Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 [10] 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 .. 33 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 27 post(s) |
Venkul Mul
Gallente
|
Posted - 2009.02.20 20:46:00 -
[271]
Mamolian, you, Tippia and co. could stop putting that damed advertising in your post?
It break the forum.
|
Ausser
Cybertech Industrials Agency
|
Posted - 2009.02.20 22:11:00 -
[272]
Originally by: Cassandra Elan Edited by: Cassandra Elan on 20/02/2009 04:18:15
Originally by: Ausser Is it really a good idea to swap the effect of the skills 'Astrometric Triangulation' and 'Signal Acquision'?
Players with maxed AT and low SA skills get nerfed by this decision.
The following solution looks better and is without pain for anybody:
- Change effect of SA to give strength bonus like AT, maybe little stronger than AT. Let AT be a prerequisite for SA. Then rename SA to something like 'Advanced Astrometric Triangulation'.
- Introduce a new skill with the old name 'Signal Acquision', make it rank 3 or so. Give it the scan duration bonus like it was on the old rank 8 skill.
This way nobody gets hurt and old players with both skills at 5 still have a little advantage to scan down the hard-to-find-stuff, at least for a while.
They didn't swap the ranks, just the names. Your SP totals are safe. Apparently you didn't notice the new skill that actually replaces triangulation - Astrometric Acquisition (rank 5)
Also, Triangulation got changed to 10% strength per level, level 3 is now more effective than level 5 was before.
You are right, the skillpoints are not lost - they get another name and effect. And that's the problem.
A player who decided to spend 1.28m skillpoints into valuable scan strength now ends up with these skill points dumped into a less valuable scan time skill.
The 'boost' in effect of the new strength skill is not more effective than before, even if it looks like it would (+25% < +30%). This is because of balancing the scan targets. These were balanced so the hard-to-find ones needed skill at 5 (25% bonus), the new scan targets will be balanced the same way, they will need the 50% scan strength bonus of a maxed skill. We have: +25% (old) = +50% (new). So it is a drop by 40% if your skill gets 'morphed' from lvl 5 to lvl 3.
The decision to invest skilltime into scan strength should not be touched.
I can see lots of reimbusement petitions where ppl ask to move their skillpoints from scan time to scan strength.
The suggestion in my first post solves the problem.
|
Miss Moonwych
Formedian Shadows
|
Posted - 2009.02.21 03:54:00 -
[273]
Edited by: Miss Moonwych on 21/02/2009 04:13:37 due to forum bug: trying to get past page 9
edit: ah it worked
Looks like we're back from the dark side of the moon.
|
mamolian
Cruoris Seraphim
|
Posted - 2009.02.21 04:10:00 -
[274]
hi5 -----------
|
Miss Moonwych
Formedian Shadows
|
Posted - 2009.02.21 05:53:00 -
[275]
Edited by: Miss Moonwych on 21/02/2009 05:55:30
Originally by: Space Wanderer
And now, people....
Formula Time!
I spent some time studying the formula of combined probes and I think I might have nailed it down (except for a small detail).
To evaluate the final strength of four probes this seems to be the procedure:
1) Signal Strength of each of the single probe.
This has already been identified.
sig-str% = Size * probe-str * distance-modifier
where probe str = prob-base-str/range modifier (1, 2, 4, 8... depending on the range the probe has been set to), and distance-modifier is the same in the old formula e^-((Target Range / Max Range)^2).
2) Signal Strength of each couple of probes.
With four probes there are six couples. For each couple you evaluate the average of the signal strength of the two probes and multiply it for a modifier evaluated depending on the angle that the two probes form with the site to be probed. The modifier goes from 0.5 (for an angle of 30 degrees) to 0.822 (for an angle of 90degrees or more). Less than 30 degrees and the two probes are counted as separate and give separate readings. What I still don't know is the exact function that is used to go from 0.5 to 0.822.
3) Average over couple of probes.
Well, this is the easy part. You just average the values obtained for each of the couples to obtain the final signal strength.
Conclusion
So what does that mean? That to obtain the best possible signal you have to put your probes as close as possible to the site, which is to be expected, AND placed so that there is an angle of more than 90 degrees between EACH probe. It does not seem to make a difference if the angle is 90 or more.
Disclaimer
I did the tests in a plane around a site, which allowed me to get a single signal using only three probes, very useful to reduce the degrees of freedom. What written above about four probes is extrapolation of what I observed for three probes to the case of four probes (singularity went down before I could do more tests).
Downtime so...
I've got some notes from some tests and will post them for those who like the number crunching. Not many data points yet (we need at least 3 I guess) but its precise which helps too.
