| Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 4 post(s) |
Lijhal
FrEE d00M Fighters
   |
Posted - 2009.03.15 22:52:00 -
[31]
 Originally by: Akita T
Originally by: CCP Greyscale
Also, if there's anywhere ingame that "triangulation" is mentioned, please let me know so I can excise it.
"Astrometric Triangulation (rank 8)"
This is exactly why people think, eve online use triangulation as scan mechanism... perfect :)
btw, i like the new scan mechanism ... i can scan much much faster plexes down than before ... but we need a scan history !! its really hard to scan down multiple plexes which are located at nearly the same spot :/
|
Sergio Ling
Veto.
|
Posted - 2009.03.15 23:05:00 -
[32]
Originally by: CCP Greyscale
Also, if there's anywhere ingame that "triangulation" is mentioned, please let me know so I can excise it.
Oh I dunno...
_
BET ISK ON ANYTHING AT ALL |
Mhaerdirne Solveig
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2009.03.15 23:08:00 -
[33]
it involves bouncing a graviton particle beam off the main deflector dish
Signature removed. Text is showing as "Signature no longer available" and filesize is well in excess of the allowed 400 x 120 pixels. Navigator |
|
CCP Greyscale
|
Posted - 2009.03.15 23:13:00 -
[34]
:facepalm:
|
|
Cyonidicus
|
Posted - 2009.03.15 23:40:00 -
[35]
LOL
|
Sergio Ling
Veto.
|
Posted - 2009.03.15 23:44:00 -
[36]
Originally by: CCP Greyscale
:facepalm:
it's OK, I don't think anyone has noticed yet
_
BET ISK ON ANYTHING AT ALL |
Hekktor Naireed
|
Posted - 2009.03.16 03:24:00 -
[37]
just want to know if it is possible to scan down a ship in under 20 sec...
Ship scanning and hunting down logoffskis (isk farmers) is terribly screwed...
ah and 4 probes within the same surface - do they give you the solution of the hight? I think they 4th probe must be out of the face of the 1st three... but ingame you just need to drop them, arrange them in a square (same surface) and get the questionable signal in the middle (cut volume of the 4 spheres), what shouldn't work or?
|
James Malice
Gallente
Legion Of Mad Cats
|
Posted - 2009.03.16 03:38:00 -
[38]
Originally by: CCP Greyscale
:facepalm:
So... does this mean you're changing the name of the skill?
Originally by: MooKids
I like them, I have an elite rating in HULL TANKING! That is like saying I can block punches with my face.
|
Bish Ounen
Gallente
Best Path Inc.
Ethereal Dawn
|
Posted - 2009.03.16 04:12:00 -
[39]
Originally by: James Malice
Originally by: CCP Greyscale
:facepalm:
So... does this mean you're changing the name of the skill?
As long as they don't REMOVE the skill. I just finished training it to V!
And personally, while I like some of the new features of the scan system, the horrible inaccuracy and SLOWNESS of it is a real bugger.
A few things that would make it MUCH better:
Once we scan down an anomaly to at least 80-90% accuracy, let us FLAG it (not bookmark, but flag) so that if it's not what we want we can exclude it from further results using a filter (show only unflagged signals) this would allow us to whittle down the various sites that are in close proximity to each other and make the entire experience significantly less frustrating. Even from an RP sense it makes sense that our massively complex on board computer systems would be able to catalog and filter all the search results.
Also, some kind of "zoom" function to automate some of the more fiddly aspects of moving probes around would be welcome. The idea being you can right-click a signal orb, ring or dot and select "zoom to signal" and the probes would automatically warp to positions best for minimizing deviation from that signal, AND reduce their scan range accordingly. It would still probably take a couple "zoom" cycles, but it would be WAY better than trying to dink around with those little arrows at the small scan ranges. Obviously, you would still have to do the initial positioning yourself, but honing down those signals would get much easier.
Those two changes would make scanning much less frustrating and more effective without completely taking the "skill" out of scanning down a ship or plex.
----
Fix the Wardec System! |
Xianthar
STK Scientific
The Initiative.
|
Posted - 2009.03.16 05:57:00 -
[40]
Originally by: Akita T
In the case of GPS, it's much simpler : the entire system (satellites, receivers) are time-synchronized
its actually much more complicated than this and the devices are _not_ time synchronized primarily because that would be impossible, gravitational time dilation causes time to move slower in orbit than it does on the surface of the earth the system always has to correct for this deviation.
also remember the average handheld device has a rather crap clock crystal in it that costs $0.20, not the $100k atomic clock that sits on each satellite, due to this timing in the handheld is rather inaccurate, there are a lot of tricks in how the system works to get around these problems.
|
Xianthar
STK Scientific
The Initiative.
|
Posted - 2009.03.16 06:21:00 -
[41]
Originally by: Korizan
A radar sends out a pulse. it times how long till it the reflection comes back.
Based on the the frequency it knows how long it will take for it to return giving a distance.
the speed of EM waves is NOT frequency dependent...and that is only a very small subset of radar, CW (cop guns, which actually have no ranging capability), FMCW (often used in altimeters), etc are not pulse based.
Originally by: Korizan
A very simple function and the bases on how radar, sonar, GPS, even telecommunications equipment work.
what function is this? speed = frequency * wavelength ? sure thats true, but your using it wrong, speed is fixed based on the medium and type of wave, wavelength varies with frequency
Originally by: Akita T
And no, the difference isn't that radar sends out a pulse that gets reflected, it's that radar determines BOTH distance and direction with a single location sensor.
only phased arrays actually get direction based on a property of the signal(s) being sent out and they use multiple transmitters to do this. Otherwise the only direction information from radar comes from the mechanical direction of the antenna.
Originally by: Akita T
GPS is a passive receiver, and it needs at least 3 emitters (the satellites - and 3, since you usually aren't in outer space, the fourth isn't absolutely needed, but it helps with the accuracy) that are relatively far apart in order to function.
true in geometric theory, but 3 sats in GPS is really, really, inaccurate, most receiver IC's i've worked with won't even give you a position from 3 locks, the 4th is actually needed for a timing trick to get around the crappy clock in the receiver and other timing issues not geometry since the 1 of the 2 possible points from a 3 sat fix is usually clearly out in space.
Originally by: Akita T
So let me repeat this - if the technology of EVE would actually exist - under no circumstances should you ever need more than ONE probe to find the area a signal is in.
not sure what you mean, it gives you one distance, so it tells you the probe is within a sphere around the probe with a known (but uncertain, based on signal strength) distance. This is modeled correctly in game.
Originally by: Korizan
Your right and wrong again.
GPS are passive because the satellites are in fixed positions (Again known values for determining positions on the planet.
And once again yes radar sends out a pulse but it is also based on a fixed position.
You are ignoring this baseline fact and the only reason both GPS and radar work.
the 2 technologies really are completely different, yea they both involve geometry but thats where the comparison ends really.
Originally by: Korizan
But you really don't care about this stuff @ all cause you totally ignored my comments.
All you want is a your single probe back.
And to be honest I like the current system.
So I will agree on one thing, I agree we have different opinions on how the probing system should work in EVE 
agreed i love it, its much more active, far better than splaying out probes and clicking scan 45 times to try to find a 10/10....
|
Iamien
Caldari
Stargate SG-1
Sev3rance
|
Posted - 2009.03.16 06:30:00 -
[42]
probes cannot detect direction. Simple as that.
|
FlameGlow
Legio Octae
Rebellion Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.03.16 07:04:00 -
[43]
Originally by: Iamien
probes cannot detect direction. Simple as that.
Duh, that's why it's not triangulation.
It's trilateration CCP misnamed 
_____________
I don't care what is nerfed, as long as it's not my "undock" button. |
Space Wanderer
|
Posted - 2009.03.16 09:38:00 -
[44]
Originally by: CCP Greyscale
:facepalm:
Don't take it too hard, just rename it as "Astrometric trilateration" (or something more legacy-friendly like "astrometric measurements") in next patch. Shouldn't take too much work, isn't it?
|
Rosa Rosette
|
Posted - 2009.03.16 09:40:00 -
[45]
i want to love you all sooooo long lol
that was the most epic geek rage thread i have come about in ages!
|
|
CCP Prism X
Gallente
C C P
|
Posted - 2009.03.16 09:46:00 -
[46]
1: "Just train Astrometric Triangulation"
2: "Ah, that's like triangulation in space? Spiffy!"
VS
1: "Just train Astrometric Quadilaterationcybbacrypph"
2: "MY MOTHER WAS A SAINT!"
Really, I have nothing against using perfect nomenclature but sometimes it's just not practical. It's more precise to refer to species by their binomial nomenclature but it isn't very practical. Aside from being understood I'm pretty sure that renaming the skill would flood GMs with "Dude! Where's my skill!?" petitions and just cause general confusion..
.. or maybe I'm just being comptious?
~ Prism X
EvE Database Developer
Relocating your character to a cozy, secure container since 2006.
Relocating your cozy, secure container to the EVE cemetery since 2008. |
|
Space Wanderer
|
Posted - 2009.03.16 09:54:00 -
[47]
Originally by: CCP Prism X
"Dude! Where's my skill!?"
Don't touch THAT argument... You are gonna open a can of worms you don't want to open. 
|
Durzel
The Xenodus Initiative.
|
Posted - 2009.03.16 09:59:00 -
[48]
Triangulation sounds pretty cool too, better than Trilateration anyway.
Also, I would imagine that most people know roughly what "triangulation" means from basic experience of GPS, even if they don't know how it works. Not sure if the same can be said for "trilateration" - I hadn't heard of it until this thread.
I only have a passing knowledge of GPS and having played with the new scanning system (and enjoyed it on the whole) I've ended up more educated about how each satellite/probe creates an ever-more accurate location.
Arguing over semantics about whether sites emit a signal in the first place, directions, etc blah blah is a bit too nerdy for my liking.
The new scanning system looks pretty, it works effectively*, it's intuitive (to a newcomer), it rewards & requires player skill. That's good enough for me.
(* Though there are bugs/quirks which hopefully will be ironed out)
|
Ethidium Bromide
Amarr
ZEALOT WARRIORS AGAINST TERRORISTS
Curatores Veritatis Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.03.16 10:14:00 -
[49]
Originally by: CCP Prism X
1: "Just train Astrometric Quadilaterationcybbacrypph"
2: "MY MOTHER WAS A SAINT!"
thanks for new sig
Originally by: CCP Prism X
1: "Just train Astrometric Quadilaterationcybbacrypph"
2: "MY MOTHER WAS A SAINT!"
|
white kight
Galaxy Punks
Axiom Empire
|
Posted - 2009.03.16 10:32:00 -
[50]
I think i understood the first post, kinda gone downhill from there. However Greyscale made my sig too.
Originally by: CCP Greyscale
:facepalm:
|
ollobrains2
Gallente
New Eve Order Holdings
|
Posted - 2009.03.16 11:53:00 -
[51]
i can now locate wormholes in 10 minutes flat got 5 in 45 minutes today. WIthin 45 minutes id found my way from one region thro 4 wormholes to another low sec area.
Once u have the hang of it its quicker easier and gets u into the action quicker
|
The Snowman
Gallente
Aliastra
|
Posted - 2009.03.16 12:19:00 -
[52]
I beleive Triangulation is correct scientific term. It dates back to when sailors navigated the seas via the stars, the only difference is that in space there is a 3;rd dimension.
So anyone who beleives that triangulation means 3, is merly showing their ignorance. |
Par'Gellen
Gallente
Tres Hombres Psychiatric Hospital
|
Posted - 2009.03.16 14:05:00 -
[53]
I just look at it like this:
It's thousands of years in the future. (i.e. Magic)
---
To err is human. But it shouldn't be the company motto...
|
huxorator
Intergalactic Serenity
Skunk-Works
|
Posted - 2009.03.16 14:23:00 -
[54]
Originally by: CCP Prism X
1: "Just train Astrometric Quadilaterationcybbacrypph"
2: "MY MOTHER WAS A SAINT!"
Wonn't happen. People that make it to this point already survived the "Just install Eve Online Apocryhalapapapathing!" phase.
I vote for renaming the astrometric triangulation to scan probe adjustment (or calibration). This saves the Jita local channel a lot of "what the hell is a triangulation?" stuff.
---
IGS Website | Killboard | Game-Time Cards |
Pakalolo
Tha Shiznit
|
Posted - 2009.03.16 15:28:00 -
[55]
Originally by: CCP Greyscale
everything we currently believe is true about physics is, statistically speaking, wrong
and if everything we know about statistics is wrong then?
|
|
CCP Prism X
Gallente
C C P
|
Posted - 2009.03.16 15:36:00 -
[56]
Edited by: CCP Prism X on 16/03/2009 15:36:57
Originally by: Pakalolo
and if everything we know about statistics is wrong then?
Statistics, by definition, are infallible. They are just empirical measurements. It's their interpretation which is usually all wrong (or the equipment used for measurement). 
~ Prism X
EvE Database Developer
Relocating your character to a cozy, secure container since 2006.
Relocating your cozy, secure container to the EVE cemetery since 2008. |
|
Imperator Jora'h
|
Posted - 2009.03.16 15:37:00 -
[57]
Originally by: Hekktor Naireed
ah and 4 probes within the same surface - do they give you the solution of the hight? I think they 4th probe must be out of the face of the 1st three... but ingame you just need to drop them, arrange them in a square (same surface) and get the questionable signal in the middle (cut volume of the 4 spheres), what shouldn't work or?
Do not think of the probes independently figuring out and X, Y & Z axis.
This is simple geometry. The probes *only* know the distance to the target. They have no clue about direction. That is why one probe gives you an answer that is a sphere and so on. On paper (literally) doing this you need three data points to find a spot on the 2D surface of the paper. Get yourself a compass (the kind used in drafting) and you can see the effect easily. When you add a third dimension you need four points to pinpoint a spot (and so on up through higher dimensions).
--------------------------------------------------
"Of course," said my grandfather, pulling a gun from his belt as he stepped from the Time Machine, "there's no paradox if I shoot you!"
|
Imperator Jora'h
|
Posted - 2009.03.16 15:39:00 -
[58]
Originally by: CCP Prism X
Edited by: CCP Prism X on 16/03/2009 15:36:57
Originally by: Pakalolo
and if everything we know about statistics is wrong then?
Statistics, by definition, are infallible. They are just empirical measurements. It's their interpretation which is usually all wrong (or the equipment used for measurement).
"There are lies, damn lies and statistics." -Benjamin Disraeli
--------------------------------------------------
"Of course," said my grandfather, pulling a gun from his belt as he stepped from the Time Machine, "there's no paradox if I shoot you!"
|
Nyphur
Pillowsoft
|
Posted - 2009.03.16 15:45:00 -
[59]
Edited by: Nyphur on 16/03/2009 15:46:34
What about switching the skill name from triangulation to trilateration? Not a huge difference and even though it's really quadlateration, I don't think anyone will care. Not that this is a big deal, it's just cosmetic.
I think it's awesome that probes use a form of quadlateration now. I wrote a program that did this years ago using a distance manually acquired from the directional scanner co-ordinates manually copied from the game when making a bookmark. Probes came out and made the program obsolete but it was fun to make and gave me a bit of a head start on the new scanning theory.
|
Nessaden
Minmatar
The Greater Goon
Clockwork Pineapple
|
Posted - 2009.03.16 15:45:00 -
[60]
Originally by: The Snowman
I beleive Triangulation is correct scientific term. It dates back to when sailors navigated the seas via the stars, the only difference is that in space there is a 3;rd dimension.
So anyone who beleives that triangulation means 3, is merly showing their ignorance.
First, triangulation is not the correct term for what we're doing in EVE. What we're doing is quadrilateration, finding where 4 spheres intersect in 3D space. In EVE's case, I believe the closer that intersection is to your target signature the higher the signal strength.
Second, triangulation has two key parts: three and angle. If you believe triangulation means anything other than using three angles to find a location then you're merely showing your ignorance. Note that probes in EVE merely give you distance, not direction, which is why EVE does not use quadrangulation.
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |