These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Are Hurricanes pointless?
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Liang Nuren
No Salvation
Divine Damnation
#41 - 2012-01-14 23:17:34 UTC
Aamrr wrote:
Liang Nuren wrote:
No, the kind of claims the OP is making come from actual combat... which is slightly different than nice theoretical situations where everyone orbits in nice pretty perfect circles...

Which would change their angular velocity, but does nothing to change the interaction between signature resolution, signature radius, and the tracking attribute.

Do you mind making a point that isn't a red herring?


Frankly, all this attacking someone who has some ~math fail~ is a red herring to the point he's trying to make: in actual combat these ships are ******* monsters. Maybe if you guys would stop trying to attack his argument on the basis of ~math~ you might see why the ~math~ actually supports it?

-Liang

I'm an idiot, don't mind me.
Liang Nuren
No Salvation
Divine Damnation
#42 - 2012-01-14 23:18:10 UTC  |  Edited by: Liang Nuren
Tippia wrote:
Liang Nuren wrote:
No, the kind of claims the OP is making come from actual combat... which is slightly different than nice theoretical situations where everyone orbits in nice pretty perfect circles.
The OP claims that large turrets track better than medium turrets. He makes this claim based on shooting large turrets and based on theoretical numbers without any consideration of how they are used by the game engine.

Not only is that a useless source of information, but he is also using a theoretical argument that is based on absolutely nothing. The first part might be excused; the latter part is what's so mind-bogglingly silly, especially since he tried to hide it behind a curtain of them being “practical” just because he reads them from an in-game stat screen.


Tippia, claiming actual combat is theoretical compared to EFT is... well, hilarious. Lol

-Liang

Ed: And if you don't like the OP, then why don't you try talking to me or Kingwood instead? There's quite a few experienced PVPers that are out making waves.

I'm an idiot, don't mind me.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#43 - 2012-01-14 23:21:30 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Liang Nuren wrote:
Frankly, all this attacking someone who has some ~math fail~ is a red herring to the point he's trying to make: in actual combat these ships are ******* monsters. Maybe if you guys would stop trying to attack his argument on the basis of ~math~ you might see why the ~math~ actually supports it?
The problem is that the point he's trying to make is being made by arguments that are completely bogus.

If he had just stuck to combat records, then fine, but he didn't he started out with theoretical arguments and kept throwing in more and more theory that was just blatantly wrong to try to support those first (equally flawed) theoretical arguments.

You're quite right: practice tells us how stuff works in practice, which is why the OP shouldn't try to use theory because he just keeps messing it up and ruining his argument.
Quote:
Tippia, claiming actual combat is theoretical compared to EFT is... well, hilarious.
Good thing that I'm not doing that, then. I'm claiming that he is trying to hide EFT-arguments behind a rhetoric of actual combat, when they are just as theoretical as the the counter-arguments he's trying to disprove.
Quote:
And if you don't like the OP, then why don't you try talking to me or Kingwood instead?
Because you know your stuff — it's the OP that needs to learn why his theoretical arguments don't work.
Liang Nuren
No Salvation
Divine Damnation
#44 - 2012-01-14 23:30:33 UTC
Then maybe you could say something like "I agree - these ships are total monsters! But your math is off because of X, Y, and Z"

Instead you said: "What? The ships are so fragile and weak to tackle and and and and and". I should probably go back and see all the arguments you've made against the topic instead of against the person.

-Liang

I'm an idiot, don't mind me.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#45 - 2012-01-14 23:35:30 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Liang Nuren wrote:
Then maybe you could say something like "I agree - these ships are total monsters! But your math is off because of X, Y, and Z"

Instead you said: "What? The ships are so fragile and weak to tackle and and and and and". I should probably go back and see all the arguments you've made against the topic instead of against the person.
Maybe, but again, look at how it started: he made a whole slew of theoretical claims. You were the one who introduced the practice in the thread. As for arguing the person, yes, I do that after people call me a moron and a bonehead for questioning their theory when they have no clue about the theory in question.

Hell, just look at this thread: hid did the exact same thing, starting out with a slew of theoretical arguments without any concern about something as critical as application (and again, the theory was… questionable).
DarkAegix
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#46 - 2012-01-14 23:37:05 UTC
Guys, guys, guys.
The Talos effectively tracks better than the Cane because it can fit dual webs.
Joe D'Trader
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#47 - 2012-01-14 23:45:10 UTC
Liang, can you link the actual fight, hopefully on eve kill or something?
Liang Nuren
No Salvation
Divine Damnation
#48 - 2012-01-14 23:47:11 UTC
DarkAegix wrote:
Guys, guys, guys.
The Talos effectively tracks better than the Cane because it can fit dual webs.


Practically speaking, the Talos feels like it tracks better because:
- People tend to think they have a 160m sig radius, when in reality they have a 940m sig radius from MWD sig bloom. This means that you would normally expect the Talos to have a > 50% tracking penalty but instead it has a ~50% tracking bonus.
- The large guns have much better range. This means that the Tier 3s tend to be much earlier in the falloff curve compared to the medium gun Tier 2 BCs.
- At a certain point (either because of diminishing returns from 2.7x better tracking, or because of superior range), it just becomes a matter of the Tier 3s just doing so much ******* damage. Even if the Zealot tracks 2.7x better than the Talos, it doesn't have near the raw DPS... and what really matters in this game (in practice) is the ability to deal damage.

Anyway, I was afraid that the Tier 3s would be useless when they were introduced. I too said they would be easily tackled and easily die... and in truth the first few weeks seemed to say that was the way it would stay.

But I was wrong.

-Liang

I'm an idiot, don't mind me.
Liang Nuren
No Salvation
Divine Damnation
#49 - 2012-01-14 23:49:48 UTC
Joe D'Trader wrote:
Liang, can you link the actual fight, hopefully on eve kill or something?


http://kb.heretic-army.biz/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=1449 (the battle report is a bit useless because we get so many kills in Amamake).

http://killboard.eveuniversity.org/?a=kill_related&kll_id=12076

-Liang

I'm an idiot, don't mind me.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#50 - 2012-01-14 23:52:59 UTC
See, that reasoning, I buy, no problem.

The issue is when, instead of making an argument along those lines, we are given claims (based on nothing but single, context-less numbers) that one ship tracks better than the other in any and all situations.
Kingwood
I N E X T R E M I S
Tactical Narcotics Team
#51 - 2012-01-15 00:00:35 UTC
http://genos.killmail.org/?a=kill_related&kll_id=12111572

Drake + Talos, no logistics. Had no problems kiting the Canes at 24 km, and the Tornado went down in about 10 seconds (maybe longer, it just felt like it). However, WN are bad so it doesn't really say much about the abilities of the new tier3 BCs.

The reason tier3 BCs are so good is because they fit so perfectly into today's Eve metagame: Fast, good range, good DPS and low EHP which doesn't really matter.

Drakes/Tengus do keep them in check so I guess we'll have to see how players adapt to them.
Large Collidable Object
morons.
#52 - 2012-01-15 00:01:11 UTC  |  Edited by: Large Collidable Object
Liang Nuren wrote:
DarkAegix wrote:
Guys, guys, guys.
The Talos effectively tracks better than the Cane because it can fit dual webs.


Practically speaking, the Talos feels like it tracks better because:
- People tend to think they have a 160m sig radius, when in reality they have a 940m sig radius from MWD sig bloom. This means that you would normally expect the Talos to have a > 50% tracking penalty but instead it has a ~50% tracking bonus.

-Liang


What on earth does a ships signature radius have to do with its tracking? No matter if I swap 'they' for canes or zealots, or 'signature radius' for sig resolution, I can't make any sense of that sentence...

[edit] - ah - 'they' refers to 'people' nvm
You know... [morons.](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4gjOx65yD5A)
Liang Nuren
No Salvation
Divine Damnation
#53 - 2012-01-15 00:06:44 UTC
Large Collidable Object wrote:
Liang Nuren wrote:
DarkAegix wrote:
Guys, guys, guys.
The Talos effectively tracks better than the Cane because it can fit dual webs.


Practically speaking, the Talos feels like it tracks better because:
- People tend to think they have a 160m sig radius, when in reality they have a 940m sig radius from MWD sig bloom. This means that you would normally expect the Talos to have a > 50% tracking penalty but instead it has a ~50% tracking bonus.

-Liang


What on earth does a ships signature radius have to do with its tracking? No matter if I swap 'they' for canes or zealots, or 'signature radius' for sig resolution, I can't make any sense of that sentence...


