| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Nonexistent Face
United Federation of Deaf
   |
Posted - 2010.02.20 21:25:00 -
[1]
So a friend and I were going to get a feel about how plexing worked, so we were planning on starting in highsec. He was still doing his own thing while I was practicing scanning stuff down. I have ninja salvaged before so I know I have the necessary experience to scan stuff down.
I have ALL probing-related skills to 4. Astrometrics IV, and the 4 (or was it 5?) probing support skills to 4. I was in a Magnate using a Core Scanner Probe launcher.
Some questions:
1) Are cosmic anomalies considered plexes? Or just specific kinds of cosmic signatures?
2) About cosmic signatures... the best I could do with scanning a signature down was get up to somewhere around 55-60%. Am I seriously going to have to train all my probing support skills to V and get a cov ops? I hope not, because this is just highsec stuff.
|
Nonexistent Face
United Federation of Deaf
|
Posted - 2010.02.20 22:38:00 -
[2]
 Originally by: Horchan
Originally by: Nonexistent Face
1) Are cosmic anomalies considered plexes? Or just specific kinds of cosmic signatures?
2) About cosmic signatures... the best I could do with scanning a signature down was get up to somewhere around 55-60%. Am I seriously going to have to train all my probing support skills to V and get a cov ops? I hope not, because this is just highsec stuff.
1) No. Cosmic anomalies are mini combat sites. If you want DED plexes or escalation plexes, you need to scan for cosmic signatures.
2) It sounds like you're doing it wrong. Highsec exploration is extremely easy and with your skills at 3-4, you should be able to find everything except for possibly some "large" gravimetric sites, which have notoriously low signatures.
Make sure you're using four overlapping probes to get the signature down to a single dot, then reduce your probes' scan radius in steps until you get 100% strength with a green dot. If it ever becomes a pair of dots, a red ring, or a red sphere, then you'll need to move your probes around until you get back to a single dot.
That's what I did... I just constantly got a sphere and I had all of my probes down to .25 AU sphere and the smallest red sphere I could achieve was a .14 AU sphere.
|
Nonexistent Face
United Federation of Deaf
|
Posted - 2010.02.22 00:50:00 -
[3]
Edited by: Nonexistent Face on 22/02/2010 00:51:48
Well, I went back to the system that had this impossible signature and tried it again.
This time I was able to get a yellow dot but I've done so many possibilities (including using a 5th probe) and this is the highest I could get.
I really don't know what I'm doing wrong or this complex is supposed to be really important or something.
EDIT: Also, I found a wormhole in the neighboring systems without very much difficulty (I only needed 2.0 AU spheres), so is it safe to say that this complex has an extremely low signature?
|
Nonexistent Face
United Federation of Deaf
|
Posted - 2010.02.22 02:43:00 -
[4]
Originally by: Savondis
Sometimes you get one that's just particularly stubborn to narrow down. I don't really know why..sometimes I run them and I get some nice finds, sometimes I find absolute crap, so I can't say for sure the difficulty in a 100% hit is relative to the rewards.
That said though, it may be the ship. I'm not sure what you're using but I run with an anathema with two probe rigs onboard and a sisters expanded launcher and sisters probes. The bonuses are a huge help and with skills at 3 across the board for probing I haven't found one yet I can't get a 100% on.
I like to use the 5 probe approach arranged in a + shape which I find minimizes the possibility of getting a lesser signal strength due to misaligned probes since I can use the arrows on the center probe as a marker to make sure the others are equally spaced. Too close or too far can sometimes give you a lesser strength so that's something to consider.
Hope that helps a bit!
Well, I'm not quite ready to train all the skills required to get up to a cov-ops... but I had completely forgotten about getting rigs. Do you think 2x Small grav rigs would get me the last 20% or am I hoping too much?
|
Nonexistent Face
United Federation of Deaf
|
Posted - 2010.02.22 09:18:00 -
[5]
Originally by: Mara Rinn
As a result of your huge scan range,
Look at the screenshot again. I used the smallest possible scan range on the probes (.25 AU). Also, the tetrahedron triangle did not increase my probing strength. The configuration of the probes that is clearly shown in my screenshot is my usual configuration and it works well (for me) so far until... this one signature. When I said that I had exhausted several possibilities and that was the highest I could get - I meant it.
Also, I remember someone saying this, and I thought it was appropriate in relation to your post:
Originally by: Mara Rinn
LOL...reading comprehension FTW...
|
Nonexistent Face
United Federation of Deaf
|
Posted - 2010.02.22 10:11:00 -
[6]
Originally by: Savondis
Ok, looking at the screeny there I think your problem isn't size so much as it is placement. In that screenshot, you see the sphere formed by the overlap of the probes is almost as big as the total range of a single probe sphere, thats way too big. Try to make that overlap area about half as big while still surrounding the signature and I'm confident you will get much better results.
Generally speaking I try to make my probe spheres overlap about 50-60% of their total size, any more than that and you get issues with signature strength in my experience. Try the 5 probe method again and using the center probe as a target of sorts on the signature, move the other probes so that they overlap about 50% into the center probe. That should be the fix to your problem. remember the sphere formed by your overlapping probes should never be comparable in size to a single probe's range.
Thanks for the suggestion, I'll be sure to do this next time.
(I know Mara Rinn already said what you said, but your post was much more descriptive and better-worded so I was able to understand it better)
|
| |
|