EVE General Discussion

Signature radius 99% of the time isn't changing by THAT much. Never had problems to compare them before but got it now cuz new stat showing what? how good turrets can track a giant asteroid? o_O how often ppl shoot at that kind of things.

P.S. in combat u have no time to divide all by few thousands i'd better compare weapons with more effort on station than do the same thing during fight, before it wasn't perfect but definitely made life easier not harder

I knew it, that u gonna argue about MWD but guess what from turret perspective if the target got x5 speed and x5 signature it change nothing. Sure it never was 100% accurate, but most of ppl are fine with 80-90% accuracy because you can see a whole picture better w\o division for several thousands, anyway was lighter before.

OK 50-200% accuracy still better than none.
I thought that u can actually see size in overview but u'r right it's != signature radius, don't rage so hard pls.
New system gaves nothing except all guns now showing us old tracking but for planet size target(40 000m), it would be better even if they normalized it around 400m (at least something u can really want to shot in eve) not some miracle number

Maybe its because im not at my computer but I have a question.

If tracking speed is how long it takes a turret to pivot 180 degrees and tranversal velocity is in meters per second. How the hell could people ever do that math on the fly in the first place? How many meters per second of transversal = 1 radius per second?

Ive always spit balled it from experience. But if they want to change the stats they should just tell you what the max tranversal velocity tracking equivelant of the turret is and bam, simple and usefull.

I know ive had them both enebled for years. I dont even bother with having the overview show me the actual speed of other ships anymore. I know angular velocity doesnt mean anything with turrets but im just confused to how you can just look at the tranversal speed and know about what your tracking speed has to be in order to hit a ship by doing quick math. You know the ballpark for what you can hit and what can hit you for given ships through experience but the units of measurement are no where the same to actually compare them on the fly. You have to just know the rough range.

It's one multiplication. To convert an old-style tracking into something you can actually compare with the target's tracking speed is also one multiplication. No change there.

How so ? I don't believe having a useless stat is an improvement.

Right, comparing tracking between my ships and turrets, that's great. But what should I do when it comes to real fights ? I have nothing to compare with in my overview... oh wait !
* taking my scientific calculator and taking from overview some data, calculating and... * Oh god, target's .... [gone / dead / i'm dead] (pick the correct answer).

Joking aside, I seriously think the WAS is great and required, BUT, there is no reason to either remove tracking data from turret informations, or not to add an "evasion score" into the overview. And this is at the moment the main issue with WAS.

And I really wish CCP to sometimes read and really take note of some of our concerns....

The idea, behind the fact of seing it, is to actually know how much high my score should have been to hit the target (as it moves).

It was the same with rad/s : I knew how much I could track (in optimal conditions), then I knew the radial speed of my target compared to my position (that's what the rad/s column shows) which is the radial speed i would need (in perfect condition) to hit the target.

After that, depending on the target size (and based on experience) I knew I could hit, or not, that target.

Right now what is missing is the data to know "how much WAS should I need in perfect condition to hit that target", this is what I called the "evasion score".

The real question you may have is actually : why should that data be displayed. I'd say, why not ? :)
I see no reason to keep angular/transversal velocity as you cannot use them for this purpose, but I also see no reason not to show an "evasion score" to allow people to compare this score to their WAS, as we did before with radial speed.
Moreover if I try to explain how WAS works and how to use it in real condition to some new players I have/had. So far, the only answer I got is more or less "I cannot use it, i just have to pray to hit my target"

Yes, I can write down the estimated tracking speed of my turret, even get it from older SDE, but the idea behind WAS (at least I think) was to hide those data and have an unified value to use. And I don't really want to keep a note in game as a "tracking speed reminder", I want to use the was, as it's an information the game shows me.

In the best of the best condition, I may know what WAS I need to hit a specific target. Right, but now they move: approach, orbit. They use MWD/AB ! I web them.
The only thing I may know behind those facts is : better/lesser chance to hit. Fine. That'll help me a lot, but how much ?

Knowing "it helps" doesn't help as much as knowing "I halfed his radial speed" ! That's actually what I (and maybe many people) want to know with the WAS.
I don't care if the value is not the most accurate, btw we never had really accurate data when it comes to hit chance (based on overview infos I mean).

Now, we have nothing more.

I'd like to use the WAS, really, but for now I have nothing to use it unless I want to get my calculator each time I target a NPC or a player to shot him.
Right know I almost feel like rolling some dices each time I shot to know whether i'll hit or not, and I know that some of my corp mate really feel that way, even when they know there is some real physics behind it.

You cannot compare apples to oranges. Now you have the exact same problem: you cannot compare a "score" to some physical informations without knowing everything in both sides.

I'm finding this new stat much less useful than the old stat for calculating hit chance in combat. I'm having to ignore the client now and am just using old versions of EFT to calculate.

While the idea of being able to compare tracking directly between different classes of weapon does have some merit, we should have both pieces of information available. I.e. keep the signature resolution and tracking value of guns as they were, and then include the comparative value as an additional piece of information.