk of ruining this fine debate, I would actually like to see the logic behind the arguments.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#60 - 2012-01-13 03:37:17 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Cyzlaki wrote:
This whole time you have assumed I do not know about signature radius and resolution
…because you demonstrated that you quite obviously don't, otherwise you wouldn't have made such an utterly moronic claim as saying the Zealot tracked worse than the Talos; calling me a moron when I corrected you; and “resting [your] case” when I told you that it couldn't be determined by tracking numbers alone.

It's not an assumption when you so willingly demonstrate your ignorance as a fact.

By the way, in your example, ship B (and the Zealot) has the better tracking. Do you know why? Or do you want me to tell you how tracking works?