Resolution Versus Radius

Ripard Teg had some posts where he posited that he thinks "something's a little wonky in the actual code that governs how much damage large signature guns should do to smaller targets". He went on to talk about math and tracking and basically got it all wrong as Azual Skoll masterfully demonstrated in a post that could be held up as a shining example of showing someone to be wrong on the internet.

Ripard, being shown the error of his ways, retracted his post soon thereafter:

Earlier this week, I wrote a little post called "Signature" in which I stated my belief that:

I think something's a little wonky in the actual code that governs how much damage large signature guns should do to smaller targets. 

And then I wrote a whole lot of wrong about where I thought this was coming from. EVE blogger and outstanding pilot Azual Skoll took exception and wrote a masterful deconstruction of just how wrong I was and put it on his blog. It's great reading and I suggest you go out and give it a read if you're interested in the topic. 

Now in my own defense -- and not in any way trying to deflect my mistake -- Azual's post is mostly about tracking issues, not damage, and my post was about damage. I fully concede that large guns have a problem tracking smaller targets; I've said in the past that the tracking issue is solvable and indeed I've done my own experiments to solve it. My statement was regarding the damage that large guns do to smaller targets when they actually hit them. Even Azual's data shows this: when the large guns of a Naga actually hit a Cormorant, they were doing equal or better damage than the medium guns of a Ferox. 

What I forgot, and the source of my mistake, is how gun damage is calculated. When a gun does hit a target, it does a minimum of 50% base damage to the target. And damn it damn it damn it, I knew this! But somehow this week I idiotically forgot about it and instead of looking it up, I worked myself into a holy snit over my indignation about something that didn't deserve my indignation. 

So, to summarize, Azual Skoll is completely right and I am completely wrong. I'm really embarrassed, and I apologize. I regret the error, as I say at times like this.

But then he ends his post with this paragraph:

So yeah, the math within the game generating damage on large guns against small targets is working perfectly well. So I'm now going to transfer some small bit of my indignation to the math itself. Should guns automatically do at least 50% base damage when they hit, regardless of the target size they're hitting? I'm thinking "no". What do you all think?

This is what I would like to address.

A while back I was ruminating on tracking, transervsal, etc and learned about the math behind Eve's gunnery mechanics:

My error lies in that I think of the two separately but the formula to determine hits has them combined in the equation. From Evelopedia:

The way I was thinking is that the tracking versus transversal part merely determines if your guns can move fast enough to aim at the target; then assuming you can aim at the target, then the resolution versus radius to determine the dispersion of the shot versus the size of the target area profile.
But its not a two part process, its a one step calculation and turning on a MWD may increase transversal speed but it also increases the radius. So the question is, how much effect does the two changes have?

My instinct prior to that post was that the tracking versus velocity was one calculation, and signature resolution versus radius was a second calculation. In other words, am I fast enough to swing my aim around at the target and is my aim good enough to hit?

But Eve, as I discovered to my public embarrassment in 2011, throws the signature resolution/radius ratio into the tracking calculation. What this means is that ship with ~0 angular velocity negates any effect of the signature ratio in the chance to hit.

Its like saying that I should be able to hit a quarter sitting on a tree with a rifle because the quarter is not moving. This strikes me as wrong.

I think for gameplay balance purposes that large bore guns (ROLEPLAY WARNING: due to inherent nature of attempting to push energy/matter a further distance) should have a built in inaccuracy that is calculated via the weapon's signature resolution and the target's signature radius.

In other words, a frigate with no MWD sitting still at optimal range to a battleship sized weapon should NOT guarantee a hit. I realize this is radically different than what currently happens now and that a lot of balancing would need to make this work but I'm kind of in Ripard's side on this one. Currently I feel that small ships are too easily dealt with by larger ship weapons (mainly  Battleship sized and bigger versus frigates and destroyers) when applied en masse and that giving them more protection would allow for more diverse gameplay options.

That being said, I don't believe Eve is in dire straits with the current gunnery hit calculations.