When probes couldn't move by themselves I moved them with my ship to some fixed points in space. The following points in space are the ones I used in my test (i'm essentially using the numbers from the bm popup):
- Sun (x: -0.01253, y: 0.279623, z: 0.219741) - Planet I (x: -33.979312, y: -6.609995, z: 15.777635) - Planet II (x: 69.558971, y: 13.543235, z: -18.491751) - Planet III (x: 23.919419, y: 4.658619, z: -93.942831)
I used the sun to put stuff down to probe: a large tower and a scropion. At the three planets I placed a deep space probe each.
According to my own calculations here are the angles between the sun and each two planets:
Planet I - Sun - Planet II : 170.602 degrees Planet I - Sun - Planet III: 128.659 degrees Planet II - Sun - Planet III: 60.71433 degrees
Scanning results single probes at different planets (PPH2/2 rigs/lvl4 tri/lvl5 cov).
Scorpion (deep space probes at 32AU):
I: 69.87% II: 69.86% III: 69.85%
Large Tower (deep space probes at 8AU):
I: 27.92% II: 27.85% III: 27.77%
Scanning results combination of probes:
Scorpion (deep space probes at 32AU):
I+II: 57.44% I+III: 57.44% II+III: 38.74%
Large Tower (deep space probes at 8AU):
I+II: 22.93% I+III: 22.89% II+III: 15.42%
Its becoming clearer that when the angle is greater than 90 degrees (not entirely sure yet) the resulting strength will be at ~82.2% of the average strength. When its lower as in this case with the 60.71433 degrees you get a higher penalty: around 55% it seems.
I know we need more datapoints but maybe someone can already figure this out . They also may be changing this stuff so I will try this exact same setup with new patches aswell to be sure the data is up-to-date.
Regards,
M.M.
|
Space Wanderer
|
Posted - 2009.02.21 09:08:00 -
[276]
Originally by: Miss Moonwych
I've got some notes from some tests and will post them for those who like the number crunching. Not many data points yet (we need at least 3 I guess) but its precise which helps too.
Thx for the data MM. I'll see if I can lay down a curve of some type. Also pretty nnice idea to derive precise angles from BM data.
Originally by: Miss Moonwych
Its becoming clearer that when the angle is greater than 90 degrees (not entirely sure yet) the resulting strength will be at ~82.2% of the average strength. When its lower as in this case with the 60.71433 degrees you get a higher penalty: around 55% it seems.
Yes, that fits my own data. I can add something here: I am sure that the penaly goes lower than 55% for lower angles. I observed a reduction to 0.52 for an angle that was closer to 30 degrees (though, as I said I am not sure about the exact value of the angle). Less than that and the signal of the two probes collapsed into two single-probes signals, but of course it might be that the granularity of the placement of probes would not allow me to reach lower values between 0.5 and 0.52.
Thx for the data. What I think we still need now, are more data of points contained between 25 and 90 degrees.
|
Red 7
|
Posted - 2009.02.21 11:45:00 -
[277]
The Astro V requirement on the Deep Space Scanner Probes is a little tough on those starting exploration. Any chance it can be changed to that each level of Astrometrics allows for a longer range on the probe? With Astro V giving the whole 1024 AU, Astro IV 512 AU, etc
|
QuantumX
Minmatar Sicarri Covenant Privateer Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.02.21 11:50:00 -
[278]
Originally by: Red 7 The Astro V requirement on the Deep Space Scanner Probes is a little tough on those starting exploration. Any chance it can be changed to that each level of Astrometrics allows for a longer range on the probe? With Astro V giving the whole 1024 AU, Astro IV 512 AU, etc
The difference would have to be far more pronounced then this, lets be honest 512UA covers 99.99999% of systems. Perhaps also make the skill affect strength...
|
FlameGlow
Legio Octae Rebellion Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.02.21 11:52:00 -
[279]
WTF!!!!Why the Sisters probe launcher was nerfed? 25% scan time reduction became just 5% probe strength, while skills, ships and rigs having the same bonus change keps their percentages _____________ I don't care what is nerfed, as long as it's not my "undock" button. |
Megan Maynard
Minmatar Out of Order
|
Posted - 2009.02.21 13:12:00 -
[280]
The lack of camera and probe control is making it impossible to find things.
I can't get any kind of perspective on where the probes are at in 3-d space because the map is always centered on the sun. The ability to center on objects, such as probes, planets, stations in map mode is a MUST or the process gets messy. (Ever play a bad resident evil? That's what this reminds me of, the terrible camera in some older res evil games.)
Also the fact that you don't see WHICH probe is getting a hit annoys me like crazy. I want to see which probe is getting a hit so I can adjust it instead of having to play some kind of logic game. Stop, hammer time. |
|
R4v3N One
Umbrella Corp. INC.
|
Posted - 2009.02.21 13:17:00 -
[281]
Uhm, can anyone actually scan things atm ? My map has been borked for about 3-4 days ...
Maybe its just me... anyone else having problems with the map ?
|
Nova Fox
Gallente Novafox Shipyards
|
Posted - 2009.02.21 13:35:00 -
[282]
Edited by: Nova Fox on 21/02/2009 13:45:37 Okay I was pertty much hateful of the old widget movement.
However you're mostly forgiven now.
DL'ed the new patch and I have to say its FAR more easier to move around than before and you actually have a clear idea what control of movement you have with the red highlight.
Now few more gripes
Scanning is broken but you probably know this. Results are not warpable.
The sphere range is too much in prenium light needs a tone down.
Still havent seen what a hit return looks like though.
=============
Pre Order your Sisters of Eve ship today
|
Lyvanna Kitaen
Minmatar Noonday Sun Corp
|
Posted - 2009.02.21 14:20:00 -
[283]
I'm a sad panda. The system map is still borked. It makes scanning extremely frustrating. Just about the time I get some probes out, the map locks up requiring a reboot to get it working again.
I was really hoping that I could scan down some wormholes this weekend and test stuff out but it appears that's not going to happen. I wish they would just roll back some stuff to the point where it works and so we can actually do some scanning, considering how much of the content in this patch depends on it.
Also, I can't get the market, in the the Domain region at least, to let me buy anything. With the new mirror, I don't have any deep space probes and I can't buy any either.
Frustrating, but what can you do? It's the test server, so things aren't always smooth sailing.
|
Miss Moonwych
Formedian Shadows
|
Posted - 2009.02.21 14:32:00 -
[284]
Originally by: Space Wanderer Thx for the data. What I think we still need now, are more data of points contained between 25 and 90 degrees.
I got lots of data now .
First off. Nothing seems to have changed lately.
This time I created 5 bookmarks between planet I and III (called a - e). Here each base strength from each of these bms and their combined strength with either the probe at planet I or II.
Scorpion (32 AU deep space probes):
base I: 69.87% base II: 69.86%
base a: 69.85% base b: 69.87% base c: 69.87% base d: 69.88% base e: 69.88%
Combination of probes (+ angle):
I - a : 57.44% (126.88856 degrees) II - a : 39.87% (61.484425 degrees)
I - b : 57.44% (121.15268 degrees) II - b : 43.54% (68.219775 degrees)
I - c : 57.45% (104.8736 degrees) II - c : 53.93% (84.497532 degrees)
I - d : 39.15% (61.335354 degrees) II - d : 57.44% (128.03194 degrees)
I - e : collapse (27.175629 degrees) II - e : 57.44% (162.18129 degrees)
Large tower (8 AU deep space probes):
base I: 27.92% base II: 27.85%
base a: 27.81% base b: 27.87% base c: 27.92% base d: 27.94% base e: 27.94%
Combination of probes (+ angle):
I - a : 22.91% (126.88856 degrees) II - a : 15.88% (61.484425 degrees)
I - b : 22.94% (121.15268 degrees) II - b : 17.36% (68.219775 degrees)
I - c : 22.96% (104.8736 degrees) II - c : 21.52% (84.497532 degrees)
I - d : 15.65% (61.335354 degrees) II - d : 22.93% (128.03194 degrees)
I - e : collapse (27.175629 degrees) II - e : 22.93% (162.18129 degrees)
I think a lot of information can be extracted from this. I would like to get some more info on the 30-60 degrees range. But so far it looks like 30-90 degrees is where the action is.
Have to put it in a program to make a nice graph of % penalty based on avg strength. But wanted to post the (raw) data right away.
Regards,
M.M.
|
SilKKZ the3rd
Caldari Deep Core Mining Inc.
|
Posted - 2009.02.21 18:20:00 -
[285]
sorry to sound totally thick , but when you are talking about angles how on earth do you obtain what the angle is when you get to the red dot stage.
Are you talking about angle from 1 probe to another whats your refferance point. So I can understand probing in more detail I am failing to understand how you can calculate angles on that 3D map effectivly. are you saying each probe needs to be more than 90 degrees from the other , however to get 4 like that its almost impossible and be close enough to get a warp able signal.
|
Miss Moonwych
Formedian Shadows
|
Posted - 2009.02.21 19:36:00 -
[286]
Edited by: Miss Moonwych on 21/02/2009 19:45:06
Originally by: SilKKZ the3rd sorry to sound totally thick , but when you are talking about angles how on earth do you obtain what the angle is when you get to the red dot stage.
Are you talking about angle from 1 probe to another whats your refferance point. So I can understand probing in more detail I am failing to understand how you can calculate angles on that 3D map effectivly. are you saying each probe needs to be more than 90 degrees from the other , however to get 4 like that its almost impossible and be close enough to get a warp able signal.
What we are trying to do here is to figure out what formulas are being used in the game. If/when we know that then it will be more clear what you have to do while scanning for signatures. For example: one of the weird things that is being encountered is when probes are getting close to a target (link). This may be explained when we figure out how the angles between the target and the probes have an effect on the outcome. That's one of the reasons (apart from plain curiosity) why these kinds of details could now be important. But when scanning you simply won't have time nor the need to use them directly.
And yes at this point it seems that probes need to have at least a 90 degree angle from the target to another probe. In other words: a tetrahedron of probes around a target still appears to be the best choice to find the target.
Regards,
M.M.
|
mamolian
Cruoris Seraphim
|
Posted - 2009.02.21 19:54:00 -
[287]
Originally by: Venkul Mul Mamolian, you, Tippia and co. could stop putting that damed advertising in your post?
It break the forum.
Err it was a forum bug, some issue with having ascii characters in the post.. not my fault brah! (already bug reported and resolved it seems.. Shame they deleted my post tho.) -----------
|
Space Wanderer
|
Posted - 2009.02.21 19:59:00 -
[288]
Ok, I got a big bug. Posting it here, and bug reporting it, as well.
The bug is this: We all know that the active probes show their selected range on screen. I don't know if it is related to the other bugs with the system map, but the shown ranges are WRONG. They seem to be half of what they should be.
Currently, I have a warpable hit on a site. This warpable hit has been obtained by four probes WITHOUT overlapping between their visible range, and the site itself lies outside the range of all probes.
Sounds funny... if it doesn't make it on TQ. :-)
|
Miss Moonwych
Formedian Shadows
|
Posted - 2009.02.21 20:02:00 -
[289]
Edited by: Miss Moonwych on 21/02/2009 20:02:48
Originally by: Space Wanderer
Ok, I got a big bug. Posting it here, and bug reporting it, as well.
The bug is this: We all know that the active probes show their selected range on screen. I don't know if it is related to the other bugs with the system map, but the shown ranges are WRONG. They seem to be half of what they should be.
Currently, I have a warpable hit on a site. This warpable hit has been obtained by four probes WITHOUT overlapping between their visible range, and the site itself lies outside the range of all probes.
Sounds funny... if it doesn't make it on TQ. :-)
Aaah. That explains something I encountered which simply didn't make sense. I could get a warpable signature without having true cover with all of my probes: one of them was a bit too far away and that didn't make sense. If they have in fact double their range that would exlplain it.
Thanks.
|
Marta Toor
|
Posted - 2009.02.21 20:56:00 -
[290]
The new three dimension system of showing the scan probe globe with longitude and latitude lines really make it easier to see where the probe is scanning. The red highlights for the drag arrows to move the probes is a great improvement as well. I could not recenter my camera anywhere besides the solar system center so that when I got to the 0.5 Au size it became impossible to see the 3 dimensions of where the probes are. If that feature is indeed working (which I think it isn't), it certainly is not intuitive as to how to do it.
|
|
Venkul Mul
Gallente
|
Posted - 2009.02.21 22:45:00 -
[291]
Originally by: mamolian
Originally by: Venkul Mul Mamolian, you, Tippia and co. could stop putting that damed advertising in your post?
It break the forum.
Err it was a forum bug, some issue with having ascii characters in the post.. not my fault brah! (already bug reported and resolved it seems.. Shame they deleted my post tho.)
Yes, I discovered that a bit after that post. sorry for the yelling.
My apologies.
|
Faridah
Solar Storm Sev3rance
|
Posted - 2009.02.22 00:40:00 -
[292]
Ok, I don't get it. What am I doing wrong? Except using excessive amount of probes? No warp to :(
|
Ray Rosny
|
Posted - 2009.02.22 02:43:00 -
[293]
I get stuck with initializing map when I try to open the map. So no probing for me :(
RR
|
Amael Galenus
Mighty Moshin Emo Rangers
|
Posted - 2009.02.22 02:55:00 -
[294]
Originally by: Faridah Ok, I don't get it. What am I doing wrong? Except using excessive amount of probes? No warp to :(
You're not doing anything wrong- probing is just completely broken right now. What that 100% signal strength is telling you is that one of your probes has gotten a strong hit- however, these new probes can only measure a linear distance from themselves to a hit, they cannot work out a direction on their own (to do that they need the help of the other probes).
So, just because a probe has a good strong 100% hit doesn't mean that the probe knows in which direction from it that hit is... yes, apparently probes are quite stupid in the future.
What the solar system map is SUPPOSED to show you is a big highlighted sphere (whose radius is the distance form the probe to the hit) which shows you an approximate region in which the hit/site is in... you're then supposed to move more probes into that highlighted region in order to get some overlapping results/distances on with the hit.
Eventually you have to form a square or cross (or triangular pyramid if you're feeling adventurous) to determine an exact point in space that you can warp to.
As I've said though, everything is pretty much broken- probes don't move properly and the results are impossible to use because the solar system map keeps on crashing/freezing sooo you'll have to wait for the next patch I'm afraid.
Oh and you can't use too many probes
|
Amael Galenus
Mighty Moshin Emo Rangers
|
Posted - 2009.02.22 02:58:00 -
[295]
Originally by: Ray Rosny I get stuck with initializing map when I try to open the map. So no probing for me :(
RR
Press escape to get rid of that and use the map- just make sure to NOT click on any of the small white icons in the solar system view though (planets, stations etc)- it'll lock the camera to that point & zoom in so far that you can't do anything... also the map's "close" button has a nasty tendency to stop working
|
DIV Leader
|
Posted - 2009.02.22 03:10:00 -
[296]
Originally by: Megan Maynard The lack of camera and probe control is making it impossible to find things.
I can't get any kind of perspective on where the probes are at in 3-d space because the map is always centered on the sun. The ability to center on objects, such as probes, planets, stations in map mode is a MUST or the process gets messy. (Ever play a bad resident evil? That's what this reminds me of, the terrible camera in some older res evil games.)
Also the fact that you don't see WHICH probe is getting a hit annoys me like crazy. I want to see which probe is getting a hit so I can adjust it instead of having to play some kind of logic game.
I have a work around for ALL but the scan results graphics on the solar map YES I can center on objects on the map. HOW, just do NOT click on a GROUP of icons. If you need to center, zoom in to that area and hover your mouse. If a list of icons are there, DO NOT CLICK, you will bug out. IF however there are only one icons, you can click to center. Clicking on probes still seems to bug out, but the are a different mechanic than the static icons on the map.
|
therealdhs
|
Posted - 2009.02.22 04:27:00 -
[297]
I'd love to have a way to tell Cosmic Anomalies apart. Unless I'm missing something, I'm not really sure which of these 8 Anomalies in the system I'm scanning, and trying to get four probes on one is kind of hard when 15 of them are in my scan results. I'm not sure how you should be able to tell one from another, but it would be a very nice feature for the new system. -------- Bender: Ahhh, what an awful dream. Ones and zeroes everywhere... and I thought I saw a two. Fry: Don't worry, Bender: there's no such thing as two. |
K1RTH G3RS3N
Haunted House BROTHERS GRIM.
|
Posted - 2009.02.22 08:18:00 -
[298]
ummm.... i just tried probes on the test server - combat probes.
i needed 4 probes set to 2a range within 1au of a battleship i dumped at a moon to make the battleship warpable too... why is this so!? is there any point to combat probes? probing mission runners will be impossible unless you somehow get to 4 points within 2au of him... i have pretty decent skills in probing aswell as an implant aswell.
someone please enlighten me if ive done something completely wrong
|
K1RTH G3RS3N
Haunted House BROTHERS GRIM.
|
Posted - 2009.02.22 08:25:00 -
[299]
a friend of mine has been training an alt that now has almost max skills and best implants for probing... does this meen all that time and money sent to CCP will be useless!? i know you guys like some sort of balance but its ok to make things better or leave them as they are stuff doesnt have to be continually nerfed all the time... i just hope you dont plan on keeping probes like this :( hey i love the game but its frustrating everytime that thing that was awesome gets smashed in the face.
|
Venkul Mul
Gallente
|
Posted - 2009.02.22 08:42:00 -
[300]
I thought drones had been removed from the list of items that was possible to scan, then I found this:
Originally by: Roemy Schneider
- probe cruiser (scan strength thingy)... would buy again - if it actually had the cpu. slot modifying sounds good at first, but quite useless if not backed up by the usual stats that come with them. first ship of mine (bar astro frigs) to actually get 100% on an oneiros (w/o eccm ofc) and ~90% on small (t2) drones would only recommend for hunting falcons though - if you can survive the rest of its fleet *doubt* -.-
She is speaking about T3 cruiser configurations, but that 90% hit on drones mean that it is possible to scan them?
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 [10] 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 .. 33 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |