| Pages: 1 2 [3] :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 4 post(s) |
eFart
   |
Posted - 2009.03.16 15:51:00 -
[61]
eve is moar then gps u can triple it tho
|
Ursula Minor
Caldari
Moons of Pluto
Space Exploration and Logistic Services
|
Posted - 2009.03.17 07:48:00 -
[62]
 Originally by: Nessaden
As far as the skill renaming goes, I think it should be renamed to Astrometric Quadrilateration. Considering that EVE already has a big enough learning curve, this skill name won't make much of a difference. Simply provide a short description of what quadrilateration is in the skill info, and some people will be able to log off EVE feeling just a bit smarter. I dislike the idea that the skill name is misleads people regarding what scan probes actually do.
I support this idea.
|
Artassaut
Minmatar
Oblivion Amalgamated
|
Posted - 2009.03.17 08:37:00 -
[63]
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.
There's only so much you can do with 0.1M3. It already expands to many times its own size, is able to use a warp drive, and can scan at 32 AU. Deep Space can do 32x the distance for only 10x the size.
---
The Gate: Lol, try targeting me in a fleet fight.
The Station: No U. |
Zhora Six
|
Posted - 2009.03.24 14:27:00 -
[64]
Originally by: CCP Prism X
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? 
Prepare for general confusion, then? Patch Notes: "Changed the name of the Astrometric Triangulation skill to Astrometric Rangefinding to better fit the skill's new role."
Also, what is comptious? Did you mean capricious, idk...
___________________________________
Always enjoy your virtual synthetic psychotropics in moderation. |
Crumplecorn
Gallente
Eve Cluster Explorations
|
Posted - 2009.03.24 15:20:00 -
[65]
The idea that the probes can't handle direction since they don't have any fixed points of reference makes sense to me. The probe doesn't really know where it is, since normal sensors don't work in warp and it has less than 10 seconds to do the scan. It's like being thrown into a dark room and hearing a sound. You know it came from *over there*, but which way is *over there* when you can't see anything? You can judge distance though.
It's all moot anyway though; since the probes are obviously using FTL sensing technology (the one bit Akita conveniently handwaves away) they are not relying on anything currently well-known to science. Whatever they do rely on, while instantaneous across at least tens of AUs, does not provide usable direction information, simple as.
-
DesuSigs |
J'Mkarr Soban
Amarr
Proxenetae Invicti
|
Posted - 2009.03.24 15:36:00 -
[66]
What in the world? I'd never actually thought about the mechanics o.o
If you're getting a signal coming in, you should know where from. Hell, even if it's in a 180 degree arc "Signal is over there." *turn round* "Signal isn't over here."
You cannot know the distance until you know the strength of the original signal.
Hell, you only really need two measurements of vector, and then plot where they cross. The others are just to increase the accuracy.
One problem with this system, which cannot be worked around no matter what, and really backs up Akita's idea: unless the object moves, it doesn't matter whether you make four measurements at once, or one measurement four times.
--
These are my personal views and in no way represent the views of Proxenetae Invicti, which maintains a neutral stance stemming from the strong ethics demanded of its work. |
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 [3] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |