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) |
Marlenus
Caldari Ironfleet Towing And Salvage Tear Extraction And Reclamation Service
|
Posted - 2009.02.16 22:09:00 -
[31]
Originally by: Hoshi Both these ships and a small handful of other ships will still need a virtue set to be possible to be locatable by probes, but I think I can live with that considering most of the ships that will fall into this category are cloaking ships anyway.
Will have to do some math on ECCM on cruiser sized ships, guess this might be that boost to ECCM that people have requested, fit 2 on your t2 cruiser and become impossible to find with probes. That could be balanced not sure.
I'm not very familiar with ECCM, but am I correct in thinking it comes in midslot (active) flavors as well as lowslot (passive) flavors? That will make a difference, as the active stuff (if I'm right) won't impede me from finding ships that are currently unpiloted.
Like you, Hoshi, I think I'm cool with covops being unprobeable. Cruisers specially fit to avoid probing strikes me as more interesting than problematic, too. I like game mechanics that are not absolute; the idea that you can fit your ship (and accept the tradeoffs that entails) to avoid being probed strikes me as kinda fun. ------------------ Ironfleet.com |
Horchan
Gallente
|
Posted - 2009.02.16 22:11:00 -
[32]
Originally by: CCP Greyscale - On the subject signal strength, skills and so on, I think we've killed two birds with one stone here. As it currently stands: - Everything which used to give a scan duration bonus now gives a scan strength bonus - Everything which used to give a scan strength bonus now gives a scan duration bonus EXCEPT the Virtue set - Everything which used to give a deviation reduction still does
Just a question: What is going to happen to Sisters launchers? Their current change to only taking 10 CPU less to fit doesn't make them seem worth the effort, at least compared to the 25% time reduction they used to give. On the other hand, a time reduction wouldn't be effective using the currently implemented scan times. But giving it a 5% or 10% strength bonus would make it attractive enough to bother using it, at least for me. ---
DesuSigs |
Marlenus
Caldari Ironfleet Towing And Salvage Tear Extraction And Reclamation Service
|
Posted - 2009.02.16 22:14:00 -
[33]
I understood "Everything which used to give a scan duration bonus now gives a scan strength bonus" as applying to the Sisters launchers. I doubt their market value will be unchanged, but if I'm right, they'll still be a very valuable tool in your probing arsenal. ------------------ Ironfleet.com |
An Anarchyyt
Gallente Battlestars GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.02.16 22:20:00 -
[34]
Originally by: Alqualonde Oh, and why don't my probes want to return? They warp back to my ship when I click "recover", but won't go into my cargo hold.
This one is a known bug right now.
Originally by: CCP Wrangler Second, a gentile is a non jewish person
|
Deep1
|
Posted - 2009.02.16 22:50:00 -
[35]
Originally by: An Anarchyyt
Originally by: CCP Abathur
Originally by: General Meridus Cute, but it still does not address the problem. Simply put, the UI blows.
The UI on SiSi is not the final product. It is being worked on as I type this.
Think of it this way. Leave it as it is, and I've already started calling it Darwinian Probing. It works perfectly.
Have to agree. After tryning it for a few days on test server it's not bad and there are some logic in .. kind of like it.. Better to spend time moving probes and singel scans that to wait for some results to tick in. drop fix'et and start working on the doc's for it - the most problems i had with the interface was allready in there - but someone had to tell me howto do it
But if you are going to try to make it better. 1)It's not verry clear that the cube can be moved freely - and the arrows only move on one axe. perhaps if the cube ( without the arrows ) lighs up then you drag it - and if you are draging an arrow let that one ligth up .. then perhaps i can move the map focus when i want to - and the Porbes when i need to move them. 2)Don't quite get how to focus on a probe - you can click on it on the map yes .. but sometimes it's hard to see where it is. Myworkaround it is to only have the probe i need to move aktive - and set the scan range up to 2-4 AU just to see where it is and then set down to where i need it to be when i get closer to target.
3) Some kind of map reset would be very nice ( or is it there ) .. when i have warp to site ( in case of more signatures ) and goes back to the map i can see a thing on the map - the zoom level is all wrong ( probely as i left it but still .. ) there is realy no way i can center my map to an object like a probe , a signature or a planet - i have to zoom out - and as stubit as i an i try both way on the mouse wheel - giving no results. My workabround for that is to set a probe to 32 AU .. THAT normaly gives me something to work with. But a reset as you when you first open the map would be nice - and way faster.
But i don't get what is the plan for the probes's reuse ( this was testet before current vertion can't recall now)
If you leave them in space and let the time run out they die - as we are uset to If you recall them then end up in your cargo hold - you can then load them into the launcher one by one takes 10 sek yes .. but when you unload the launcher they are just like brand new .. so basic we would be fools not to recall them even if they only have 5 sek left. Is it the point that we should only need one set of probes ( 4-16 ) to scan 23/7 the next year or so ?
|
Space Wanderer
|
Posted - 2009.02.16 22:59:00 -
[36]
Edited by: Space Wanderer on 16/02/2009 23:00:46 More Feedback:
Ok, spent the whole evening probing around sites. Skipped all the 0.10% and lower sites (which probably are the old base3/base4 sites).
I found: - mining sites - hacking sites - salvage sites - deadspace complexes - expedition sites - Wormholes (leading to 0.0 k-space)
The only missing kind of site was the ladar ones, but probably I wasn't in the right constellation for them.
Observations:
1) The scanning report for ALL the sites was "Group: cosmic signature" and "Type: deadspace". Isn't that too generic? It would be nice to have some more variability, for instance reporting "Group: radar signature", so that people might decide whether to pursue the signal until the end or move on after some minutes of scanning. If probes could be fine tuned to a specific sensor type, to the detriment of the others it would help add variability, too.
2) I found the wormhole, warped to it, but NO WORMHOLE COULD BE SEEN ANYWHERE. I tried to add and remove the scene2, nothing. It wasn't even shown in the overview... what gives?
|
Meha Mott
Minmatar Carebear Research and Produktion Agency
|
Posted - 2009.02.16 23:13:00 -
[37]
I scanned down over 50 Systems in High-sec, and wasn't able to find a single Wormhole signature.
Is this intended, not seeded, or bad luck for me ?
Sorry for my bad english. |
Col Callahan
Caldari Oberon Incorporated Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2009.02.16 23:26:00 -
[38]
Edited by: Col Callahan on 16/02/2009 23:26:56 Just under 24hrs until wormholes are going to be opened. Grayscale would never let poor defenseless kittens be slaughtered because he did not bow to outrageous terrorist demands.
We shall.......see
|
Helison
Gallente Times of Ancar
|
Posted - 2009.02.16 23:31:00 -
[39]
Originally by: CCP Greyscale
- On the subject signal strength, skills and so on, I think we've killed two birds with one stone here. As it currently stands: - Everything which used to give a scan duration bonus now gives a scan strength bonus - Everything which used to give a scan strength bonus now gives a scan duration bonus EXCEPT the Virtue set - Everything which used to give a deviation reduction still does With max skills, a rigged covert ops now gives a 2.7x strength bonus. This means that the hardest ship to scan (non-prize for who knows which one it is, only ships that have legitimately been flown by players count) gives a strength of something like 98.5% with the combat probes at 0.05AU. This distance is roughly half the side-length of the scanning control cube at its smallest side, which means with the above bonuses you'll almost never have to have significant cube overlap for scanning ships. We're going to tweak down the strength of the very hardest exploration sites ever so slightly so they end up in about the same place.
These changes should both ensure that old skills, rigs and implants are still very relevant, and that the "I can't get any closer!" issue goes away once you skill up properly. (As a side-note here, I'm pretty sure that the math picks the four best probe results and ignores the rest, so dropping 8 around the same target slightly increases the chances of those four results being optimal, but doesn't directly contribute to the signal strength.)
I am VERY perturbed about this design. Please do not make it IMPOSSIBLE to scan down difficult targets (like small ships or high-end exploration content) as long as you donŠt have the very best skills / the most expensive equipment. Make it really DIFFICULT to scan down a weak signal, as long as your skills/equipment is not optimal. If necessary redesign the whole calculation, so that the signal strength is more important and that deviation really happens. It would also be great if more probes would really improve the result.
Another point: Please donŠt drop the protection inside of deadspace complexes. |
SARENA LEE
Gallente
|
Posted - 2009.02.17 00:39:00 -
[40]
ok i'm lost i got it the best i could, .25 on range 3 around the bottom and one on the top. and thats the best i get
|
|
Horchan
Gallente
|
Posted - 2009.02.17 00:42:00 -
[41]
Originally by: SARENA LEE ok i'm lost i got it the best i could, .25 on range 3 around the bottom and one on the top. and thats the best i get
Probably one of the currently unfindable sites. Just wait til the next build gets pushed to Sisi. ---
DesuSigs |
An Anarchyyt
Gallente Battlestars GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.02.17 00:46:00 -
[42]
Edited by: An Anarchyyt on 17/02/2009 00:47:17
Originally by: CCP Greyscale
Originally by: Space Wanderer An opinion.
