Toggle menu
Toggle preferences menu
Toggle personal menu
Not logged in
Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits.

Turret damage: Difference between revisions

From EVE University Wiki
m Spelling and grammar. Should have combined them all into one single edit, but didn't realize I would get caught up in doing this.
m Grammar/spelling
Line 80: Line 80:


===Target size===
===Target size===
As mentioned above, target size only influence tracking penalties, never range penalties. It may seem counter intuitive, but that is the way the game works. The overview has a column for ship sizes, but those values are not related to a ships signature size.
As mentioned above, target size only influence tracking penalties, never range penalties. It may seem counter intuitive, but that is the way the game works. The overview has a column for ship sizes, but those values are not related to a ship's signature size.


The trickiest part with sizes is that you must account for this yourself, the game doesn't help you. The table below is not exact, but give an idea of how much the size differance will impact the tracking ability of small, medium and large guns.
The trickiest part with sizes is that you must account for this yourself, the game doesn't help you. The table below is not exact, but gives an idea of how much the size difference will impact the tracking ability of small, medium and large guns.


Adjust your own tracking with these multiples to compensate for size differance
Adjust your own tracking with these multiples to compensate for size difference
{| class="wikitable" border=0
{| class="wikitable" border=0
|  || '''Frigate (40m)''' || '''Cruiser (125m)''' || '''Battlecruiser (300m)''' || '''Battleship(400m)''' ||
|  || '''Frigate (40m)''' || '''Cruiser (125m)''' || '''Battlecruiser (300m)''' || '''Battleship(400m)''' ||
Line 104: Line 104:


==Grouping guns, does it affect the damage?==
==Grouping guns, does it affect the damage?==
No. Even if the guns are grouped on your screen, they are still treated separately. This can be seen by collecting damage data and comparing that with the normal expected damage distribution, its very clear that its a combination of several seperate turret shots instead of a single one. It can also be deduced by looking at the turret group's damage output when shooting at hard to hit objects, like things deep into falloff, it's possible to tell when one, two or more guns hit the target.
No. Even if the guns are grouped on your screen, they are still treated separately. This can be seen by collecting damage data and comparing that with the normal expected damage distribution, it's very clear that it's a combination of several separate turret shots instead of a single one. It can also be deduced by looking at the turret group's damage output when shooting at hard to hit objects, like things deep into falloff, it's possible to tell when one, two or more guns hit the target.


==Does a Target Painter help turrets?==
==Does a Target Painter help turrets?==
Line 125: Line 125:
*Transversal speed = Movement up/down/left/right relative to an object, but not towards or away from it (that thing is called radial speed). Measured in m/s.
*Transversal speed = Movement up/down/left/right relative to an object, but not towards or away from it (that thing is called radial speed). Measured in m/s.
*Range to target = The range to an object. Measured in meters.
*Range to target = The range to an object. Measured in meters.
*Turret tracking = Found on the attributes tab of a turret. Measured in rad/second (one rad is equal to 57 degrees, 360 degress is equal to 6.28 rad)
*Turret tracking = Found on the attributes tab of a turret. Measured in rad/second (one rad is equal to 57 degrees, 360 degrees is equal to 6.28 rad)
*Turret signature resolution = Higher values make it harder to hit small signature radii, it can be thought of as accuracy but it isn't entirely correct. Measured in meters.
*Turret signature resolution = Higher values make it harder to hit small signature radii, it can be thought of as accuracy but it isn't entirely correct. Measured in meters.
*Target signature radius = The size of the target, or more precisly the radius of an imagined circle that represents the target's sensor footprint. Measured in meters.
*Target signature radius = The size of the target, or more precisely the radius of an imagined circle that represents the target's sensor footprint. Measured in meters.
*max(0, x) = a math function that takes the highest value of zero or x. It is used to prevent negative values in this case, any negative numbers a replaced with a zero instead.  
*max(0, x) = a math function that takes the highest value of zero or x. It is used to prevent negative values in this case, any negative numbers a replaced with a zero instead.  
*Turret optimal range = Found on the attributes tab of a turret. Inside this range no range penalites from distance are applied. Measured in meters.
*Turret optimal range = Found on the attributes tab of a turret. Inside this range no range penalties from distance are applied. Measured in meters.
*Falloff = Found on the attributes tab of a turret. Represents how rapidly a turret's accuracy declines as the target moves beyond optimal range. Measured in meters.
*Falloff = Found on the attributes tab of a turret. Represents how rapidly a turret's accuracy declines as the target moves beyond optimal range. Measured in meters.


Line 142: Line 142:
  Chance to hit = 0.5 ^ (tracking term) * 0.5 ^ (range term)
  Chance to hit = 0.5 ^ (tracking term) * 0.5 ^ (range term)


Why is this interesting? From this we can see that tracking and range are actually calculated seperately, then the results from each are multiplied. This shows that Range and Tracking are indeed two different and independant things, and both will be used to score a hit.
Why is this interesting? From this we can see that tracking and range are actually calculated separately, then the results from each are multiplied. This shows that Range and Tracking are indeed two different and independent things, and both will be used to score a hit.


There is also one more thing we can find out by just looking at the equation. This is however a little tricker to follow, but the conclusion is easy. The aim is to compare the tracking term and the range term for similarities in how they behave. Do they have anything in common? To do this, we will freeze all values in those respective terms except for one variable in each, that will be 'turret tracking' and 'falloff' respectively. Then we can look at how that single variable effects the outcome in each case and see if there is any similarities between them.
There is also one more thing we can find out by just looking at the equation. This is, however, a little trickier to follow, but the conclusion is easy. The aim is to compare the tracking term and the range term for similarities in how they behave. Do they have anything in common? To do this, we will freeze all values in those respective terms except for one variable in each, that will be 'turret tracking' and 'falloff' respectively. Then we can look at how that single variable effects the outcome in each case and see if there is any similarities between them.


The tracking part: All guns have their tracking value expressed in something called 'angular velocity', this is identical to 'Transversal speed' divided by 'Range to Target', this is all inside the tracking term if you look at it, and basically it just means how fast something moves around something else. Lets freeze the angular velocity, this means that it is still moving but that the speed will not change. In the tracking term we also have 'Turret signature resolution' divided by 'Target signature radius', for easy comparison later on we will assume that both these number are the same (so their ratio is one, which means no effect), then we freeze them as well. What we are left over with is this: a fixed number divided by 'Turret tracking'.
The tracking part: All guns have their tracking value expressed in something called 'angular velocity', this is identical to 'Transversal speed' divided by 'Range to Target', this is all inside the tracking term if you look at it, and basically it just means how fast something moves around something else. Lets freeze the angular velocity, this means that it is still moving but that the speed will not change. In the tracking term we also have 'Turret signature resolution' divided by 'Target signature radius', for easy comparison later on we will assume that both these number are the same (so their ratio is one, which means no effect), then we freeze them as well. What we are left over with is this: a fixed number divided by 'Turret tracking'.
Line 154: Line 154:


==Base damage==
==Base damage==
All turrets have a base damage, this is a fixed number. The volley damage that your turrets do will be spread around this number. The higher the number the more damage the turret will do when it hits. It is calculated from the turrets Damage Multiplier attribute and the ammo's damage values. This is before any resistances is taken into consideration. A high base damage means that your guns hit hard (but do not mistake this for DPS (damage per second) since that also depends on how often the guns may fire). The base damage is always a bit below the average damage (about 1.5% lower) when there is a 100% hit chance -- the reason for this are those rare but highly damaging perfect hits.
All turrets have a base damage, this is a fixed number. The volley damage that your turrets do will be spread around this number. The higher the number the more damage the turret will do when it hits. It is calculated from the turret's Damage Multiplier attribute and the ammo's damage values. This is before any resistances is taken into consideration. A high base damage means that your guns hit hard (but do not mistake this for DPS (damage per second) since that also depends on how often the guns may fire). The base damage is always a bit below the average damage (about 1.5% lower) when there is a 100% hit chance -- the reason for this are those rare but highly damaging perfect hits.


'''Example:''' A small turret has a damage multiplier of x1.725, and is loaded with an ammo type that does 7 EM and 5 Thermal damage. The base damage is then 1.725*(7+5) = 20.7
'''Example:''' A small turret has a damage multiplier of x1.725, and is loaded with an ammo type that does 7 EM and 5 Thermal damage. The base damage is then 1.725*(7+5) = 20.7
Line 193: Line 193:
Since it was established earlier that Tracking and Falloff behave exactly the same way. We can use the same data table and the same graphs to describe both, but only one at the time.
Since it was established earlier that Tracking and Falloff behave exactly the same way. We can use the same data table and the same graphs to describe both, but only one at the time.


The table below shows how damage and DPS goes down as a result of lower hit chance. The decrease is identical for tracking and falloff so either one can be used.  If you wish to combine the effects of tracking and falloff, look them up individualy and then multiply them (note: this only works for the columns Hit Chance and Relative DPS; the column Reduction in DPS by % can not be used for this).
The table below shows how damage and DPS goes down as a result of lower hit chance. The decrease is identical for tracking and falloff so either one can be used.  If you wish to combine the effects of tracking and falloff, look them up individually and then multiply them (note: this only works for the columns Hit Chance and Relative DPS; the column Reduction in DPS by % can not be used for this).


The true strength with the table and graphs below are not to calculate what your DPS might be in a given situation. But rather to see how much you can push your falloff and tracking while still maintaining a decent DPS output.
The true strength with the table and graphs below are not to calculate what your DPS might be in a given situation. But rather to see how much you can push your falloff and tracking while still maintaining a decent DPS output.
Line 318: Line 318:
Webs:
Webs:


The effect from a web is hard to predict, since its use can change both the transversal speed and the range between the ships. Experience and practice will be your best guide here. The drawback with webs is that they can help your opponants tracking as well as your own. The web is more often used for its tactical benefits, such as giving control over the range. But it is also the best tool to reduce the need for tracking when large guns are used against small targets.
The effect from a web is hard to predict, since its use can change both the transversal speed and the range between the ships. Experience and practice will be your best guide here. The drawback with webs is that they can help your opponents tracking as well as your own. The web is more often used for its tactical benefits, such as giving control over the range. But it is also the best tool to reduce the need for tracking when large guns are used against small targets.




Line 326: Line 326:
The only turret type where higher tracking can possibly outweigh the extra damage and range is for autocannons, the other types simply don't gain enough tracking to be worth even looking into. The lighter autocannon type has +32% tracking, -23% damage and -17% falloff compared 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.
The only turret type where higher tracking can possibly outweigh the extra damage and range is for autocannons, the other types simply don't gain enough tracking to be worth even looking into. The lighter autocannon type has +32% tracking, -23% damage and -17% falloff compared 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 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.  
'''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 difference)), 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.
'''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 344: Line 344:
Analysis of the data and interpretation of some reduced frequencies of min and max results in the normal damage span:
Analysis of the data and interpretation of some reduced frequencies of min and max results in the normal damage span:


Of the 10,656 shots the lowest recorded damage was 11.4 (recorded 15 times) and the highest non-perfect was 34.0 (recorded 33 times), perfect hits dealt 68.5 damage (recorded 101 times). On average, each damage number (anything between 11.5 to 33.9) was recorded 46.7 times (standard deviation = 7.02). The reason for the lower occurences of the min and max results on normal hits comes from rounding effects. Any damage in-between has an interval of 0.1 units (22.2500 to 22.3499 both produce the 22.3 in the log). However the min and max values do not have that span. The lowest theoretical number is Base Damage x 0.5 = 11.415, hence the interval to get 11.4 in the log is between 11.415 and 11.4499, that is only 0.0345 differance. So the expected number of occurances of the value 11.4 is only 34.6% of the average number, 15 recorded values / 34.6% = 43.4, close to average and inside the standard deviation. The upper interval is 67.8%, 33 times / 67.8% = 48.7, also close to average and inside the standard deviation. (Note: 34.6%+67.8%=102.4%, which is of course impossible -- the error comes from rounding errors in the 4th decimal of the base damage, awesome precision isn't needed for this comparative calculation since the natural random deviation is much larger anyhow, so this is good enough, the objective was to explain the lower frequencies of the end points which now has been done).
Of the 10,656 shots the lowest recorded damage was 11.4 (recorded 15 times) and the highest non-perfect was 34.0 (recorded 33 times), perfect hits dealt 68.5 damage (recorded 101 times). On average, each damage number (anything between 11.5 to 33.9) was recorded 46.7 times (standard deviation = 7.02). The reason for the lower occurrences of the min and max results on normal hits comes from rounding effects. Any damage in-between has an interval of 0.1 units (22.2500 to 22.3499 both produce the 22.3 in the log). However the min and max values do not have that span. The lowest theoretical number is Base Damage x 0.5 = 11.415, hence the interval to get 11.4 in the log is between 11.415 and 11.4499, that is only 0.0345 difference. So the expected number of occurrences of the value 11.4 is only 34.6% of the average number, 15 recorded values / 34.6% = 43.4, close to average and inside the standard deviation. The upper interval is 67.8%, 33 times / 67.8% = 48.7, also close to average and inside the standard deviation. (Note: 34.6%+67.8%=102.4%, which is of course impossible -- the error comes from rounding errors in the 4th decimal of the base damage, awesome precision isn't needed for this comparative calculation since the natural random deviation is much larger anyhow, so this is good enough, the objective was to explain the lower frequencies of the end points which now has been done).


*Lowest damage random multiple
*Lowest damage random multiple