hate these ads?, log in or register to hide them
Page 2 of 7 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 136

Thread: The Useful Info Thread

  1. #21
    Super Moderator Global Moderator QuackBot's Avatar
    Join Date
    March 7, 2012
    Posts
    20,806
    Quote Originally Posted by Torashuu View Post
    Dealing with anacondas in the kill missions, both assisted and unassisted in a 400k cr fitted viper.


    p.s. Yes video quality isn't great, I know.
    Viper is still an amazing farm, you just dont get to see how a pm is going to be the main blob ship.

  2. #22
    Straight Hustlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 14, 2011
    Posts
    9,806
    Quote Originally Posted by Shaikar View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Procellus View Post
    You guys are probably all over this but going into reverse allows you to turn faster. Also you can use the downward thrusters. Let go of the forward thrust button, press the downward thrusters, begin to turn and wait until your ship starts to slow down. It'll make a sound, the Viper makes what sounds like a coffee maker that's done brewing. Once you hear that sound let go of the downward thrusters and hit your forward thrusters. It should allow you to turn pretty quickly.

    The right timing varies with your speed it seems. Its much better to do it the second way as it doesn't make you a sitting duck from slowing down
    The second way?
    Does it matter which way you're turning ? (Pitch up/down affect whether you want up/down thrusters?)
    Do you know what reverse and vertical thrusters does?


    I've turned really fast in a viper before, but I've not quite figured out how I've done it yet as my attempts to consciously reproduce tend to end in embarrassing failure or no outside context to see how tight (or not) the turn was.
    Yes it does matter which way you are turning. When you are pitching up, thrusting up decreases the radius of the turn, thrusting down increases the radius. Vice versa for pitching downward.

    Both have their uses. Decreasing the turn radius helps you close distance on the target & turn faster. Increasing the radius is helpful for getting onto someone's tail, but as the radius gets larger you will lose distance to the target.

    So say you are pitching upward towards a target; decreasing the radius will bring the target into your sights faster, however given that the target is usually turning into you, it will generally be going at an angle to you IE you will tend to be shooting its top/bottom. Whereas if you increase the radius, it'll line you up more directly on the targets ass end.

  3. #23

    Join Date
    April 13, 2011
    Posts
    3,737
    Not only that, using thrusters adds to your total speed, so having throttle set in the blue zone but adding thrusters will increase you v past blue speed making you turn slower. So you need to manage your throttle to to keep that blue speed while turning and thrustering at the same time. It is especially noticable if your pitch up and use thrusters down. You can also force quick turns by using boosts, but obviously you need more space then because you'll gain a lot of speed before and after the window of quick turning.

  4. #24
    Procellus's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 12, 2011
    Posts
    1,019
    Sorry, first way was to slow down manually and use reverse thrusters. Its not bad but dangerous to use in a fight as it makes you a stationary target.

    Second way was to use the downward thrusters, slowing down your ship and then turning. I roll and then pull back on the stick as though I were flying in atmosphere. You can roll and push down on the stick and use the upward thrusters and it works the same but it feels too weird and I keep thinking I'll red out.

  5. #25

    Join Date
    April 13, 2011
    Posts
    3,737
    you will if you do it fast enough. (elite has red outs )

  6. #26
    Shaikar's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Location
    Kador
    Posts
    1,741
    Cool, thanks - will give that a go over the weekend.

  7. #27
    Sandzibar's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Posts
    4,557
    Sexeh new piwat skins on the shop.

    P2Cool



    No Imp Clipper makes me sad though

  8. #28
    Hoggbert's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 16, 2013
    Posts
    2,193
    Worthless Federation Dropship gets a paintjob, but not the magnificent Clipper, sadness indeed.

  9. #29

    Join Date
    April 10, 2011
    Posts
    1,597
    PSA: If you play on open, be careful around stations if you have a point defense turret. If a player fires a missile at you and your PDT hits the station, it will WTFBBQ your ship. There are a few players exploiting this to get other CMDRs killed.

  10. #30
    Sandzibar's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Posts
    4,557
    Quote Originally Posted by CastleBravo View Post
    PSA: If you play on open, be careful around stations if you have a point defense turret. If a player fires a missile at you and your PDT hits the station, it will WTFBBQ your ship. There are a few players exploiting this to get other CMDRs killed.
    ahah. That explains how an Asp was able to be flagged as "attacking" me without gaining the wanted status when I was in a highsec system. He must have fired a missile near me, so my point defense detects it as an attack. I then think he is flagged as wanted and attack him - but it was me who got flagged. Sneaky cunt.

