These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
12Next page
 

distance and chance to hit for guns
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Bagatur I
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#1 - 2016-08-30 12:46:46 UTC  |  Edited by: Bagatur I
I have been using missiles up to now (and drones), but am thinking now to try guns. so I was reading about damage application for guns, the damage formula to be precise. and on one website I saw a statement that at 2 x falloff (+optimal of course) and more, the chance to hit is hard-capped at 0%. is that so? while at that distance the chance to hit is pretty small, it is still good if you can or cannot get wrecked at that distance...

edit: edited wrong number
Donnachadh
United Allegiance of Undesirables
#2 - 2016-08-30 13:42:10 UTC  |  Edited by: Donnachadh
Wrecking is a little odd in that they are not specifically linked to your chance to hit. In fact they are essentially calculated entirely separately.
Hopefully this Turret Damage article from the EvE Uni Wiki will help you understand all things turrets. Section 2.4 title "Perfect Hits" is what you want to help answer your specific question.
Bagatur I
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#3 - 2016-08-30 13:55:57 UTC
Donnachadh wrote:
Wrecking is a little odd in that they are not specifically linked to your chance to hit. In fact they are essentially calculated entirely separately.
Hopefully this Turret Damage article from the EvE Uni Wiki will help you understand all things turrets. Section 2.4 title "Perfect Hits" is what you want to help answer your specific question.


I read that, and many other sources. they dont answer my question.
and wrecking hits dont require any calculations, unless you call comparing a random number to 0.01 and multiplying base damage by 3 calculations.
Zhilia Mann
Tide Way Out Productions
#4 - 2016-08-30 14:46:38 UTC
No. There is no cap at optimal + 2xfalloff. It's just 6.25% as predicted. Not sure who came up with that little gem.
Bagatur I
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#5 - 2016-08-30 15:01:59 UTC
Zhilia Mann wrote:
No. There is no cap at optimal + 2xfalloff. It's just 6.25% as predicted. Not sure who came up with that little gem.

this website claims that:
Quote:
What the tracking formula doesn't reveal, though, is that CTH is hard-capped at two times falloff range. Any beyond that distance automatically receives a CTH of 0%.


also this post on these very forums basically states the same - beyond optimal + 2 x falloff chance to hit is hard capped to 0.
Reinhardt Kreiss
TetraVaal Tactical Group
#6 - 2016-08-30 15:05:13 UTC
A few things.

- "true" falloff is what is stated in EFT (or other fitting program) and if you rightclick > info on the turret. If you mouseover the turret icon while in space the falloff it states there is not actual falloff, it's optimal +1 x falloff, because CCP doesn't do logic.

To get the true falloff either check info stats on the turret or from the mouseover detract optimal from the "faloff"


- at optimal +2 x falloff you have 0 chance to hit. However, wrecking chance still exist and is fixed at 1% resulting in some 3% damage (due to above average damage of a wrecking shot)
Zhilia Mann
Tide Way Out Productions
#7 - 2016-08-30 15:25:00 UTC
Bagatur I wrote:
Zhilia Mann wrote:
No. There is no cap at optimal + 2xfalloff. It's just 6.25% as predicted. Not sure who came up with that little gem.

this website claims that:
Quote:
What the tracking formula doesn't reveal, though, is that CTH is hard-capped at two times falloff range. Any beyond that distance automatically receives a CTH of 0%.


also this post on these very forums basically states the same - beyond optimal + 2 x falloff chance to hit is hard capped to 0.


Shrug. Ask Tippia? I've never observed that effect and while normally I'd take Tippia as a trusted source it doesn't match my experience. If in doubt, test it.
Bagatur I
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#8 - 2016-08-30 15:53:38 UTC
Reinhardt Kreiss wrote:
A few things.

- "true" falloff is what is stated in EFT (or other fitting program) and if you rightclick > info on the turret. If you mouseover the turret icon while in space the falloff it states there is not actual falloff, it's optimal +1 x falloff, because CCP doesn't do logic.

To get the true falloff either check info stats on the turret or from the mouseover detract optimal from the "faloff"


- at optimal +2 x falloff you have 0 chance to hit. However, wrecking chance still exist and is fixed at 1% resulting in some 3% damage (due to above average damage of a wrecking shot)


well, you have to hit to get a wrecking hit, so if the chance to hit is exactly 0, there can be no wrecking hits.
just like if your chance to hit is below 1% (e.g. due to tracking, not distance), then your wrecking hit chance is capped at that. you cant have 0.1% chance to hit and still 1% chance of wrecking hits.
Bagatur I
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#9 - 2016-08-30 15:54:35 UTC
Zhilia Mann wrote:
Bagatur I wrote:
Zhilia Mann wrote:
No. There is no cap at optimal + 2xfalloff. It's just 6.25% as predicted. Not sure who came up with that little gem.

this website claims that:
Quote:
What the tracking formula doesn't reveal, though, is that CTH is hard-capped at two times falloff range. Any beyond that distance automatically receives a CTH of 0%.


also this post on these very forums basically states the same - beyond optimal + 2 x falloff chance to hit is hard capped to 0.