Currently, barring the astro V bug, every player with astrometrics II can use every kind of probe. In the current system you had to have astro V to be able to use the longest range probes (observator and ferret).
Why the requirement has been removed for new long range probes? Is this intended? If yes, what is the rationale?
Nope, that's me not paying attention. Bumped it to 5, but would consider dropping it to 4.
I don't know if this is saying what I think. However, putting these to 5 is a bad idea.
First, these probes are basically working as a new multispectral, due to the size of systems and at 1024 you can get some reliable, reproducable results.
Secondly, since scan strength is much more important now, these probes aren't good for much else except the multispeccing without having the strength skill to 5. So all you are doing is making someone train another skill to level 5, after training a rank 8 skill to level 5. So that just sounds like you are needlessly adding an extra ~2 weeks of training for no good reason.
The only reason anyone would want this is because they're upset that they already trained it to 5.
Originally by: CCP Wrangler Second, a gentile is a non jewish person
|
Marlenus
Caldari Ironfleet Towing And Salvage Tear Extraction And Reclamation Service
|
Posted - 2009.02.17 01:08:00 -
[43]
I don't have a strong opinion on the 4 versus 5, but their design function is similar to the Observator, which has always been 5. For finding things that are a really long way away from anything, I don't think 5 is unreasonable.
------------------ Ironfleet.com |
Asmodean Reborn
Kurtz's Kommandos
|
Posted - 2009.02.17 01:09:00 -
[44]
Edited by: Asmodean Reborn on 17/02/2009 01:13:22 EDIT: Just read the solution to the problem in a different thread. Known issue...
|
An Anarchyyt
Gallente Battlestars GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.02.17 01:24:00 -
[45]
Edited by: An Anarchyyt on 17/02/2009 01:29:49 Edited by: An Anarchyyt on 17/02/2009 01:29:13 Edited by: An Anarchyyt on 17/02/2009 01:24:34
Originally by: Marlenus I don't have a strong opinion on the 4 versus 5, but their design function is similar to the Observator, which has always been 5. For finding things that are a really long way away from anything, I don't think 5 is unreasonable.
Only in terms of ships. It is a cross between an Observator and a Multispec in the way it works. But the important part is that it is not that useful without strength V.
And even with that 5 strength, I'm still thinking it'll be limited to hits on capitals and bigger. Or perhaps permaMWDing Battleships.
Originally by: CCP Wrangler Second, a gentile is a non jewish person
|
Xelios
Minmatar Brutor tribe
|
Posted - 2009.02.17 01:27:00 -
[46]
Originally by: Marlenus I don't have a strong opinion on the 4 versus 5, but their design function is similar to the Observator, which has always been 5. For finding things that are a really long way away from anything, I don't think 5 is unreasonable.
Yeah but that was with the old scanning system, where you needed a probe like that so you could warp closer to the target. In the new system I'd agree with Anarchyyt, the deep space probe is more like the multispectral. It's only real use so far is to show you what kinds of signals are in the system, everything else can be done with the other probes.
|
Amon Fyre
|
Posted - 2009.02.17 01:43:00 -
[47]
Yeah but that was with the old scanning system, where you needed a probe like that so you could warp closer to the target. In the new system I'd agree with Anarchyyt, the deep space probe is more like the multispectral. It's only real use so far is to show you what kinds of signals are in the system, everything else can be done with the other probes.
That's exactly what I've been using the deep probes for. Launch one to see what's in the system and if it's a long distance site, launch a second to get a general idea of the location to pin down with core probes.
Found two high sec wormholes playing around today and a lot of lookouts and combat sites. What I'd really like to have happen is when I get a 100% warpable site to find out what it is then on the scanner without having to warp to it.
I agree with everyone talking about the excessive mouse action to manage the map, probe placement, and camera. Fighting the camera is more frustrating than coming across a site that just won't budge above 80% signal strength.
Something I've noticed while playing with the new scanning system is the over abundance of sites in some systems. I'll pop into a system and either find nothing, or 3 or more seperate sites. Maybe it's just luck.
Originally by: Gone'Postal Don't worry hunny, With your transversal I might as well be shooting blanks.
|
Asmodean Reborn
Kurtz's Kommandos
|
Posted - 2009.02.17 01:46:00 -
[48]
I have a 100% hit using 4 probes. It's clickable in the scanner but not right-clickable like it used to be. Hence, I can't warp to it. Any ideas?
|
Rhohan
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2009.02.17 02:11:00 -
[49]
After finding a site, I tried to see what the least number of probes I could use to warp to it, and I was able to get a solid hit with 3 probes and warp to it.
I could also get a 100% hit with 2 probes, but couldn't warp to it. Note, this takes near perfect placement of the two probes, one slightly offset one from the other, and only gives you a tiny ring, not a dot.
|
Lyvanna Kitaen
Minmatar Noonday Sun Corp
|
Posted - 2009.02.17 02:59:00 -
[50]
Edited by: Lyvanna Kitaen on 17/02/2009 03:01:24
Originally by: Asmodean Reborn I have a 100% hit using 4 probes. It's clickable in the scanner but not right-clickable like it used to be. Hence, I can't warp to it. Any ideas?
You right click on the hit in the scanner window, not the green dot on the map.
=edit= unless you're saying clicking in the scanner window doesn't work?
|
|
Xelios
Minmatar Brutor tribe
|
Posted - 2009.02.17 03:05:00 -
[51]
We're getting a lot of people in the Exploration channel confused about the 100% signal strength when hitting with less than 4 probes. I think this could use some clarification either in the UI itself or the scanning tutorial. It's doubly confusing when you use 4 probes all getting 100% hits on the same site that isn't warpable because the probes are too close together / not surrounding the site properly.
|
Miss Moonwych
Formedian Shadows
|
Posted - 2009.02.17 05:41:00 -
[52]
Edited by: Miss Moonwych on 17/02/2009 05:42:36 Thought I put stuff from previous thread in a single post.
Here a compiled list of sites grouped by 1024 AU signal strengths (info on how and why):
0.80% - Rogue Trial Yard 0.80% - Provisional Serpentis Outpost 0.80% - Serpentis Base 0.80% - Exploration Small Gneiss 0.80% - Exploration - Small Bistot 0.80% - Blood Raider Base (Small plex)
0.40% - Material Acquitision Mining Outpost 0.40% - Serpentis Fortress 0.40% - Serpentis Phi-Ouput (4/10 complex) 0.40% - Calabash Nebula 0.40% - Regional Serpentis Mainframe 0.40% - Rogue Drone Asteroid Infestation (3/10) 0.40% - Mal-Zatak Monastery (4/10) 0.40% - Exploration Medium Gneiss 0.40% - Ruined Serpentis Monument Site 0.40% - Central Serpentis Sparking Transmitter (hacking) 0.40% - Goose Nebula 0.40% - Exploration - Small Arkonor, Bistot 0.40% - Cobra Nebula (Malachite cytoserocin gas clouds) 0.40% - Central Blood raider Sparking Transmitter (Hacking site) 0.40% - Crimson Hand Supply Depot (6/10 Plex) 0.40% - Radiance (Small drone plex)
0.26% - Wormhole
0.20% - Hidden Asteroid Belt (Bistot/Arkonor) 0.20% - Hidden Asteroid Belt + Space Stonehenge (Medium Dark Ochre, Gneiss) 0.20% - Hidden Asteroid Belt (Small Crokite, Dark Ochre, Gniess) 0.20% - Serpentis Military Complex 0.20% - Chemical Yard 0.20% - Regional Serpentis Command Center 0.20% - Regional Serpentis Database Center 0.20% - Regional Serpentis Data Processing Center 0.20% - Wormhole to a 0.0 system according to pop-up (WH wasn't there when warped to, and thus not jumpable) 0.20% - Minor Blood Annex 0.20% - Outgrowth Rogue Drone Hive (5/10) 0.20% - Regional Blood Raider Data Processing Center 0.20% - Central _____ Survey Site (hacking) 0.20% - Hierarchy 0.20% - Exploration - Large Bistot 0.20% - Wormhole (x702) 0.20% - Pristine Blood Raider Dump Cargo (Salvage site with drones)
0.16% - Minor Serpentis Annex
0.10% (not detectable with 0.25 au probes) 0.05% (not detectable with 0.25 au probes)
So far no Wormholes found with 0.40% or 0.80% strength. Has anybody found wormholes with this "high" strength?
Regards,
M.M.
PS. Signal strengths are rounded up. For example 0.80% usually shows up as 0.78, 0.40% as 0.39% and 0.20% sometimes as 0.19%. But 0.16% and 0.26% are separate classes of sites it seems.
|
Miss Moonwych
Formedian Shadows
|
Posted - 2009.02.17 07:31:00 -
[53]
Edited by: Miss Moonwych on 17/02/2009 07:35:11
Originally by: CCP Greyscale
- On the subject signal strength, skills and so on, I think we've killed two birds with one stone here. As it currently stands: - Everything which used to give a scan duration bonus now gives a scan strength bonus - Everything which used to give a scan strength bonus now gives a scan duration bonus EXCEPT the Virtue set - Everything which used to give a deviation reduction still does With max skills, a rigged covert ops now gives a 2.7x strength bonus. This means that the hardest ship to scan (non-prize for who knows which one it is, only ships that have legitimately been flown by players count) gives a strength of something like 98.5% with the combat probes at 0.05AU. This distance is roughly half the side-length of the scanning control cube at its smallest side, which means with the above bonuses you'll almost never have to have significant cube overlap for scanning ships. We're going to tweak down the strength of the very hardest exploration sites ever so slightly so they end up in about the same place.
You say that with max skills we could get a 2.7x boost on the scan strength.
Right now its not possible to scan 0.10% (1024 AU) strength sites. The limit is around 0.12% it seems. That means that with max skills we would be able to scan down 0.04% sites.
But DeepBlue encountered a 0.03% site. So how are we going to find those site?
Regards,
M.M.
|
Roemy Schneider
BINFORD
|
Posted - 2009.02.17 07:44:00 -
[54]
Edited by: Roemy Schneider on 17/02/2009 07:49:40
combat:
will the signature/sensor strength calc remain?
i've been probing in FFAs (kinda "on-grid", just nudged the 0.5 probes to a tetrahedron on the map) with my usual scimitar fitting for other logistics aswell as "smaller" stuff with (presumably) ~50sig and ~10 sensor they show up at little more than ~50%. if you're saying that a perfect cov ops (hf with the 13 ranks of lvl5) gets 2.7x better results, it would appear to me that one (mid) ECCM on these ships practically makes you "invulnerable" on a safe spot
but maybe im getting it wrong... since you are balancing with such worst-case scenarios of ~3months skilling, could you tell me what a halo'd, standard x-instinct'ed scimitar with, say..., 2 conjunctive ladars (47.68m sig / 61.12 ladar) would require?
on the other end of the spectrum... one can get 100% on marauders with only deep space probes set to 8 au
or could we make a seperate combat probing thread, plz? - putting the gist back into logistics |
Alex Harumichi
Gallente Gradient Electus Matari
|
Posted - 2009.02.17 08:11:00 -
[55]
Originally by: CCP Greyscale - Everything which used to give a scan duration bonus now gives a scan strength bonus
Does this mean that the Sisters scan launcher will get a scan strength bonus? Last I checked on sisi, it just had reduced fittings from the normal one, the scan duration bonus (the thing that made it so good) was gone.
|
keepiru
Omega Fleet Enterprises Executive Outcomes
|
Posted - 2009.02.17 08:44:00 -
[56]
Edited by: keepiru on 17/02/2009 08:53:18
Originally by: Alqualonde [...]A lot of the aggravation involved in constant rotating and tweaking would be solved by simply adding the tactical overlay to the scanning map. (Edit: with vertical lines from the plane for all the probes, planets, and scan hits of course)
Secondary problems are that it's hard to tell what things can be clicked, and when they can be clicked. Easily solved by making clickable controls light up when the mouse is hovered over them. (Also this would make scanning more fun. It is a basic of game design that controls that react in satisfying ways really help player enjoyment.)
Lastly, the arrows are hard to click at certain angles. They should be cylindrical. Right now of course they act as a clue to the camera orientation, which wouldn't be necessary with some kind of tactical overlay.[...]
This. Oh oooohh oohhhhhhhhh THIS.
Give this man a medal, even though he's a goon.
edit: added some more bold for extra emphasis. ... and I really think they should boost T2 plate HP.
|
Pytria Le'Danness
Placid Reborn
|
Posted - 2009.02.17 08:56:00 -
[57]
Edited by: Pytria Le''Danness on 17/02/2009 08:56:23
Originally by: CCP Abathur
Originally by: Sniper Wolf18 The probe moving interface is more painful than having a cactus rammed up your ass then inflated with an over 9000 psi inflator hose
How do you know this?
He probably is a very devoted tester.
