These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

EVE New Citizens Q&A

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Listing of most Tracking Missles + Turrents

Author
Luda Desekus
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#1 - 2016-11-28 07:59:31 UTC
Hi all,

I was wondering if anyone knows of a list somewhere or can list me from most tracking to least tracking by weapon type Blasters > Missiles etc. Thanks much in advance :)
gfldex
#2 - 2016-11-28 09:58:07 UTC
blaster, autocannons,pulselasers, (most) beamlasers, arty, railsguns. Missiles don't have tracking but both target speed and sigradius play a role.

However, this list is completely useless because you need to look at tracking at optimal range (given you can dictate range) and many ships got a bonus to optimal range/falloff or tracking.

So, what do you actually want to know?

If you take all the sand out of the box, only the cat poo will remain.

Luda Desekus
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#3 - 2016-11-28 10:03:59 UTC
This is the perfect answer I wanted. I understand the range, falloff, orbits, and traversal all play an affect. I just wanted a general to have a general idea of what ships using what weapons have the "general" change of handling orbits around a target
Ovv Topik
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#4 - 2016-11-28 16:28:12 UTC
Luda Desekus wrote:
This is the perfect answer I wanted. I understand the range, falloff, orbits, and traversal all play an affect. I just wanted a general to have a general idea of what ships using what weapons have the "general" change of handling orbits around a target

We used to use fitting tools like 'PYFA' and 'EFT' to calculate the stats for each individual fit.

Now there is the in game 'ghost fitting' tool to play around with options.

"Nicknack, I'm in a shoe in space, on my computer, in my house, with a cup of coffee, in't that something." - Fly Safe PopPaddi. o7

SurrenderMonkey
State Protectorate
Caldari State
#5 - 2016-11-28 16:41:20 UTC
Ovv Topik wrote:
Luda Desekus wrote:
This is the perfect answer I wanted. I understand the range, falloff, orbits, and traversal all play an affect. I just wanted a general to have a general idea of what ships using what weapons have the "general" change of handling orbits around a target


We used to use fitting tools like 'PYFA' and 'EFT' to calculate the stats for each individual fit.

Now there is the in game 'ghost fitting' tool to play around with options.



Uh... we still use PYFA and EFT. You just also have the option of fiddling around with the in-game tool, which is useful in its own right, but is absolutely not a sufficient replacement for an out of game fitting tool.

"Help, I'm bored with missions!"

http://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/

mkint
#6 - 2016-11-28 17:01:44 UTC  |  Edited by: mkint
tracking barely matters, especially not within the context of deciding which weapons category to use. You pick your weapon by range, damage, and fitting. Then you fly within the limits of your tracking, using tracking mods to allow you more flexibility in how you fly. Most people don't seem to even keep angular velocity turned on in their overview, or even know it's a thing (people keep saying transversal which has been especially irrelevant for the past 8 years.)

ed: the only time I've ever chosen a weapon based on tracking was to fit undersized or short ranged weapons to deal with drones in a ceptor or drone frig.

Maxim 6. If violence wasn’t your last resort, you failed to resort to enough of it.

Iria Ahrens
Space Perverts and Forum Pirates
#7 - 2016-11-28 17:34:24 UTC
tracking info no longer shows radians/sec but a flat number, say 500. The new number seems to work better with Transversal where the old info was better with AV.

My choice of pronouns is based on your avatar. Even if I know what is behind the avatar.

Francis Raven
GeoCorp.
The Initiative.
#8 - 2016-11-28 18:26:55 UTC
Answers are clear above, however pleaaaaase: It's spelled and pronounced "turrets"

Thank youuuuu.

ExDominion | Nullsec Corporation | Website | Forums | Established Nov. 2015 |

Miriam Beckstein
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#9 - 2016-11-28 19:25:21 UTC
Iria Ahrens wrote:
tracking info no longer shows radians/sec but a flat number, say 500. The new number seems to work better with Transversal where the old info was better with AV.


I saw that, but I don't understand what it means. rad/sec is simple & obvious, but the tracking whatever of 500 doesn't seem to tell me anything sensible.
ergherhdfgh
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#10 - 2016-11-28 20:10:06 UTC
Tracking matters a lot. One example would be try to run missions in a ship with 1400 mm artillery. Unless you are shooting at a structure you will be dealing **** poor damage.

Want to talk? Join Cara's channel in game: House Forelli

mkint
#11 - 2016-11-28 21:49:43 UTC  |  Edited by: mkint
ergherhdfgh wrote:
Tracking matters a lot. One example would be try to run missions in a ship with 1400 mm artillery. Unless you are shooting at a structure you will be dealing **** poor damage.

Yeah, but you didn't choose whether or not to fit that based on tracking. You chose that based on range and DPS, and because you fly minmatar. Tracking is the consequence, and you'll fly in a way to make use of the tracking you have. You'll fit your TC's and TE's and webs and kite and MJD. Not that tracking isn't important, it's just rarely the deciding factor in what guns to use, especially when like the OP, you're deciding between arty and rails.

Miriam Beckstein wrote:
Iria Ahrens wrote:
tracking info no longer shows radians/sec but a flat number, say 500. The new number seems to work better with Transversal where the old info was better with AV.


I saw that, but I don't understand what it means. rad/sec is simple & obvious, but the tracking whatever of 500 doesn't seem to tell me anything sensible.

because it's not anything sensible. There was a thread about it recently, and it's far more arbitrary and hard to evaluate than rad/s. It tries to incorporate sig radius into the picture too, which is impossible if you don't know what you're shooting at, which makes the number far more vague. I think the rad/s should still be there in the show info window.

Maxim 6. If violence wasn’t your last resort, you failed to resort to enough of it.

Seymarr
Nobody in Local
Deepwater Hooligans
#12 - 2016-11-28 22:32:59 UTC  |  Edited by: Seymarr
The old "rad/s" tracking value incorporated signature size too - the number stated would only be remotely accurate if you were shooting at a target of about the size it assumed (40m for small, 125m for medium, 400m for large).

The current tracking score is exactly the rad/s value, if shooting at a target with a sigrad of 40000m (note the "signature resolution: 40.00km"). That means more math to figure out exactly what rad/s value you can hit for a given target, but a much more straightforward comparison if you just want to know "which of these guns tracks better", without having to convert between size classes and signature resolutions.

If you want to convert to the old rad/s numbers, divide by 1000 for frigate guns, or 100 for battleship guns - ezpz. (Or, rather, if your assumed target is a frigate or battleship, respectively.) For cruiser guns, you have to divide by 320, which is a bit more annoying.

Or, as a rough estimate:
500 = Frigate Brawling. Tracks frigate at 0.5 rad/s
100 = Frigate Sniping. Tracks frigate at 0.1 rad/s
50 = Cruiser Brawling. Tracks cruiser at 0.15 rad/s, frigate at 0.05 rad/s
10 = Cruiser Sniping. Tracks cruiser at 0.03 rad/s, frigate at 0.01 rad/s
5 = Battleship Brawling. Tracks battleship at 0.05 rad/s, cruiser at 0.015 rad/s
2.5 = Dreadnought HAWS (lol). Tracks battleship at 0.025 rad/s, cruiser at 0.008 rad/s
1 = Battleship Sniping. Tracks battleship at 0.01 rad/s, cruiser at 0.003 rad/s
0.05 = Dreadnought Brawling. Tracks carrier at 0.0125 rad/s, battleship at 0.0005 rad/s
0.02 = Dreadnought Sniping. Tracks carrier at 0.005 rad/s, battleship at 0.0002 rad/s
ergherhdfgh
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#13 - 2016-11-28 23:13:11 UTC
mkint wrote:

Yeah, but you didn't choose whether or not to fit that based on tracking. You chose that based on range and DPS, and because you fly minmatar. Tracking is the consequence, and you'll fly in a way to make use of the tracking you have. You'll fit your TC's and TE's and webs and kite and MJD. Not that tracking isn't important, it's just rarely the deciding factor in what guns to use, especially when like the OP, you're deciding between arty and rails.

That would not be the smart way to go about it. You just choose the 1200's as they are a far better choice. If you are choosing your weapon's system based purely on paper dps then I think you are being overly simplistic.

Granted most of my experience on the topic comes from large weapons in PvE situations so I can't speak from experience in PvP. However when I was new and had very low support skills I had a very hard time landing any hits in my rifter. Once I skilled up motion prediction and Mini frig it got a lot better for me. I also learned a lot about the game in that time frame as well so it is difficult for me to say how much was learning the game and how much was character skill points.

Either way I think that a new player with very low experience and low skills might have issues with actually landing good damage on his / her target if they just choose the largest, slowest, highest paper dps turret that they can fit.

The only effective way that I know of to quantify actual landed damage ( as opposed to theoretical DPS ) is by using bounty ticks. Again most of the testing that I have done with tracking and bounty ticks has been with large weapons however it has proven tracking to be far more important that paper dps.

Everything in Eve is situational and if you are in a fleet that has the primary constantly sig bloomed with a TP and slowed to nothing with multiple webs then tracking won't matter much.

There are times that I wish I had some type of damage logger to quantify this better in more diverse situations. Then I think about how damage meters ruined other games and I'm glad we don't have them here.

Want to talk? Join Cara's channel in game: House Forelli

ergherhdfgh
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#14 - 2016-11-28 23:26:26 UTC
mkint wrote:

because it's not anything sensible. There was a thread about it recently, and it's far more arbitrary and hard to evaluate than rad/s. It tries to incorporate sig radius into the picture too, which is impossible if you don't know what you're shooting at, which makes the number far more vague. I think the rad/s should still be there in the show info window.

You hit the nail on the head on this one. Sadly it seems part of a bigger trend not only in this game but internet wide to dumb things down and pretty them up.

IMHO most of the changes that I've seen CCP roll out in recent years have been in the direction of better aesthetics at the cost of function. This particular one has been to remove the subtleties of turret tracking and try to reduce it to one number so that even new players can understand. The down side is that players with deeper knowledge of the game are punished by having information taken away.

Want to talk? Join Cara's channel in game: House Forelli