Turning on your MWD balloons your sig radius, which means that people track you better. This means that while you might expect BS guns to have a > 50% tracking penalty against you, they actually have ~50% tracking bonus towards you. I don't see whats unclear about it, but that's undoubtedly because I wrote it. :(

-Liang

I'm an idiot, don't mind me.
Cyzlaki
Pandemic Horde Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#54 - 2012-01-15 00:13:29 UTC
Yeah, I'm an idiot because I play the game and know what I'm talking about instead of arguing useless theoretical math formulas on a forum.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#55 - 2012-01-15 00:14:02 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Liang Nuren wrote:
Turning on your MWD balloons your sig radius, which means that people track you better. This means that while you might expect BS guns to have a > 50% tracking penalty against you, they actually have ~50% tracking bonus towards you. I don't see whats unclear about it, but that's undoubtedly because I wrote it. :(
The referent was a bit unclear, that's all — reading it quickly, it looks like you're saying that the Talos has an easier time tracking because it (the Talos) blooms its sig, when what you mean to say is that the target blooms its sig.

So instead of having a 400:160 sigres-to-sigrad ratio (cutting the effective tracking more than in half), it's actually 400:940 (more than doubling the tracking). Then again, this goes for all ships, so the same holds true for any medium turret you compare it against — they get a 125:940 ratio instead of 125:160, so the “tracking bonus” applies to them as well.

Also, it might have been a bit unclear what you got the 160m number from, not that it really matters for the overall argument.
Large Collidable Object
morons.
#56 - 2012-01-15 00:16:58 UTC
Liang Nuren wrote:


Turning on your MWD balloons your sig radius, which means that people track you better. This means that while you might expect BS guns to have a > 50% tracking penalty against you, they actually have ~50% tracking bonus towards you. I don't see whats unclear about it, but that's undoubtedly because I wrote it. :(

-Liang



See above edit - i misunderstood you because I thought 'they' refers to any ship mentioned in the thread and the numbers not fitting any of them, whereas it referred to 'the people' and you just making a random example.
I understand what you meant now, yet i doubt there are many people you encounter in pvp that are not aware of MWD sig bloom and act accordingly (ie fit an AB or only pulse their MWD until they're in the desired position...), but that's just a wild guess, of course.
You know... [morons.](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4gjOx65yD5A)
Cyzlaki
Pandemic Horde Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#57 - 2012-01-15 00:17:13 UTC  |  Edited by: Cyzlaki
Liang Nuren wrote:
Then again, this goes for all ships, so the same holds true for any medium turret you compare it against — they get a 125:940 ratio instead of 125:160, so the “tracking bonus” applies to them as well.

But the medium turrets already have good tracking and less than half the DPS, so which do you think appears to benefit more from this, the large turrets or the medium? Even if medium turrets hit for wrecking every shot the large guns are still going to out perform them.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#58 - 2012-01-15 00:26:36 UTC
Cyzlaki wrote:
But the medium turrets already have good tracking and less than half the DPS, so which do you think appears to benefit more from this, the large turrets or the medium?
…and yet, the medium turret does indeed have better tracking.
Quote:
Even if medium turrets hit for wrecking every shot the large guns are still going to out perform them.
Actually, if the medium turret gets all wrecking shots, it will outperform a large turret that does twice as much damage…

…then again, wrecking shots are not affected by tracking.
Cyzlaki
Pandemic Horde Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#59 - 2012-01-15 00:26:40 UTC
Name Family Name wrote:
So - the Gallente Tier 3 BC outperforms the Minmatar Tier 2 at speed and EFT DPS whereas dealing damage is pretty much it's only role whereas the Hurricane is more versatile and tanks better...

Sounds like it's working as intended.

No one flies the cane because it has a 'good tank'.. lol. So that leaves with you 'more versatile'. Which isn't really saying anything other than it can fit neuts. Which a Curse does much better so it doesn't really have a role there. I guess it can kill frigs good. But so can frigs, destroyers, and cruisers.

Hurricane is pointless.
Cyzlaki
Pandemic Horde Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#60 - 2012-01-15 00:28:02 UTC
Cyzlaki wrote:
The medium turrets already have good tracking and less than half the DPS, so which do you think appears to benefit more from this, the large turrets or the medium?

I ask you again.