Turret damage: Difference between revisions

Line 150:

The range part: Being inside optimal never incurs a hit penalty, so we must move out into falloff ranges too see any changes in the to-hit-equation's output values. Lets freeze everything apart from 'falloff'. What we are left with is: a fixed number divided by 'Falloff'.

Did you see what they had in common? In the tracking term, we now have ''something / Turret tracking'', in the range term we have ''something / Falloff''. In both cases there is a value that is divided by the variable we were interested in. There is an important insight here: tracking and falloff behaves identically. And they are not fixed limits, they become ratios that describes how quickly you ~~loose~~ hit chance as you start to push range and orbiting speeds, and the hit chance loss is gradual.

Did you see what they had in common? In the tracking term, we now have ''something / Turret tracking'', in the range term we have ''something / Falloff''. In both cases there is a value that is divided by the variable we were interested in. There is an important insight here: tracking and falloff behaves identically. And they are not fixed limits, they become ratios that describes how quickly you lose hit chance as you start to push range and orbiting speeds, and the hit chance loss is gradual.

Line 328:

The only turret type where higher tracking can possibly outweigh the extra damage and range is for autocannons, the other types simply doesn't gain enough tracking to be worth even looking into. The lighter autocannon type has +32% tracking, -23% damage and -17% falloff compard to the heavier type (for small, mediums and large alike). The following example will compare heavy vs light, there will be lots of numbers, but there is a summary at the end of it of it all if you want to skip ahead.

'''Example:''' ''This is a comparison of when the lighter type overtakes the heavier type against a target with high angular velocity. For this example it is assumed that that the targets signature radius is identical to the guns signature size, the range is also assumed to be the same in both cases so that the angular velocity will be identical.'' A pilot is using the heavier autocannons (for example small 200mm, but this comparison is true for medium and large as well) and is fighting at 0.333 parts into falloff (corresponds to about 2200m with hard hitting ammo and T2 guns (for T1 it would be 2100m, so no real differance)), this corresponds to a -10% DPS loss from range, tracking isn't considered yet. If the pilot instead had been using the lighter autocannons (small 125mm) the range is the same (2200m for T2 guns) but this time it corresponds to 0.4 parts into falloff where the DPS loss from falloff is -15%. Now we will compare the guns damage output, we must remember that the lighter version does -23% damage as well. So in this range case the relative DPS from the heavier one is 0.90 and for the lighter it is (0.85 x 0x77) 0.655, we can divide them (0.9 / 0.655) to find out that the heavier ones do +37% more DPS over the lighter ones. Now the question is, at how many parts into tracking will these guns do the same damage? Since the lighter ones track better, the heavier ones will ~~loose~~ DPS faster and we are looking for the point where they do the same damage. It turns out that when the heavier type is at 0.9 parts into tracking, they ~~loose~~ -53% DPS, at the same time the lighter version is only 0.68 parts into tracking (0.9 / 1.32, +32% faster tracking), where it ~~loose~~ -36% DPS. Comparing the relative DPS we get that the lighter do 0.64 and the heavier 0.47, we divide them (0.64 / 0.47) and see that the lighter ones do +36% more DPS (from just tracking) at this point. This is close to the +37% advantage that the heavier had from before.

'''Example:''' ''This is a comparison of when the lighter type overtakes the heavier type against a target with high angular velocity. For this example it is assumed that that the targets signature radius is identical to the guns signature size, the range is also assumed to be the same in both cases so that the angular velocity will be identical.'' A pilot is using the heavier autocannons (for example small 200mm, but this comparison is true for medium and large as well) and is fighting at 0.333 parts into falloff (corresponds to about 2200m with hard hitting ammo and T2 guns (for T1 it would be 2100m, so no real differance)), this corresponds to a -10% DPS loss from range, tracking isn't considered yet. If the pilot instead had been using the lighter autocannons (small 125mm) the range is the same (2200m for T2 guns) but this time it corresponds to 0.4 parts into falloff where the DPS loss from falloff is -15%. Now we will compare the guns damage output, we must remember that the lighter version does -23% damage as well. So in this range case the relative DPS from the heavier one is 0.90 and for the lighter it is (0.85 x 0x77) 0.655, we can divide them (0.9 / 0.655) to find out that the heavier ones do +37% more DPS over the lighter ones. Now the question is, at how many parts into tracking will these guns do the same damage? Since the lighter ones track better, the heavier ones will lose DPS faster and we are looking for the point where they do the same damage. It turns out that when the heavier type is at 0.9 parts into tracking, they lose -53% DPS, at the same time the lighter version is only 0.68 parts into tracking (0.9 / 1.32, +32% faster tracking), where it loses -36% DPS. Comparing the relative DPS we get that the lighter do 0.64 and the heavier 0.47, we divide them (0.64 / 0.47) and see that the lighter ones do +36% more DPS (from just tracking) at this point. This is close to the +37% advantage that the heavier had from before.

'''Summary:''' Only when the heavier autocannons get near 1.0 parts of their tracking, will the lighter ones start performing better. At this point, the drop in DPS is already big (like half). It is therefor generally more useful to fit the heaviest type you can and then fly in a way that reduce the demand for tracking if need be. Lighter weapons are mostly only useful when a ship uses up its CPU and PG on other things.

@@ Line 150: / Line 150: @@
 The range part: Being inside optimal never incurs a hit penalty, so we must move out into falloff ranges too see any changes in the to-hit-equation's output values. Lets freeze everything apart from 'falloff'. What we are left with is: a fixed number divided by 'Falloff'.
-Did you see what they had in common? In the tracking term, we now have ''something / Turret tracking'', in the range term we have ''something / Falloff''. In both cases there is a value that is divided by the variable we were interested in. There is an important insight here: tracking and falloff behaves identically. And they are not fixed limits, they become ratios that describes how quickly you loose hit chance as you start to push range and orbiting speeds, and the hit chance loss is gradual.
+Did you see what they had in common? In the tracking term, we now have ''something / Turret tracking'', in the range term we have ''something / Falloff''. In both cases there is a value that is divided by the variable we were interested in. There is an important insight here: tracking and falloff behaves identically. And they are not fixed limits, they become ratios that describes how quickly you lose hit chance as you start to push range and orbiting speeds, and the hit chance loss is gradual.
@@ Line 328: / Line 328: @@
 The only turret type where higher tracking can possibly outweigh the extra damage and range is for autocannons, the other types simply doesn't gain enough tracking to be worth even looking into. The lighter autocannon type has +32% tracking, -23% damage and -17% falloff compard to the heavier type (for small, mediums and large alike). The following example will compare heavy vs light, there will be lots of numbers, but there is a summary at the end of it of it all if you want to skip ahead.
-'''Example:''' ''This is a comparison of when the lighter type overtakes the heavier type against a target with high angular velocity. For this example it is assumed that that the targets signature radius is identical to the guns signature size, the range is also assumed to be the same in both cases so that the angular velocity will be identical.'' A pilot is using the heavier autocannons (for example small 200mm, but this comparison is true for medium and large as well) and is fighting at 0.333 parts into falloff (corresponds to about 2200m with hard hitting ammo and T2 guns (for T1 it would be 2100m, so no real differance)), this corresponds to a -10% DPS loss from range, tracking isn't considered yet. If the pilot instead had been using the lighter autocannons (small 125mm) the range is the same (2200m for T2 guns) but this time it corresponds to 0.4 parts into falloff where the DPS loss from falloff is -15%. Now we will compare the guns damage output, we must remember that the lighter version does -23% damage as well. So in this range case the relative DPS from the heavier one is 0.90 and for the lighter it is (0.85 x 0x77) 0.655, we can divide them (0.9 / 0.655) to find out that the heavier ones do +37% more DPS over the lighter ones. Now the question is, at how many parts into tracking will these guns do the same damage? Since the lighter ones track better, the heavier ones will loose DPS faster and we are looking for the point where they do the same damage. It turns out that when the heavier type is at 0.9 parts into tracking, they loose -53% DPS, at the same time the lighter version is only 0.68 parts into tracking (0.9 / 1.32, +32% faster tracking), where it loose -36% DPS. Comparing the relative DPS we get that the lighter do 0.64 and the heavier 0.47, we divide them (0.64 / 0.47) and see that the lighter ones do +36% more DPS (from just tracking) at this point. This is close to the +37% advantage that the heavier had from before.
+'''Example:''' ''This is a comparison of when the lighter type overtakes the heavier type against a target with high angular velocity. For this example it is assumed that that the targets signature radius is identical to the guns signature size, the range is also assumed to be the same in both cases so that the angular velocity will be identical.'' A pilot is using the heavier autocannons (for example small 200mm, but this comparison is true for medium and large as well) and is fighting at 0.333 parts into falloff (corresponds to about 2200m with hard hitting ammo and T2 guns (for T1 it would be 2100m, so no real differance)), this corresponds to a -10% DPS loss from range, tracking isn't considered yet. If the pilot instead had been using the lighter autocannons (small 125mm) the range is the same (2200m for T2 guns) but this time it corresponds to 0.4 parts into falloff where the DPS loss from falloff is -15%. Now we will compare the guns damage output, we must remember that the lighter version does -23% damage as well. So in this range case the relative DPS from the heavier one is 0.90 and for the lighter it is (0.85 x 0x77) 0.655, we can divide them (0.9 / 0.655) to find out that the heavier ones do +37% more DPS over the lighter ones. Now the question is, at how many parts into tracking will these guns do the same damage? Since the lighter ones track better, the heavier ones will lose DPS faster and we are looking for the point where they do the same damage. It turns out that when the heavier type is at 0.9 parts into tracking, they lose -53% DPS, at the same time the lighter version is only 0.68 parts into tracking (0.9 / 1.32, +32% faster tracking), where it loses -36% DPS. Comparing the relative DPS we get that the lighter do 0.64 and the heavier 0.47, we divide them (0.64 / 0.47) and see that the lighter ones do +36% more DPS (from just tracking) at this point. This is close to the +37% advantage that the heavier had from before.
 '''Summary:''' Only when the heavier autocannons get near 1.0 parts of their tracking, will the lighter ones start performing better. At this point, the drop in DPS is already big (like half). It is therefor generally more useful to fit the heaviest type you can and then fly in a way that reduce the demand for tracking if need be. Lighter weapons are mostly only useful when a ship uses up its CPU and PG on other things.