Shrug. Ask Tippia? I've never observed that effect and while normally I'd take Tippia as a trusted source it doesn't match my experience. If in doubt, test it.


well, unfortunately I just missed my chance. apparently Tippia quit EVE at the beginning of July Sad
Zhilia Mann
Tide Way Out Productions
#10 - 2016-08-30 17:39:47 UTC
Ok, just ran a test on Sisi. My instincts were right.

Setup:

[Revelation, poco basher]
Heat Sink II
Heat Sink II
Heat Sink II
Heat Sink II
Heat Sink II
[empty low slot]
[empty low slot]
[empty low slot]

Cap Recharger II
Cap Recharger II
[empty med slot]
[empty med slot]

Dual Giga Pulse Laser II, Conflagration XL
Dual Giga Pulse Laser II, Conflagration XL
Dual Giga Pulse Laser II, Conflagration XL
Siege Module II
[empty high slot]

[empty rig slot]
[empty rig slot]
[empty rig slot]

My skills gives optimal at 28875 and faloff of 25000.

Warped in at a customs office, went to 97km, sieged and shot for two cycles. Two total wrecking hits, which matches the prediction of only wrecking at that range (CTH: ~0.6%, so all shots that land should be wrecking).

Moved in to 81km (CTH: ~5%) which is still outside of optimal + 2x falloff. Sieged again. Now I'm getting wrecking and grazing. So yes, you can still hit outside of optimal + 2x falloff and there is no magic cutoff. Received wisdom on this is wrong.
Reinhardt Kreiss
TetraVaal Tactical Group
#11 - 2016-08-30 18:49:18 UTC
Bagatur I wrote:
Reinhardt Kreiss wrote:
A few things.

- "true" falloff is what is stated in EFT (or other fitting program) and if you rightclick > info on the turret. If you mouseover the turret icon while in space the falloff it states there is not actual falloff, it's optimal +1 x falloff, because CCP doesn't do logic.

To get the true falloff either check info stats on the turret or from the mouseover detract optimal from the "faloff"


- at optimal +2 x falloff you have 0 chance to hit. However, wrecking chance still exist and is fixed at 1% resulting in some 3% damage (due to above average damage of a wrecking shot)


well, you have to hit to get a wrecking hit, so if the chance to hit is exactly 0, there can be no wrecking hits.
just like if your chance to hit is below 1% (e.g. due to tracking, not distance), then your wrecking hit chance is capped at that. you cant have 0.1% chance to hit and still 1% chance of wrecking hits.


Incorrect, wrecking chance is fixed at 1% regardless of actual chance to hit.
Bagatur I
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#12 - 2016-08-31 09:20:10 UTC
Zhilia Mann wrote:
Ok, just ran a test on Sisi. My instincts were right.

Setup:

[Revelation, poco basher]
Heat Sink II
Heat Sink II
Heat Sink II
Heat Sink II
Heat Sink II
[empty low slot]
[empty low slot]
[empty low slot]

Cap Recharger II
Cap Recharger II
[empty med slot]
[empty med slot]

Dual Giga Pulse Laser II, Conflagration XL
Dual Giga Pulse Laser II, Conflagration XL
Dual Giga Pulse Laser II, Conflagration XL
Siege Module II
[empty high slot]

[empty rig slot]
[empty rig slot]
[empty rig slot]

My skills gives optimal at 28875 and faloff of 25000.

Warped in at a customs office, went to 97km, sieged and shot for two cycles. Two total wrecking hits, which matches the prediction of only wrecking at that range (CTH: ~0.6%, so all shots that land should be wrecking).

Moved in to 81km (CTH: ~5%) which is still outside of optimal + 2x falloff. Sieged again. Now I'm getting wrecking and grazing. So yes, you can still hit outside of optimal + 2x falloff and there is no magic cutoff. Received wisdom on this is wrong.


this is great! thanks for doing this. I was planning to test it with lasers too and see if I am getting hits past 2xcutoff.
Bagatur I
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#13 - 2016-08-31 09:24:30 UTC
Reinhardt Kreiss wrote:
Bagatur I wrote:
Reinhardt Kreiss wrote:
A few things.

- "true" falloff is what is stated in EFT (or other fitting program) and if you rightclick > info on the turret. If you mouseover the turret icon while in space the falloff it states there is not actual falloff, it's optimal +1 x falloff, because CCP doesn't do logic.

To get the true falloff either check info stats on the turret or from the mouseover detract optimal from the "faloff"


- at optimal +2 x falloff you have 0 chance to hit. However, wrecking chance still exist and is fixed at 1% resulting in some 3% damage (due to above average damage of a wrecking shot)


well, you have to hit to get a wrecking hit, so if the chance to hit is exactly 0, there can be no wrecking hits.
just like if your chance to hit is below 1% (e.g. due to tracking, not distance), then your wrecking hit chance is capped at that. you cant have 0.1% chance to hit and still 1% chance of wrecking hits.


Incorrect, wrecking chance is fixed at 1% regardless of actual chance to hit.


incorrect, you have to get a hit first before it become a wrecking hit. at least on this one, UniWiki and many other sources agree and state that "If your hit chance is less than one percent, you must first get that hit, before it can become a perfect one" or something to that effect.
what you say would mean that the minimum chance to hit is 1% no matter what, even if the target is an AU away.
Serendipity Lost
Repo Industries
#14 - 2016-08-31 13:59:15 UTC
We really really need to get to the bottom of this. Knowing how wrecking shots work outside of 2X falloff is a key decision point for several of the doctrines I'm working on. This is a key issue as far as I'm concerned.
Reinhardt Kreiss
TetraVaal Tactical Group
#15 - 2016-08-31 14:36:02 UTC  |  Edited by: Reinhardt Kreiss
Bagatur I wrote:
Reinhardt Kreiss wrote:
Bagatur I wrote:
Reinhardt Kreiss wrote:
A few things.

- "true" falloff is what is stated in EFT (or other fitting program) and if you rightclick > info on the turret. If you mouseover the turret icon while in space the falloff it states there is not actual falloff, it's optimal +1 x falloff, because CCP doesn't do logic.

To get the true falloff either check info stats on the turret or from the mouseover detract optimal from the "faloff"


- at optimal +2 x falloff you have 0 chance to hit. However, wrecking chance still exist and is fixed at 1% resulting in some 3% damage (due to above average damage of a wrecking shot)


well, you have to hit to get a wrecking hit, so if the chance to hit is exactly 0, there can be no wrecking hits.
just like if your chance to hit is below 1% (e.g. due to tracking, not distance), then your wrecking hit chance is capped at that. you cant have 0.1% chance to hit and still 1% chance of wrecking hits.


Incorrect, wrecking chance is fixed at 1% regardless of actual chance to hit.


incorrect, you have to get a hit first before it become a wrecking hit. at least on this one, UniWiki and many other sources agree and state that "If your hit chance is less than one percent, you must first get that hit, before it can become a perfect one" or something to that effect.
what you say would mean that the minimum chance to hit is 1% no matter what, even if the target is an AU away.


Within locking range, obviously.

You know, it's so easy to test if you don't believe me. Actually someone else tested it and stated in this very thread that outside 2 x falloff you do some residual damage, which are wrecking shots. If you STILL don't believe me simply try it yourself, it's really not difficult to set up.
Zhilia Mann
Tide Way Out Productions
#16 - 2016-08-31 22:58:38 UTC
Reinhardt Kreiss wrote:
You know, it's so easy to test if you don't believe me. Actually someone else tested it and stated in this very thread that outside 2 x falloff you do some residual damage, which are wrecking shots. If you STILL don't believe me simply try it yourself, it's really not difficult to set up.


Actually, you're misinterpreting what I wrote. Outside of optimal + 2x falloff but before you get to CTH<1% you still do predicted damage -- that is, there is no magic cutoff there where the only shots are wrecking shots.

I'm actually not convinced yet that wrecking hits are unaffected by CTH (that is, there's a fixed 1% chance of wrecking regardless of range). I haven't yet tested it, but I will tomorrow or so.
Bagatur I
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#17 - 2016-09-02 10:16:51 UTC
Reinhardt Kreiss wrote:
Bagatur I wrote:
Reinhardt Kreiss wrote:
Bagatur I wrote:
Reinhardt Kreiss wrote:
A few things.

- "true" falloff is what is stated in EFT (or other fitting program) and if you rightclick > info on the turret. If you mouseover the turret icon while in space the falloff it states there is not actual falloff, it's optimal +1 x falloff, because CCP doesn't do logic.

To get the true falloff either check info stats on the turret or from the mouseover detract optimal from the "faloff"


- at optimal +2 x falloff you have 0 chance to hit. However, wrecking chance still exist and is fixed at 1% resulting in some 3% damage (due to above average damage of a wrecking shot)


well, you have to hit to get a wrecking hit, so if the chance to hit is exactly 0, there can be no wrecking hits.
just like if your chance to hit is below 1% (e.g. due to tracking, not distance), then your wrecking hit chance is capped at that. you cant have 0.1% chance to hit and still 1% chance of wrecking hits.


Incorrect, wrecking chance is fixed at 1% regardless of actual chance to hit.


incorrect, you have to get a hit first before it become a wrecking hit. at least on this one, UniWiki and many other sources agree and state that "If your hit chance is less than one percent, you must first get that hit, before it can become a perfect one" or something to that effect.
what you say would mean that the minimum chance to hit is 1% no matter what, even if the target is an AU away.


Within locking range, obviously.

You know, it's so easy to test if you don't believe me. Actually someone else tested it and stated in this very thread that outside 2 x falloff you do some residual damage, which are wrecking shots. If you STILL don't believe me simply try it yourself, it's really not difficult to set up.


as he already pointed out, he only tested my original question - whether HTC is hard-set to zero when the target is outside of optimal + 2*falloff distance. I actually did more googling around, and apparently it used to be like that, but then people complained that inties can just tackle you and stay infinitely outside that range, so they removed the hard-cap and there is a chance to kill that intie, albeit very small.
to test what you are saying, someone needs to be at a distance which gives <1% CTH, and do a whole lot of shots to see if the number of hits was 1% or the calculated CTH of the total number.
Reinhardt Kreiss
TetraVaal Tactical Group
#18 - 2016-09-02 12:38:23 UTC  |  Edited by: Reinhardt Kreiss
Yes so you grab yourself a ship, put a gatling pulse laser on it with MF and set a target at some 20km. Go afk for a bit and read the logs. All the effort you put in so far going "NEIN NEIN NEIN :reasons:" could have been avoided.

Perhaps you should ask Mittens for a really cool guide with moving gifs, dank memes and low self esteem peer pressure jokes. After which you can then claim it to be "logical" and "obvious" posing as if you figured it out yourself. That's generally how that goes.
Bagatur I
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#19 - 2016-09-02 13:19:41 UTC
Reinhardt Kreiss wrote:
Yes so you grab yourself a ship, put a gatling pulse laser on it with MF and set a target at some 20km. Go afk for a bit and read the logs. All the effort you put in so far going "NEIN NEIN NEIN :reasons:" could have been avoided.

Perhaps you should ask Mittens for a really cool guide with moving gifs, dank memes and low self esteem peer pressure jokes. After which you can then claim it to be "logical" and "obvious" posing as if you figured it out yourself. That's generally how that goes.


at least, your 'JA JA JA JA' has no reasons.

and maybe I will test it. it seems that the log is actually saved in a text file, so I can have enough data to work with.
Bagatur I
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#20 - 2016-09-02 20:55:06 UTC
Reinhardt Kreiss wrote:
Yes so you grab yourself a ship, put a gatling pulse laser on it with MF and set a target at some 20km. Go afk for a bit and read the logs. All the effort you put in so far going "NEIN NEIN NEIN :reasons:" could have been avoided.

Perhaps you should ask Mittens for a really cool guide with moving gifs, dank memes and low self esteem peer pressure jokes. After which you can then claim it to be "logical" and "obvious" posing as if you figured it out yourself. That's generally how that goes.


well, I did test it. I fit a Coercer with 8 Gatling Modulated Energy Beam I's and 3 Heat Sinks for better ROF. I had 4158 m optimal and 1000 m falloff with 1 shot from each laser every 1.488 seconds.
First, I tested it well outside multiple falloff range, at a distance of 9489 m to be exact. According to the formula, for 0 transversal, the chance to hit is an abysmal 2.8e-9. I let it shoot my MTU for over an hour. Out of 22226 shots, there were exactly 0 hits, wrecking or otherwise, which is not surprising giving the chance to hit.
Then I moved closer. I stayed at a distance of 6923 m, trying to aim for 0.5% chance to hit. The calculated chance to hit was 0.4995%. I let it shoot my MTU for over 2 hours now. Out of 45070 shots, there were 218 wrecking hits, which comes out to be 0.4837% of all shots.
So yeah, I am pretty sure from these results, that the wrecking hit chance is NOT 1%, but rather capped by chance to hit, if it is below 1%.
Now I am gonna go and do burner teams knowing that I have a better chance at winning the lottery than getting wrecked by a Jaguar at 35km :).
12Next page