looking forward to the remaining parts

thanks so much for commenting on this site, I really appreciate. Things are out-of-bounds at the moment, as Ecaf and me are relaunching this site. In the future we are still planning to release articles in a semi-regular basis.

The idea you have is really interesting and I’ll put that on our “favourite topics list” and hopefully we’ll have something up soon.

Oh, in the future you can find us on http://www.EVE-Links.com.

Thanks again for contributing!

Best wishes,
Smak

kEwL dOOd

Keep up the good fight, and as soon as I finish some volunteer work for one of the more prolific authors (something about fighting spacecraft) I’d like to connect about your interest in my work as a possible contributor.

Much respect!

kEwL dOOd

Pirates are romantic everywhere. and so are mobs.

But truthfully miners alts have a minor chance at blowing Orcas in free space if there are enough of the miner alts. However, pirate freighters will always be immune since they just have so damned much structure.

< Fair comment Seiji but this is an Amarr specific article, hence the wording - Ecaf >

I love to debate these finer points, particularly when CCP maths are involved! So I take no offence at your valid and well reasoned arguments.

Your logic is without flaw regarding the resistance example and I think both “view points” are valid as long as both are considered together.

I also agree with the logic on the webber example as long as you look at the effect on the target ship in isolation. Yes any number of webbers would each cause the ship to take twice as long to cross any given distance. But if you introduce another element that doesn’t change then this fact is no longer relevant as you compare to an absolute and not the “previous value” from the webber before it.

As an example, you are in a battleship with slow tracking large turrets and a fast frigate came in to orbit you inside your webber range. The object here would be to slow the frigate down to the point where your turrets could track it. Lets say your turrets could track an object with a transversal velocity of 200 m/s at the range that the frigate is at.

A frigate able to orbit at 1000 m/s would be slowed to 500 m/s by a single webber. That’s a significant impact whichever way you calculate it, but a second webber will only slow the frig to 250 m/s. Regardless of the fact that this still isn’t good enough to allow constant tracking the net effect to you in your BS is half that given by the first webber. Without diminishing returns, ie. if the webber had an absolute effect, say -400 m/s, instead of a percentage, the second webber would have been enough.

We may just be quibbling over semantics here and could probably carry the discussion on for some time. This for me demonstrates one of the beauties of EVE in that opposite view points can be just as valid or invalid when viewed from different angles.

I cannot comment on the new content point right now but you can be sure you have not heard the last from Smak and myself.

Cheers

Ecaf

I disagree. One 50% web would double the time to travel a given distance. A second 50% web, reducing speed to 25% (1/2 * 1/2) would again double the time to travel a given distance. The same exact principle applies to resistances (i. e. 95% is twice the protection of 90%). To look at this correctly, one must look at the incoming damage percentage, not the resistance levels. The simple (or perhaps oversimple) math is to take 1-(resist) to determine the incoming damage, and from my earlier example, 1-(90%) vs. 1-(95%) equals out to 10% vs. 5% for an obvious 50% reduction in oncoming damage.

Yea this is simplified to overlook the stacking penalty, and to only look at one damage type/resistance, though it seems that this fundamental element was overlooked and I want to make sure it is not misunderstood.

Non-confrontationally,

kEwL dOOd

Also, where is the new content? Over a month?!?

A serious article on mining Earth’s moon links mine about moon mining in EVE!

Gotta love the internet.