EVE General Discussion

But only in this game is what that poster is saying. They are saying that trying to think about the mechanics from any real life perspective will fail, since the game physics uses its own formulae which don't have much connection with reality. In real life if you orbited a stationary target your guns wouldn't need to move at all (circular orbit, target at centre).

With this new system it's much harder to figure out what your actual tracking is since there's no overview column for "accuracy score"

They would still need to track to hit something several km away, unless your orbit is exactly, perfectly circular.

I can understand rads per second, this weapon accuracy shenanigans however, not.

My frig has 500, omen 20, does that mean frig guns are 20 times better? It could say "LOL pizza" instead, that's how much info i get from this stat.

Can we haz some useful tracking data back?

<./salt>

Small turrets (frigates) track faster than Mediums or Larges.

Some larger ships mount secondary batteries to deal with this. I have a dual 150 II mount on my Exequror NI just for this purpose. It's not as fast as a single 150 mount (which I could have done) but with my tracking and scan resolution scripts running for close combat, it blows up frigates nicely. Yes, you do lose top DPS, but DPS against a ship you can't hit is ZERO, so I'll let you guys do the math.

Yes, but minute changes.

At the Battle of 73 Easting a handful of US M1 Abrams battle tanks decimated a far larger force of Iranian T-72 tanks because in the up-close confrontation, the Abrams turrets were built to track and fire on targets in under 5-10 seconds while many of the T-72's were supposedly still hand cranked.

Had those M1's been 'orbiting' the T-72's (They were running right through the middle of their formations) the turrets wouldn't have had to move much at all and it would have been all about reload time, which it still was considering how fast an M1 turret can transverse, but transverse, even going nuts in the middle of an enemy formation wasn't the sticking point.

It's an extreme example of a difference in tracking, but EVE's turrets should be even more advanced than something that was built in the 1980's. So all of this is moot since it's basically a game mechanic to let the smaller ships have a shot at surviving against larger ones... not much of a shot, but one nonetheless.

What's the point of making new much worse not helping with anything stat and hide simple and well known rad\s? if u want so, make atleast new universal column in overview which will consider your turret tracking speed and target signature!

Looks like some kind of unfunny joke try again.

The point is that before, turrets tracking was related to the size of ship class for which it was made, not to a something magical with 40 000m scale.

This I know, yes.
What of it?

The new value can be compared (which is a plus). Neither have in-combat use as there is simply too much variation on sig radius.

Not knowing if a ship is shieldtanked or hulltanked, now knowing what kind of MWD it's running, and not having learnt all base sig radii by heart, can you honestly say you found the old value useful?

The fact that small guns apply to small targets and mediums to cruisers hasn't changed-- this I knew even without looking up my tracking.

You can still compare your railgun to artillery, same as before; but you can now also compare your Large dual 650s to Medium 650s. From where I stand that's an argument in favour of the new system. Now please explain to me what you used rad/sec for, specifically in combat because that's what you wanted to modify yes?