"Ok, let's test self destruct. Works. Now let's test self destruct while warping. Works. Ok, now let's test self destruct while having a cactus rammed up your ass then inflated with an over 9000 psi inflator hose. OUCH - but works!"
:D
Back on topic: I've gotten used to the UI now and can probe quite well with it, but it can be improved. As someone else said, make the cubes and arrows scale with zoom level, not probe size. Right now when I narrow down on a site and need another probe while being far away I need to launch the probe, zoom out from the site I have been hunting so I see my ship, and either zoom in on the ship or increase the scan range of the probe to get handles I can click on.
Color-coding the handles would be nice too, as would be making them somewhat transparent. Although I am not sure if that wouldn't be too confusing. This isuue might vanish though when you do no longer have to overlap cubes.
One thing that is going to be very annoying in contested space is that there is no way to differentiate between FW sites and exploration sites - both show up as "Cosmic Anomaly" until you warp to them. This creates frustration for the explorer who finds a lot of sites he cannot use, and also opens the FW plexes for everyone to see which is a tactical disadvantage (thankfully it is so for both sides). On the other hand it will make FW probing much more difficult - right now you can do it with the onboard scanner, how is it supposed to happen using the new system?
Corporation RP channel: "PlacidReborn" |
Roemy Schneider
BINFORD
|
Posted - 2009.02.17 09:04:00 -
[58]
and no more probe radius manipulation in the system map plz left-click(-drag) is overloaded as it is: camera rotation, camera position, probe maneuvering etc - putting the gist back into logistics |
Neddy Fox
Gallente Paxton Industries Paxton Federation
|
Posted - 2009.02.17 09:15:00 -
[59]
Thx Greyscale to not simply discard pvp-probing, but giving it good thoughts for future releases. We rely too much on it, and losing our system scanning array already hurts a lot.
As for the current state :
-The auto-collapsing window is very annoying. I want it to stay pinned the way *I* want it, and not every time drag the window larger when I launch a probe. It also bugged a few times, and I was not able to see the probes anymore until I relogged.
-I love the changes on scan-strength bonusses, this is exactly what the skilled probers wanted : skilling pays off, as does flying the proper ships. I'd only like to know if the sister scanner ALSO had it's bonus changed from time to strength?
---- [PXIN Recruiter]
PXIN Recruitement thread |
Space Wanderer
|
Posted - 2009.02.17 09:19:00 -
[60]
Edited by: Space Wanderer on 17/02/2009 09:21:06 Edited by: Space Wanderer on 17/02/2009 09:19:41
Originally by: An Anarchyyt Edited by: An Anarchyyt on 17/02/2009 00:47:17
Originally by: CCP Greyscale
Originally by: Space Wanderer An opinion.
Currently, barring the astro V bug, every player with astrometrics II can use every kind of probe. In the current system you had to have astro V to be able to use the longest range probes (observator and ferret).
Why the requirement has been removed for new long range probes? Is this intended? If yes, what is the rationale?
Nope, that's me not paying attention. Bumped it to 5, but would consider dropping it to 4.
I don't know if this is saying what I think. However, putting these to 5 is a bad idea.
First, these probes are basically working as a new multispectral, due to the size of systems and at 1024 you can get some reliable, reproducible results.
Yes and no. Yes in the sense that deep space probes may act, among other things, like multispectral. No in the sense that it is not true that there is no other alternative. Remember, now probes are reconfigurable. You can drop a core probe and cover 32AU, or a combat probe and cover 64AU. In large solar systems you might need more than one core/combat to get a reliable info but doesn't seem to me a showstopping issue. It just gives a sliver of advantage (multispeccing with a single probe instead of 3) to people who trained astro 5, nothing more.
Originally by: An Anarchyyt
Secondly, since scan strength is much more important now, these probes aren't good for much else except the multispeccing without having the strength skill to 5. So all you are doing is making someone train another skill to level 5, after training a rank 8 skill to level 5.
I don't know about you, but I don't plan to train sig acquisition to lvl 5 anytime soon, even with the changes.
Quote: So that just sounds like you are needlessly adding an extra ~2 weeks of training for no good reason.
I suppose that having to train all those skills to use capital ships just adds some extra months of training for no good reason. It's not like you can't multispec without deep space probes.
Quote: The only reason anyone would want this is because they're upset that they already trained it to 5.
The only reason people already trained astrometrics to 5 is to use long range probes. Why mess with this dynamic when there is a perfectly reasonable way to multispec the system without using deep space probes? Just because you have to use 3 probes instead of 1?
|
|
|
|
|
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 |