  11. #31
    tulip's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 11, 2011
    Posts
    1,972
    Quote Originally Posted by Sandzibar View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by CastleBravo View Post
    PSA: If you play on open, be careful around stations if you have a point defense turret. If a player fires a missile at you and your PDT hits the station, it will WTFBBQ your ship. There are a few players exploiting this to get other CMDRs killed.
    ahah. That explains how an Asp was able to be flagged as "attacking" me without gaining the wanted status when I was in a highsec system. He must have fired a missile near me, so my point defense detects it as an attack. I then think he is flagged as wanted and attack him - but it was me who got flagged. Sneaky cunt.
    Someone tested and launching chaff doesn't flag you in stations, so either swap out for chaff launchers (plus it messes with turrets/gimbal mounts) or power down your point defences when you get to a station.
    Quote Originally Posted by Tarminic View Post
    Just for the record, "sending a needy text" is never the right answer.

  12. #32

    Join Date
    April 13, 2011
    Posts
    3,737
    So turns out the initial shield numbers people produced don't match up with actual strengths because they didn't take into account that small weapons do reduced damage to larger targets..
    Trying to dig out all the quotes...


    We have 3 classes of landing pads that roughly equate to 3 ship sizes, 4 classes of weapons, and the knowledge that a small ship with small weapons shooting a large ship (Anaconda) leads to 1/3 damage.

    I guess it probably works something like this:

    S weapon + S target = 100% DPS potential.
    S weapon + M target = 67% DPS potential.
    S weapon + L target = 33% DPS potential.

    M weapon + S target = 100% DPS potential.
    M weapon + M target = 100% DPS potential.
    M weapon + L target = 67% DPS potential.

    L weapon = 100% DPS potential all against S-L ships.

    Huge weapons maybe geared towards potentially larger targets like faction capitals.


    Railguns, missiles, cannons and torpedoes punch above their weight in terms of their effectiveness against larger ships. There is a stat missing from outfitting that is supposed to indicate roughly speaking what the weapons is good at shooting at in terms of rough ship size (small to huge). Under the hood is slightly more complicated but effectively every weapon has a number that is compared against another number on the target ship that if lower will result in lower damage than normal. If higher then it doesn't change. The largest hard point size on the ship is a good indicator to show what kind of weapons you need to be effective against it. So a cobra is best dealt with size 2/medium weapons.

    Mike Evans
    Mike Evans is online now Designer- Elite: Dangerous
    Mike Evans's Avatar

    Quote Originally Posted by Poseidal View Post
    Look at the shield values:

    http://i.imgur.com/omzijnI.png

    It has equal or better shields than the Anaconda. All other non-freighter big ships are tiny in comparison - the nearest being the Clipper with shields just over half the value of the Python shields. The Clipper is also close in basic price to the Python; closer than either are to the Anaconda, but the firepower of the Python is more.

    The Clipper is the ship that most favourably compares with the Python in that size category.

    On top of these tanky shields, the Python is no slouch in turning. Imagine a Cobra (in terms of movement) that is more than four times as tough, with three times the firepower.

    If it is 'medium', it should lose most of the shields and large hardpoints.
    Just so you know that table isn't really correct at all.
    Mike Evans's Avatar

    Quote Originally Posted by shadowwar View Post
    Thanks Mike I will look into this once the game has loaded onto my Laptop PC. I can't play on my desktop any more without my system cratering badly. I am waiting for the next patch to see if this fixes things for me.
    Shield Optimised Masses:

    Size Minimum Optimised Maximum
    1 13t 25t 63t
    2 28t 55t 138t
    3 83t 165t 413t
    4 143t 285t 713t
    5 203t 405t 1013t
    6 270t 540t 1350t
    7 530t 1060t 2650t
    8 900t 1800t 4500t
    Mike Evans
    Mike Evans is online now Designer- Elite: Dangerous
    Mike Evans's Avatar

    Quote Originally Posted by remosito View Post
    > 6 270t 540t 1350t


    Which is the max shield the Dropship can install. But it has a Hull Mass of 580t, which is higher. Bringing it's effective shield value down to 75% and Asp level.

    Is the Python really supposed to have 2.6x the shield rating of the Dropship? And have more shielding with a 100k Credits Class 3B shield than the Dropship with a 15MCr 6A shield?
    The difference of 40t is not enough to create a -25% difference in it's base shield strength. It's more like -2.5% with an average shield generator.
    Mike Evans
    Mike Evans is online now Designer- Elite: Dangerous
    Mike Evans's Avatar

    Quote Originally Posted by LeetNoob View Post
    Shields are not well balanced in the game, A 3E class shield on a viper is stronger than a 4A on the Cobra because of hull mass.
    I would argue they're balanced in the only way that makes any sense that allows a single shield generator to fit on multiple ships of varying size.
    Imagine the shield generator as having a finite resource that it uses to produce a shield. Spreading that resource other a larger area will result in a weaker shield at any single point. A smaller area would result in a stronger shield at any single point. With that scheme in place it makes sense to alter the strength of the shields based on some factor of size so that a puny sidewinder shield can't just provide an Anaconda with a reliable and strong shield when the anaconda is huge in comparison (it/s not fair and makes no sense). Thus a shield generator is optimised for a certain hull mass which is a convenient way of encoding size into the ship's stats. If the ship has a lower hull mass it's like your able to spread the shield energy over a smaller area so it gets stronger at any single point. Being over that size results in a thinner and weaker shield at any single point and going to0 big just results in a shield so thin it doesn't work.

    The only other way of doing this would be to have bespoke shield generators for every single ships in the game and not something we're prepared to do.

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
    20/01/2015, 3:04 PM Click here to go to the next staff post in this thread. #27
    Mike Evans
    Mike Evans is online now Designer- Elite: Dangerous
    Mike Evans's Avatar

    Quote Originally Posted by remosito View Post
    Thank you kindly for your answer. Can I take this as official confirmation that this formula:



    and this table are wrong:

    https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets...75&single=true
    Those formulas have a lot of magic numbers in them; a sure sign that it isn't what we're using. The shield formula is pretty simple. Take the base strength, look at the difference between hull mass and optimal mass and create a modifier to the base strength based on the linear interpolation between the shields best and worst modifier depending on whether you're over or under weight.

    If you're exactly at the optimised mass then you'd get a modifier of 1 so no change.

    A C2 shield generator has 28t 55t 138t mass curve and modifier limits of 1.5 to 0.5. So being at 28t would give you a modifier of 1.5 to base strength. Being at 138t would give you a 0.5 modifier to base strength. Being somewhere in between would be a linear interpolation of those values and 1.
    tl;dr:
    Weapons do less damage to larger targets to ensure large weapons are superior vs larger targets. (Smaller sized weapons have superior tracking etc)
    The tested shield values previously circulating have very poor relation to actual shield values because the tests were done with a small laser.
    Actual shield strength is a function of base value (listed when purchasing) multiplied by the shields optimal mass to actual mass relation. Higher rated shields get better multipliers.
    generally range from 0.5 to 2.5

    for further reading, follow Mike Evans posts on FD forums:
    https://forums.frontier.co.uk/search...archid=1581858
    Last edited by Torashuu; January 22 2015 at 10:58:45 AM.

  13. #33
    tulip's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 11, 2011
    Posts
    1,972
    Quote Originally Posted by Torashuu View Post
    So turns out the initial shield numbers people produced don't match up with actual strengths because they didn't take into account that small weapons do reduced damage to larger targets..
    Trying to dig out all the quotes...


    We have 3 classes of landing pads that roughly equate to 3 ship sizes, 4 classes of weapons, and the knowledge that a small ship with small weapons shooting a large ship (Anaconda) leads to 1/3 damage.

    I guess it probably works something like this:

    S weapon + S target = 100% DPS potential.
    S weapon + M target = 67% DPS potential.
    S weapon + L target = 33% DPS potential.

    M weapon + S target = 100% DPS potential.
    M weapon + M target = 100% DPS potential.
    M weapon + L target = 67% DPS potential.

    L weapon = 100% DPS potential all against S-L ships.

    Huge weapons maybe geared towards potentially larger targets like faction capitals.


    Railguns, missiles, cannons and torpedoes punch above their weight in terms of their effectiveness against larger ships. There is a stat missing from outfitting that is supposed to indicate roughly speaking what the weapons is good at shooting at in terms of rough ship size (small to huge). Under the hood is slightly more complicated but effectively every weapon has a number that is compared against another number on the target ship that if lower will result in lower damage than normal. If higher then it doesn't change. The largest hard point size on the ship is a good indicator to show what kind of weapons you need to be effective against it. So a cobra is best dealt with size 2/medium weapons.

    Mike Evans
    Mike Evans is online now Designer- Elite: Dangerous
    Mike Evans's Avatar

    Quote Originally Posted by Poseidal View Post
    Look at the shield values:

    http://i.imgur.com/omzijnI.png

    It has equal or better shields than the Anaconda. All other non-freighter big ships are tiny in comparison - the nearest being the Clipper with shields just over half the value of the Python shields. The Clipper is also close in basic price to the Python; closer than either are to the Anaconda, but the firepower of the Python is more.

    The Clipper is the ship that most favourably compares with the Python in that size category.

    On top of these tanky shields, the Python is no slouch in turning. Imagine a Cobra (in terms of movement) that is more than four times as tough, with three times the firepower.

    If it is 'medium', it should lose most of the shields and large hardpoints.
    Just so you know that table isn't really correct at all.
    Mike Evans's Avatar

    Quote Originally Posted by shadowwar View Post
    Thanks Mike I will look into this once the game has loaded onto my Laptop PC. I can't play on my desktop any more without my system cratering badly. I am waiting for the next patch to see if this fixes things for me.
    Shield Optimised Masses:

    Size Minimum Optimised Maximum
    1 13t 25t 63t
    2 28t 55t 138t
    3 83t 165t 413t
    4 143t 285t 713t
    5 203t 405t 1013t
    6 270t 540t 1350t
    7 530t 1060t 2650t
    8 900t 1800t 4500t
    Mike Evans
    Mike Evans is online now Designer- Elite: Dangerous
    Mike Evans's Avatar

    Quote Originally Posted by remosito View Post
    > 6 270t 540t 1350t


    Which is the max shield the Dropship can install. But it has a Hull Mass of 580t, which is higher. Bringing it's effective shield value down to 75% and Asp level.

    Is the Python really supposed to have 2.6x the shield rating of the Dropship? And have more shielding with a 100k Credits Class 3B shield than the Dropship with a 15MCr 6A shield?
    The difference of 40t is not enough to create a -25% difference in it's base shield strength. It's more like -2.5% with an average shield generator.
    Mike Evans
    Mike Evans is online now Designer- Elite: Dangerous
    Mike Evans's Avatar

    Quote Originally Posted by LeetNoob View Post
    Shields are not well balanced in the game, A 3E class shield on a viper is stronger than a 4A on the Cobra because of hull mass.
    I would argue they're balanced in the only way that makes any sense that allows a single shield generator to fit on multiple ships of varying size.
    Imagine the shield generator as having a finite resource that it uses to produce a shield. Spreading that resource other a larger area will result in a weaker shield at any single point. A smaller area would result in a stronger shield at any single point. With that scheme in place it makes sense to alter the strength of the shields based on some factor of size so that a puny sidewinder shield can't just provide an Anaconda with a reliable and strong shield when the anaconda is huge in comparison (it/s not fair and makes no sense). Thus a shield generator is optimised for a certain hull mass which is a convenient way of encoding size into the ship's stats. If the ship has a lower hull mass it's like your able to spread the shield energy over a smaller area so it gets stronger at any single point. Being over that size results in a thinner and weaker shield at any single point and going to0 big just results in a shield so thin it doesn't work.

    The only other way of doing this would be to have bespoke shield generators for every single ships in the game and not something we're prepared to do.

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
    20/01/2015, 3:04 PM Click here to go to the next staff post in this thread. #27
    Mike Evans
    Mike Evans is online now Designer- Elite: Dangerous
    Mike Evans's Avatar

    Quote Originally Posted by remosito View Post
    Thank you kindly for your answer. Can I take this as official confirmation that this formula:



    and this table are wrong:

    https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets...75&single=true
    Those formulas have a lot of magic numbers in them; a sure sign that it isn't what we're using. The shield formula is pretty simple. Take the base strength, look at the difference between hull mass and optimal mass and create a modifier to the base strength based on the linear interpolation between the shields best and worst modifier depending on whether you're over or under weight.

    If you're exactly at the optimised mass then you'd get a modifier of 1 so no change.

    A C2 shield generator has 28t 55t 138t mass curve and modifier limits of 1.5 to 0.5. So being at 28t would give you a modifier of 1.5 to base strength. Being at 138t would give you a 0.5 modifier to base strength. Being somewhere in between would be a linear interpolation of those values and 1.
    tl;dr:
    Weapons do less damage to larger targets to ensure large weapons are superior vs larger targets. (Smaller sized weapons have superior tracking etc)
    The tested shield values previously circulating have very poor relation to actual shield values because the tests were done with a small laser.
    Actual shield strength is a function of base value (listed when purchasing) multiplied by the shields optimal mass to actual mass relation. Higher rated shields get better multipliers.
    generally range from 0.5 to 2.5

    for further reading, follow Mike Evans posts on FD forums:
    https://forums.frontier.co.uk/search...archid=1581858
    Wait, larger ships get what is effectively a resistance bonus against small weapons (that already do little damage) and large weapons suffer no penalties when hitting smaller stuff despite them going through the trouble of coding size based damage resolutions?

    That's retarded, if anything large weapons should have a % shaved off when hitting smaller stuff to try to avoid instagib situations.
    Quote Originally Posted by Tarminic View Post
    Just for the record, "sending a needy text" is never the right answer.

  14. #34
    Straight Hustlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 14, 2011
    Posts
    9,806
    Quote Originally Posted by tulip View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Torashuu View Post
    So turns out the initial shield numbers people produced don't match up with actual strengths because they didn't take into account that small weapons do reduced damage to larger targets..
    Trying to dig out all the quotes...


    We have 3 classes of landing pads that roughly equate to 3 ship sizes, 4 classes of weapons, and the knowledge that a small ship with small weapons shooting a large ship (Anaconda) leads to 1/3 damage.

    I guess it probably works something like this:

    S weapon + S target = 100% DPS potential.
    S weapon + M target = 67% DPS potential.
    S weapon + L target = 33% DPS potential.

    M weapon + S target = 100% DPS potential.
    M weapon + M target = 100% DPS potential.
    M weapon + L target = 67% DPS potential.

    L weapon = 100% DPS potential all against S-L ships.

    Huge weapons maybe geared towards potentially larger targets like faction capitals.


    Railguns, missiles, cannons and torpedoes punch above their weight in terms of their effectiveness against larger ships. There is a stat missing from outfitting that is supposed to indicate roughly speaking what the weapons is good at shooting at in terms of rough ship size (small to huge). Under the hood is slightly more complicated but effectively every weapon has a number that is compared against another number on the target ship that if lower will result in lower damage than normal. If higher then it doesn't change. The largest hard point size on the ship is a good indicator to show what kind of weapons you need to be effective against it. So a cobra is best dealt with size 2/medium weapons.

    Mike Evans
    Mike Evans is online now Designer- Elite: Dangerous
    Mike Evans's Avatar

    Quote Originally Posted by Poseidal View Post
    Look at the shield values:

    http://i.imgur.com/omzijnI.png

    It has equal or better shields than the Anaconda. All other non-freighter big ships are tiny in comparison - the nearest being the Clipper with shields just over half the value of the Python shields. The Clipper is also close in basic price to the Python; closer than either are to the Anaconda, but the firepower of the Python is more.

    The Clipper is the ship that most favourably compares with the Python in that size category.

    On top of these tanky shields, the Python is no slouch in turning. Imagine a Cobra (in terms of movement) that is more than four times as tough, with three times the firepower.

    If it is 'medium', it should lose most of the shields and large hardpoints.
    Just so you know that table isn't really correct at all.
    Mike Evans's Avatar

    Quote Originally Posted by shadowwar View Post
    Thanks Mike I will look into this once the game has loaded onto my Laptop PC. I can't play on my desktop any more without my system cratering badly. I am waiting for the next patch to see if this fixes things for me.
    Shield Optimised Masses:

    Size Minimum Optimised Maximum
    1 13t 25t 63t
    2 28t 55t 138t
    3 83t 165t 413t
    4 143t 285t 713t
    5 203t 405t 1013t
    6 270t 540t 1350t
    7 530t 1060t 2650t
    8 900t 1800t 4500t
    Mike Evans
    Mike Evans is online now Designer- Elite: Dangerous
    Mike Evans's Avatar

    Quote Originally Posted by remosito View Post
    > 6 270t 540t 1350t


    Which is the max shield the Dropship can install. But it has a Hull Mass of 580t, which is higher. Bringing it's effective shield value down to 75% and Asp level.

    Is the Python really supposed to have 2.6x the shield rating of the Dropship? And have more shielding with a 100k Credits Class 3B shield than the Dropship with a 15MCr 6A shield?
    The difference of 40t is not enough to create a -25% difference in it's base shield strength. It's more like -2.5% with an average shield generator.
    Mike Evans
    Mike Evans is online now Designer- Elite: Dangerous
    Mike Evans's Avatar

    Quote Originally Posted by LeetNoob View Post
    Shields are not well balanced in the game, A 3E class shield on a viper is stronger than a 4A on the Cobra because of hull mass.
    I would argue they're balanced in the only way that makes any sense that allows a single shield generator to fit on multiple ships of varying size.
    Imagine the shield generator as having a finite resource that it uses to produce a shield. Spreading that resource other a larger area will result in a weaker shield at any single point. A smaller area would result in a stronger shield at any single point. With that scheme in place it makes sense to alter the strength of the shields based on some factor of size so that a puny sidewinder shield can't just provide an Anaconda with a reliable and strong shield when the anaconda is huge in comparison (it/s not fair and makes no sense). Thus a shield generator is optimised for a certain hull mass which is a convenient way of encoding size into the ship's stats. If the ship has a lower hull mass it's like your able to spread the shield energy over a smaller area so it gets stronger at any single point. Being over that size results in a thinner and weaker shield at any single point and going to0 big just results in a shield so thin it doesn't work.

    The only other way of doing this would be to have bespoke shield generators for every single ships in the game and not something we're prepared to do.

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
    20/01/2015, 3:04 PM Click here to go to the next staff post in this thread. #27
    Mike Evans
    Mike Evans is online now Designer- Elite: Dangerous
    Mike Evans's Avatar

    Quote Originally Posted by remosito View Post
    Thank you kindly for your answer. Can I take this as official confirmation that this formula:



    and this table are wrong:

    https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets...75&single=true
    Those formulas have a lot of magic numbers in them; a sure sign that it isn't what we're using. The shield formula is pretty simple. Take the base strength, look at the difference between hull mass and optimal mass and create a modifier to the base strength based on the linear interpolation between the shields best and worst modifier depending on whether you're over or under weight.

    If you're exactly at the optimised mass then you'd get a modifier of 1 so no change.

    A C2 shield generator has 28t 55t 138t mass curve and modifier limits of 1.5 to 0.5. So being at 28t would give you a modifier of 1.5 to base strength. Being at 138t would give you a 0.5 modifier to base strength. Being somewhere in between would be a linear interpolation of those values and 1.
    tl;dr:
    Weapons do less damage to larger targets to ensure large weapons are superior vs larger targets. (Smaller sized weapons have superior tracking etc)
    The tested shield values previously circulating have very poor relation to actual shield values because the tests were done with a small laser.
    Actual shield strength is a function of base value (listed when purchasing) multiplied by the shields optimal mass to actual mass relation. Higher rated shields get better multipliers.
    generally range from 0.5 to 2.5

    for further reading, follow Mike Evans posts on FD forums:
    https://forums.frontier.co.uk/search...archid=1581858
    Wait, larger ships get what is effectively a resistance bonus against small weapons (that already do little damage) and large weapons suffer no penalties when hitting smaller stuff despite them going through the trouble of coding size based damage resolutions?

    That's retarded, if anything large weapons should have a % shaved off when hitting smaller stuff to try to avoid instagib situations.
    Its offset by tracking speed. But IMO the tracking speed of larger weapons should be reduced some what.

  15. #35

    Join Date
    April 13, 2011
    Posts
    3,737
    Corrected shield values:
    https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets...wfcqlM/pubhtml

    Post nerf python still will have strongest shields bar anaconda. Run for the hills, it'll be a glorified type-7 huehuehue

  16. #36
    Liare's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    10,740
    Quote Originally Posted by Straight Hustlin View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by tulip View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Torashuu View Post
    So turns out the initial shield numbers people produced don't match up with actual strengths because they didn't take into account that small weapons do reduced damage to larger targets..
    Trying to dig out all the quotes...


    We have 3 classes of landing pads that roughly equate to 3 ship sizes, 4 classes of weapons, and the knowledge that a small ship with small weapons shooting a large ship (Anaconda) leads to 1/3 damage.

    I guess it probably works something like this:

    S weapon + S target = 100% DPS potential.
    S weapon + M target = 67% DPS potential.
    S weapon + L target = 33% DPS potential.

    M weapon + S target = 100% DPS potential.
    M weapon + M target = 100% DPS potential.
    M weapon + L target = 67% DPS potential.

    L weapon = 100% DPS potential all against S-L ships.

    Huge weapons maybe geared towards potentially larger targets like faction capitals.


    Railguns, missiles, cannons and torpedoes punch above their weight in terms of their effectiveness against larger ships. There is a stat missing from outfitting that is supposed to indicate roughly speaking what the weapons is good at shooting at in terms of rough ship size (small to huge). Under the hood is slightly more complicated but effectively every weapon has a number that is compared against another number on the target ship that if lower will result in lower damage than normal. If higher then it doesn't change. The largest hard point size on the ship is a good indicator to show what kind of weapons you need to be effective against it. So a cobra is best dealt with size 2/medium weapons.

    Mike Evans
    Mike Evans is online now Designer- Elite: Dangerous
    Mike Evans's Avatar

    Quote Originally Posted by Poseidal View Post
    Look at the shield values:

    http://i.imgur.com/omzijnI.png

    It has equal or better shields than the Anaconda. All other non-freighter big ships are tiny in comparison - the nearest being the Clipper with shields just over half the value of the Python shields. The Clipper is also close in basic price to the Python; closer than either are to the Anaconda, but the firepower of the Python is more.

    The Clipper is the ship that most favourably compares with the Python in that size category.

    On top of these tanky shields, the Python is no slouch in turning. Imagine a Cobra (in terms of movement) that is more than four times as tough, with three times the firepower.

    If it is 'medium', it should lose most of the shields and large hardpoints.
    Just so you know that table isn't really correct at all.
    Mike Evans's Avatar

    Quote Originally Posted by shadowwar View Post
    Thanks Mike I will look into this once the game has loaded onto my Laptop PC. I can't play on my desktop any more without my system cratering badly. I am waiting for the next patch to see if this fixes things for me.
    Shield Optimised Masses:

    Size Minimum Optimised Maximum
    1 13t 25t 63t
    2 28t 55t 138t
    3 83t 165t 413t
    4 143t 285t 713t
    5 203t 405t 1013t
    6 270t 540t 1350t
    7 530t 1060t 2650t
    8 900t 1800t 4500t
    Mike Evans
    Mike Evans is online now Designer- Elite: Dangerous
    Mike Evans's Avatar

    Quote Originally Posted by remosito View Post
    > 6 270t 540t 1350t


    Which is the max shield the Dropship can install. But it has a Hull Mass of 580t, which is higher. Bringing it's effective shield value down to 75% and Asp level.

    Is the Python really supposed to have 2.6x the shield rating of the Dropship? And have more shielding with a 100k Credits Class 3B shield than the Dropship with a 15MCr 6A shield?
    The difference of 40t is not enough to create a -25% difference in it's base shield strength. It's more like -2.5% with an average shield generator.
    Mike Evans
    Mike Evans is online now Designer- Elite: Dangerous
    Mike Evans's Avatar

    Quote Originally Posted by LeetNoob View Post
    Shields are not well balanced in the game, A 3E class shield on a viper is stronger than a 4A on the Cobra because of hull mass.
    I would argue they're balanced in the only way that makes any sense that allows a single shield generator to fit on multiple ships of varying size.
    Imagine the shield generator as having a finite resource that it uses to produce a shield. Spreading that resource other a larger area will result in a weaker shield at any single point. A smaller area would result in a stronger shield at any single point. With that scheme in place it makes sense to alter the strength of the shields based on some factor of size so that a puny sidewinder shield can't just provide an Anaconda with a reliable and strong shield when the anaconda is huge in comparison (it/s not fair and makes no sense). Thus a shield generator is optimised for a certain hull mass which is a convenient way of encoding size into the ship's stats. If the ship has a lower hull mass it's like your able to spread the shield energy over a smaller area so it gets stronger at any single point. Being over that size results in a thinner and weaker shield at any single point and going to0 big just results in a shield so thin it doesn't work.

    The only other way of doing this would be to have bespoke shield generators for every single ships in the game and not something we're prepared to do.

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
    20/01/2015, 3:04 PM Click here to go to the next staff post in this thread. #27
    Mike Evans
    Mike Evans is online now Designer- Elite: Dangerous
    Mike Evans's Avatar

    Quote Originally Posted by remosito View Post
    Thank you kindly for your answer. Can I take this as official confirmation that this formula:



    and this table are wrong:

    https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets...75&single=true
    Those formulas have a lot of magic numbers in them; a sure sign that it isn't what we're using. The shield formula is pretty simple. Take the base strength, look at the difference between hull mass and optimal mass and create a modifier to the base strength based on the linear interpolation between the shields best and worst modifier depending on whether you're over or under weight.

    If you're exactly at the optimised mass then you'd get a modifier of 1 so no change.

    A C2 shield generator has 28t 55t 138t mass curve and modifier limits of 1.5 to 0.5. So being at 28t would give you a modifier of 1.5 to base strength. Being at 138t would give you a 0.5 modifier to base strength. Being somewhere in between would be a linear interpolation of those values and 1.
    tl;dr:
    Weapons do less damage to larger targets to ensure large weapons are superior vs larger targets. (Smaller sized weapons have superior tracking etc)
    The tested shield values previously circulating have very poor relation to actual shield values because the tests were done with a small laser.
    Actual shield strength is a function of base value (listed when purchasing) multiplied by the shields optimal mass to actual mass relation. Higher rated shields get better multipliers.
    generally range from 0.5 to 2.5

    for further reading, follow Mike Evans posts on FD forums:
    https://forums.frontier.co.uk/search...archid=1581858
    Wait, larger ships get what is effectively a resistance bonus against small weapons (that already do little damage) and large weapons suffer no penalties when hitting smaller stuff despite them going through the trouble of coding size based damage resolutions?

    That's retarded, if anything large weapons should have a % shaved off when hitting smaller stuff to try to avoid instagib situations.
    Its offset by tracking speed. But IMO the tracking speed of larger weapons should be reduced some what.
    enter the Vulture from the left, with two large hardpoints and viper-like manuverability allowing it to employ fixed weapons reasonably well.

    hue hue hue.
    Viking, n.:
    1. Daring Scandinavian seafarers, explorers, adventurers, entrepreneurs world-famous for their aggressive, nautical import business, highly leveraged takeovers and blue eyes.
    2. Bloodthirsty sea pirates who ravaged northern Europe beginning in the 9th century.

    Hagar's note: The first definition is much preferred; the second is used only by malcontents, the envious, and disgruntled owners of waterfront property.

  17. #37

    Join Date
    April 10, 2011
    Posts
    1,597
    Watch this video for weapon testing against Anaconda shields. A small beam puts out ~40% the DPS of a large beam against large targets, so I don't think they implemented the ~66% damage reduction.

    If you were to say that that Anaconda had 100 shield HP, then the fixed beams did the following DPS:

    C3 = 5 DPS
    C2 = 3 DPS
    C1 = 2 DPS



    This chart from the video shows time in seconds to drop the Anaconda's shields with various weapons.

    Last edited by CastleBravo; January 23 2015 at 03:58:12 PM.

  18. #38
    Kraken's Avatar
    Join Date
    July 31, 2013
    Posts
    850
    use the galaxy map, turn on realistic. it tells you what Class of star is at a system if you click on info rather than navigation. also the colour of the star gives an indication. A-M you are golden, beyond M stars (Ts and Ys etc) you are not. See the various exploration charts about the star types and what is and isnt scoopable. but as you can always tell what type of star is at any system using the jump map you should never run out of fuel.

    This might be useful (someone retype my crap words also?)

    Edit now with shit youtube video taken on my phone to show what im talking about or some shit.
    Last edited by Kraken; January 28 2015 at 08:41:04 PM.

  19. #39
    Procellus's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 12, 2011
    Posts
    1,019
    FOG KBAM is the acronym I use to remember scoopable stars

  20. #40
    Kraken's Avatar
    Join Date
    July 31, 2013
    Posts
    850
    Quote Originally Posted by Procellus View Post
    FOG KBAM is the acronym I use to remember scoopable stars
    L?

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •