EVE Search - Scanning change they "forgot" to mention?

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

Scanning change they "forgot" to mention?

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 :: [one page]
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 15 post(s)
MisterAl tt1	Posted - 2011.06.22 06:48:00 - [1] Am I the only one to notice, that a signal power, got from a probe, has been lowered approximatly two times? Someone though "all right, now all 8 probes contribute to result - great! Easy scan!" Dreamers. It seems like at the same time they have lowered the strength for a probe, so now you have to have 8 probes "touching" the signature to receive the same result, as you had earlier with 4! And well done CCP! As usually this "slight change" is NOT mentioned in the patchnotes. The signal power for probes (in the in-game info) looks the same as it has to be, too. _________________________ Dynamic WH map for everyone!
Xearal Minmatar SOL Industries Black Thorne Alliance	Posted - 2011.06.22 06:53:00 - [2] You're doing it wrong then.. I just went out for some exploration, went with 6 probes, but decided 4 was easier to manage and quicker with my skills.. I saw no drop in my scan strengths to signatures, using my standard 4 probes. ( as compared to before incarna )
MisterAl tt1	Posted - 2011.06.22 06:58:00 - [3] Edited by: MisterAl tt1 on 22/06/2011 06:58:46 No, I'm sure in my skills and calculations. Previously with 1 probe for 64 AU in our WH I got V911 signal between 1.74-2.6 Today I've got 1.29 _________________________ Dynamic WH map for everyone!
Omara Otawan	Posted - 2011.06.22 07:00:00 - [4] There have been complaints that bonuses are not properly applied for drones, possibly other stuff as well. Maybe check your probe strength in game and compare to what it should be?
Kuronaga Kantian Principle	Posted - 2011.06.22 07:02:00 - [5] If you probing nerds can do me a quick favor -- how drastic was the "nerf" to unscannable T3 setups? Is it actually possible to catch a T3 now, or is just lolpossible?
Liang Nuren	Posted - 2011.06.22 07:03:00 - [6] Originally by: Kuronaga If you probing nerds can do me a quick favor -- how drastic was the "nerf" to unscannable T3 setups? Is it actually possible to catch a T3 now, or is just lolpossible? lolpossible -- Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire On Twitter
MisterAl tt1	Posted - 2011.06.22 07:08:00 - [7] I didn't check myself, but heard that you will still need a full Virtue set with perfect skills and hardwirings to scan that down. The idea is that +4 probes contributing to scan was considered as "too easy" (which I agree) and thus 8 probes are now as good as 4 before. Now Astrometrics 5 has become a needed skill. I think that for actual scanning that is not that evident, but for a single-probe signature check that is well-seen. _________________________ Dynamic WH map for everyone!
Zachstar	Posted - 2011.06.22 07:08:00 - [8] Originally by: Omara Otawan There have been complaints that bonuses are not properly applied for drones, possibly other stuff as well. Maybe check your probe strength in game and compare to what it should be? This! Missiles drones many things are not working for many people. It is highly likely this is not an intended change but your bonuses not applying due to the bug. One thing to try as a temporary measure strip your fit and repackage everything (Except the rigs of course dont break them) then refit the ship. Someone reported that worked tho I have not tried it. If you do that and it fixed it can you report back here so we can confirm it as a part of the bonus issue?
Grimpak Gallente The Whitehound Corporation Frontline Assembly Point	Posted - 2011.06.22 07:08:00 - [9] Originally by: Kuronaga If you probing nerds can do me a quick favor -- how drastic was the "nerf" to unscannable T3 setups? Is it actually possible to catch a T3 now, or is just lolpossible? in a nutshell, it went from "impossible" to "almost impossible". you need a character with all 5's on probing related skills, virtue+high grade hardwirings, full set of sisters mods, at the very least 6 probes and a bit of luck to manage to get the perfect alignment. --- Quote: The more I know about humans, the more I love animals. ain't that right.
Ser Shondi	Posted - 2011.06.22 07:09:00 - [10] I'm getting the same problem. Before the patch I'd probe down 10/10s with 4 probes very easily. After the patch I had to use 5 to get to 100%
Gnorki Balanovski	Posted - 2011.06.22 07:18:00 - [11] Is there a thread with the formula for probing anywhere?
MisterAl tt1	Posted - 2011.06.22 07:29:00 - [12] Edited by: MisterAl tt1 on 22/06/2011 07:30:21 Checking the "bonuses not applied" thing: Signature under consideration: V911 Expected strengths from 1 probe at 32AU: 3.47-5.21 Actual strengths got: 2.6 Now, one old bug: if you leave a probe in the system, go to the other system, then return and reconnect to the probe - your bonuses are not applied to it (at least some bonuses). mmm... the same 2.6 So either you are right and the case is that, or they have fixed that old bug. But for me it looks like that is the thing I wrote of. The fact is expected strenght for 32 and 64 AU probe are multiplied (or divided) by 2. So: Expected strengths from 1 probe at 32AU: 3.47-5.21 Expected strengths from 1 probe at 64AU: 1.74-2.6 If the case is they have changed 1 probe strenght so that 8 probes become the same as 4, so that has been divided by 2, also. Thus expected strength for 32 AU would be the same as it was for 64 AU, right? And that is exactly what I see: 2.6 = 2.6 If that was the case of "no bonuses at all" - we would've got much lesser strenght expected: 1.32-1.99 for 32AU probe Edit: Gnorki Balanovski, I don't know and I'm not the one who will start that. Especially when what I have does not work anymore. _________________________ Dynamic WH map for everyone!
MisterAl tt1	Posted - 2011.06.22 08:49:00 - [13] Looks like monocles are more interesting for people as scan. )) My corp-mates confirm that scanning with the same amount of probes as before (6 e.g.) has become more difficult. Anyway: FAILcarna. _________________________ Dynamic WH map for everyone!
Hannibal Ord Minmatar Noir. Noir. Mercenary Group	Posted - 2011.06.22 08:51:00 - [14] You will need an Nvidia card to take full advantage of the probing mechanics.
Zachstar	Posted - 2011.06.22 09:00:00 - [15] CCP can you say if this is part of the issue with the item bonuses? Is this change intended?
Rek Seven Gallente Zandathorn Industries	Posted - 2011.06.22 09:05:00 - [16] Who makes all these stupid decisions at CCP? I didnÆt know that all probes didnÆt contribute to the scan (i was using 7 probes) so when i read the patch notes i though ôgreat, scanning will be much betterö. Now youÆre telling me that i have to train to get back to where i was? IÆm starting to get real tired of this ****!
AkJon Ferguson JC Ferguson and Son Ltd Ferguson Alliance	Posted - 2011.06.22 09:11:00 - [17] I can confirm that probe strength has been reduced.
Rek Seven Gallente Zandathorn Industries	Posted - 2011.06.22 09:30:00 - [18] Originally by: AkJon Ferguson I can confirm that probe strength has been reduced. Then we should get a free remap as i don't see why i should have to train a skill that i'm no longer mapped for, just so i have the same abilities that i had yesterday.
Esternia Celsian	Posted - 2011.06.22 14:01:00 - [19] Originally by: MisterAl tt1 Anyway: FAILcarna. as for me it's WINcarna 8-probe scanning ftw
Enuen Ravenseye Malevolence. Imperial 0rder	Posted - 2011.06.22 15:06:00 - [20] (Yet another) Known issue: Originally by: CCP Veritas Originally by: CCP Veritas Originally by: Orphan World Either that, or something is making a whole pile of astrometrics modifiers fall away. I'm currently investigating an issue which might be causing exactly that Try completely emptying your launchers of all ammo then reloading. Should reset things.
Apollo Gabriel Brotherhood Of Fallen Angels Etherium Cartel	Posted - 2011.06.22 15:08:00 - [21] Only done a little probing, but it does seem that the computation has changed, it took a little while longer than previous. Time will tell. AG *** Signature may appear without warning! *** Please do not feed the trolls, it builds dependency.
MisterAl tt1	Posted - 2011.06.22 22:19:00 - [22] Originally by: Esternia Celsian as for me it's WINcarna 8-probe scanning ftw Read this topic carefully and you won't be that sure. Does anyone have any news? I've been told of a bug, that makes only 4 probes contribute to scanning. Will check it myself a little later. _________________________ Dynamic WH map for everyone!
Swynet State War Academy	Posted - 2011.06.22 22:29:00 - [23] Why have 8 probes when you can scan evrything with 4 I ask? If there's one bug somewhere I'd say the bug was before, now if you have to use max skills/tools to scan stuff seems to me it's more like "fix"
Karnitha	Posted - 2011.06.22 22:34:00 - [24] Originally by: Hannibal Ord You will need an Nvidia card to take full advantage of the probing mechanics. And a license for the use of that. And a monthly fee of $10 in order for us to process the scan results. I hope you understand, it's meant to be that way - people spend a lot of money on medical imaging, and it shouldn't be any different here.
MisterAl tt1	Posted - 2011.06.22 22:39:00 - [25] Originally by: Swynet Why have 8 probes when you can scan evrything with 4 I ask? If there's one bug somewhere I'd say the bug was before, now if you have to use max skills/tools to scan stuff seems to me it's more like "fix" Another one not able to read the topic from the start? _________________________ Dynamic WH map for everyone!
Lord Viziam	Posted - 2011.06.22 22:42:00 - [26] Confirming probing has been nerfed. I used to scan my high-sec exit with 4 probes at 2au. Now takes 4 probes at 1 au to nail it.
MisterAl tt1	Posted - 2011.06.22 23:16:00 - [27] Well. Very simple check - dropped a probe at the hole with 0.5AU set. We used to get this hole as 99%, right? And now? 62.46% But well, let's get to something new: They said us, that all 8 probes now do contribute to scanning? And now, two screenshoots: and I'm a little bit too tired to investigate into it now. But you can try to reproduce it yourself. Just make 2 groups of probes with different radius, and then, after some scan, disable one of them and scan again. Or you can test other options. _________________________ Dynamic WH map for everyone!
MisterAl tt1	Posted - 2011.06.22 23:39:00 - [28] Still made a check more. The above situation, when 4 "big" probes does not contribute, is seen when all the probes are on the same horyzon with the signature. If they are higher or lower - then those probes do have an impact. Still, I don't understand a reason for that. _________________________ Dynamic WH map for everyone!
Rek Seven Gallente Zandathorn Industries	Posted - 2011.06.23 08:34:00 - [29] So, bug or nerf?
Cataca	Posted - 2011.06.23 08:49:00 - [30] Originally by: MisterAl tt1 Still made a check more. The above situation, when 4 "big" probes does not contribute, is seen when all the probes are on the same horyzon with the signature. If they are higher or lower - then those probes do have an impact. Still, I don't understand a reason for that. Im pretty terrible at probing, but i thought you shouldnt let the probes sit in the radius of another probe? So instead of making cube shapes try a cross with only the very tips of the probes touching the sig. I could be wrong tho, i dont have much experience at it, but thats what i usually do.
MisterAl tt1	Posted - 2011.06.23 09:42:00 - [31] Originally by: Cataca So instead of making cube shapes try a cross with only the very tips of the probes touching the sig. Bad idea - the signal strenght depends on how far is the signature is from the probe. + deviation factor, doing it your way you will not be sure all the probes really touch the sig. _________________________ Dynamic WH map for everyone!
Space Wanderer	Posted - 2011.06.23 09:48:00 - [32] Originally by: Gnorki Balanovski Is there a thread with the formula for probing anywhere? Yes, I wrote it when the new scan system came out, you can find it among the stickied resources in the Missions and Exploration forum. However, despite the two scrawny lines in the patch notes and the non-alarmistic posts by devs, it seems that incarna has considerably altered the scan strength determination formula, thus all the scanning techniques you might have been used to are to be considered invalid (or at least uncertain). I am currently back to the reverse engineering board trying to derive the new one (already got a lead). As soon as I have it I'll post it, in the same format as the previous formula.
Arista Shahni Amarr Murasaki Mining and Manufacturing	Posted - 2011.06.23 10:03:00 - [33] Buried under the screaming is http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1533408 CCP rep said to unload the scanner and re-load it (aka repack stuff). That cleared it up for me for the most part with my yuck noob scanning skills (4 Astrometrics, 3's in the subskills, rigged anathema, sisters, 2% implant, etc.) I'm scanning with a slight lowering in ability to ID site type but before I unloaded the launcher I has major issues locking on anything. And speaking of 8 probes, yah, not every one has 5s in all their skills.. :( Wish it was realized mroe often that the entire playerbase is not maxxed out veterans when these stealthnerfs go in..
Mr Kidd	Posted - 2011.06.23 10:12:00 - [34] I've noticed an increase in difficulty probing as well. I used to only use 4 probes. I had read about the change where each probe would contribute to the signal strength of the target. I assumed that was the reason things were a bit more difficult. So I started using 5 probes which makes it a bit easier. However, I'm also reading people talking about damage mods and implants not working. So, I'm assuming that rigs and/or sister probe attributes and/or sister expanded probe launcher's attributes aren't contributing to signal strength. For the time being I would suggest that if you're only using 4 probes then start using 5. Since I've added the 5th probe it seems to put me back at my effectiveness when probing before Incarna.
TZeer BURN EDEN	Posted - 2011.06.23 10:18:00 - [35] Originally by: MisterAl tt1 Edited by: MisterAl tt1 on 22/06/2011 07:08:24 I didn't check myself, but heard that you will still need a full Virtue set with perfect skills and hardwirings to scan that down. The idea is that +4 probes contributing to scan was considered as "too easy" (which I agree) and thus 8 probes are now as good as 4 before. Now Astrometrics 5 has become a needed skill. I think that for actual scanning that is not that evident, but for a single-probe signature check that is well-seen. However, I would like such changes to BE listed in patchnotes. Wrong. Tested and tried. Yes, you will need some implants, but not the full virtue set. If you don't have maxed out skills, you can compensate with implants and all that jazz.
MisterAl tt1	Posted - 2011.06.23 12:12:00 - [36] Originally by: Space Wanderer However, despite the two scrawny lines in the patch notes and the non-alarmistic posts by devs, it seems that incarna has considerably altered the scan strength determination formula, thus all the scanning techniques you might have been used to are to be considered invalid (or at least uncertain). I am currently back to the reverse engineering board trying to derive the new one (already got a lead). As soon as I have it I'll post it, in the same format as the previous formula. Doesn't it look for you, that a base signal strengh has been devided in 2? I mean, what I now get with 32AU is very close to what I used to get with 64AU. _________________________ Dynamic WH map for everyone!
Space Wanderer	Posted - 2011.06.23 14:26:00 - [37] Originally by: MisterAl tt1 Doesn't it look for you, that a base signal strengh has been devided in 2? It's not that simple, unfortunately, otherwise I would have already found the new formula. The base strength of the single probe is the same as it used to be (you can check it in the charge info slot of the fitting screen). The problem is that the way it is used to derive the signal strength is drastically different, apparently non-linear in nature. Will take a little time to find out more.
AviendhaYasu	Posted - 2011.06.23 17:57:00 - [38] Originally by: Space Wanderer It's not that simple, unfortunately, otherwise I would have already found the new formula. The base strength of the single probe is the same as it used to be (you can check it in the charge info slot of the fitting screen). The problem is that the way it is used to derive the signal strength is drastically different, apparently non-linear in nature. Will take a little time to find out more. I wish you luck in this endeavor, as I am also a bit confused by the scan changes. I used to use a six-probe scan system, marking each face of a cube shape in space with each of my probes, and rarely if ever has this failed to scan down any signature within a range between 2 and 0.5 AU. Obviously this is overkill, especially with a covert ops scan ship, but it's quick enough that I don't lose massive amounts of time when scanning. The new system has made it easier to scan, however, particularly when using six or more probes, even in a T3 without massive scan bonuses like a Cov Ops. If you need extra data, let me know, I scan regularly in a T3.
Ospie The Python Cartel. The Defenders of Pen Island	Posted - 2011.06.23 18:08:00 - [39] Well, I feel that individual probe strength has been lowered somewhat. I don't have results from pre-Incarna to compare to, however it does feel less effective with 4 probes now than it previously did. It does seem that now the system is far more finicky with how you try to set up the probes (I had more luck with 6 probes compared to 8 simply due to the 6 being easier to setup). I'm not entirely sure but I think that a badly setup probe or two can have a more negative result than a bonus, when I was trying to probe an alliance mates unprobable loki (running 4s on all probing skills, though astrometrics 5, +3% implant, rigged covops w/ covops 4 trained) I had more luck with 6 probes than 8, even with 6 probes a very slight position change of two of them resulting a massive jump from 27% hit to 68% hit (working at max zoom since it gets a bit tricky with 6 x .5 au probes).
Violet Vayu	Posted - 2011.06.23 18:33:00 - [40] I agree they did break this too, formula change, they even wanted to include wormhole dwellers in the failure of this "expansion".
MisterAl tt1	Posted - 2011.06.23 19:39:00 - [41] Got an answer for my bugrep. Main points out of it: - This is indeed a change in the scanning formula, which is by design - a single probe results in a slightly lower signal strength - the changes were incuded in pathcnotes, but without the details on the formula change Well, so we'll be waiting for the results of the new research. _________________________ Dynamic WH map for everyone!
Orion TashMurkon	Posted - 2011.06.23 19:45:00 - [42] spent some time scanning on a falcon earlier today with an expanded probe launcher and standard probs. even with my high skills i couldn't pinpoint anything... if before was tricky, now i find it impossible.. anyone tried without a covert ops and a sister launcher?
Darth Dreads	Posted - 2011.06.23 19:49:00 - [43] I read this thread and looked at scanning and Originally by: Dr Zuma Turn it off.
AviendhaYasu	Posted - 2011.06.23 20:07:00 - [44] Originally by: Orion TashMurkon spent some time scanning on a falcon earlier today with an expanded probe launcher and standard probs. even with my high skills i couldn't pinpoint anything... if before was tricky, now i find it impossible.. anyone tried without a covert ops and a sister launcher? Like I was saying earlier, I scanned down a couple dozen signatures in a Loki with the probe subsystem. With Electronic subs at 4, 7 probes in space, no scanning rigs, and only passable scanning skills (most at 3, including pinpointing), I was able to scan out most signatures, albeit high sec signatures, within five to fifteen minutes depending on the difficulty of positioning.
Splodger Black Viper Nomads	Posted - 2011.06.23 20:13:00 - [45] What has changed is the displayed value of a signature, the signature itself is still the same size (to give anyone benefit of the doubt they may be slightly smaller). I cannot notice any difference scanning before with 4 probes and after patch. The value displayed has changed but inherently the signature itself hasnt changed, it still requires same number of passes to get to 100% The difference now is that when using more than 4 probes is that any overlay in the total area coverage will now yield a higher signature strength of that signature/multiple signatures under coverage when using more than 4 probes. However when scanning to a smaller signature size using more than 4 probes will diminish the returns the closer you focus into the signature. Multiple probes speeds up the triagulation and identification process but doesnt assist in the finale pinpointing of signatures below a certain threshold. Logically this makes sense, but the patch notes arnt very clear and this is just my theory into the way CCP has modified the way they work. __________________________ Wormhole Exploration Tool Wormnav.com
AviendhaYasu	Posted - 2011.06.23 20:22:00 - [46] Originally by: Splodger ... Multiple probes speeds up the triagulation and identification process but doesnt assist in the finale pinpointing of signatures below a certain threshold. ... Technically, this would be a case of quadrangulation, would it not? Or hexangulation for us cube-form scanners, and septangulation or octangulation for those times when you just want to have you max probes in space. In any case, I thought this was already the situation pre-patch, as the more points of reference one has to a particular object in space, the more accurately one can determine its true location. So from what I'm understanding, this makes the scanning process more logical, as only allowing four points of reference to remain valid, even if more than those four are present, just seems gimpy to me.
Care Bear King	Posted - 2011.06.23 20:28:00 - [47] Originally by: Grimpak Originally by: Kuronaga If you probing nerds can do me a quick favor -- how drastic was the "nerf" to unscannable T3 setups? Is it actually possible to catch a T3 now, or is just lolpossible? you need a character with all 5's on probing related skills, virtue+high grade hardwirings, full set of sisters mods, at the very least 6 probes and a bit of luck to manage to get the perfect alignment. Please note that if you take your probing hobby seriously, an option to further invest in and maximize the enjoyment of your hobby will be available through the Nex this winter! Keep up the march toward excellence!
Barbara Nichole Cryogenic Consultancy Black Sun Alliance	Posted - 2011.06.23 20:32:00 - [48] Edited by: Barbara Nichole on 23/06/2011 20:32:48 Originally by: Ser Shondi I'm getting the same problem. Before the patch I'd probe down 10/10s with 4 probes very easily. After the patch I had to use 5 to get to 100% I have 5's in all my scanning skills and I always used 5 probes. I have noticed that it takes more work.

CCP Veritas	Posted - 2011.06.23 20:34:00 - [49] Hey there gents. The scanning formulas changed fundamentally. My apologies that the patch notes didn't convey that very well.

Fellblade	Posted - 2011.06.23 20:35:00 - [50] Edited by: Fellblade on 23/06/2011 20:36:20 Please could we have some detail as to the manner in which it was changed? Thanks for replying to this topic. Edit for grammar
Strider Hiryu Kangaroos With Frickin Lazerbeams The KWFL Republic	Posted - 2011.06.23 20:36:00 - [51] Originally by: CCP Veritas Hey there gents. The scanning formulas changed fundamentally. My apologies that the patch notes didn't convey that very well. And us ladies. Sexist Pig! I like beer and cheese...
BeanBagKing Terra Incognita Intrepid Crossing	Posted - 2011.06.23 20:37:00 - [52] Originally by: CCP Veritas Hey there gents. The scanning formulas changed fundamentally. My apologies that the patch notes didn't convey that very well. Wait, what? They didn't convey a change in formula at all, there was no "not very well" about it. So now that this has been noticed, instead of just posting "oh yea, woops" mind telling us how they changed? and why you would change them in the first place?
Palovana Caldari Inner Fire Inc.	Posted - 2011.06.23 20:38:00 - [53] Monocle = 2x scanning strength. ----- There's nothing Noble about this Exchange! Money for pixels and pink ships for free.
Tajidan Muppet Ninja's Ninja Unicorns with Huge Horns	Posted - 2011.06.23 20:38:00 - [54] Originally by: CCP Veritas Hey there gents. The scanning formulas changed fundamentally. My apologies that the patch notes didn't convey that very well. Hello there dev. Care to elaborate?
Rek Seven Gallente Zandathorn Industries	Posted - 2011.06.23 20:48:00 - [55] Originally by: CCP Veritas Hey there gents. The scanning formulas changed fundamentally. My apologies that the patch notes didn't convey that very well. Well thanks you for finally confirming this but you really should warn people when you change game play mechanics in this way. It took one of my friends, who is very new to the game, a full day to find his way out of a wormhole... I don't think he will be renewing his sub
Ace Secunda Black Viper Nomads	Posted - 2011.06.23 20:50:00 - [56] When using 32 or 64AU probes initially it would seem strength has been halved with 4 probes but on getting down to 8au's and under with 4 it is the same as before the patch for me. this has not effected our scanning as it is still easy to pick out the size groupings from the half stength sigs. 'If I can't blow it up It don't exsist'
Splodger Black Viper Nomads	Posted - 2011.06.23 20:51:00 - [57] Originally by: AviendhaYasu Originally by: Splodger ... Multiple probes speeds up the triagulation and identification process but doesnt assist in the finale pinpointing of signatures below a certain threshold. ... Technically, this would be a case of quadrangulation, would it not? Or hexangulation for us cube-form scanners, and septangulation or octangulation for those times when you just want to have you max probes in space. In any case, I thought this was already the situation pre-patch, as the more points of reference one has to a particular object in space, the more accurately one can determine its true location. So from what I'm understanding, this makes the scanning process more logical, as only allowing four points of reference to remain valid, even if more than those four are present, just seems gimpy to me. Well yes Quad would be more valid as long as you had 4 overlappying probes at minimum it would do it, having more does just increase the chances of getting the first hit. Yes id agree with you it does feel gimpy. But they say they have changed something although it feels trivial to me personally I didnt notice it but then again I just go into zombie mode when scanning, granted others are saying otherwise so we will have to wait for further details. __________________________ Wormhole Exploration Tool Wormnav.com
Gabriel Grimoire Amarr Ascendent. Gentlemen's Agreement	Posted - 2011.06.23 20:51:00 - [58] Originally by: CCP Veritas Hey there gents. The scanning formulas changed fundamentally. My apologies that the patch notes didn't bother to mention that whatsoever. Fixed. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Leonard T. Washington gets buck naked for no man.
Heitaro Kimura Selectus Pravus Lupus Transmission Lost	Posted - 2011.06.23 20:53:00 - [59] Edited by: Heitaro Kimura on 23/06/2011 20:52:58 Originally by: CCP Veritas Hey there gents. The scanning formulas changed fundamentally. My apologies that the patch notes didn't convey that very well. By "didn't convey that very well", you mean "not at all"? Quote: Scanning * It is no longer possible to set up a ship to be impervious to scanning while uncloaked. * All probes can now contribute to a scan result, as opposed to the previous limit of four.
AviendhaYasu	Posted - 2011.06.23 20:53:00 - [60] I'm surprised I'm haven't seen more of these panacean responses in the other "oh god wtf happened to EVE" threads.
Space Wanderer	Posted - 2011.06.23 20:55:00 - [61] Edited by: Space Wanderer on 23/06/2011 20:55:16 Originally by: CCP Veritas The scanning formulas changed fundamentally. My apologies that the patch notes didn't convey that very well. Eh, you are late, I found that out the first day after incarna release. I still don't get the new formula completely, but from what i found out I have to admit you have applied a good amount of nice touches.
Space Wanderer	Posted - 2011.06.23 21:04:00 - [62] Originally by: BeanBagKing Wait, what? They didn't convey a change in formula at all, there was no "not very well" about it. That's not entirely true. The second I read that more than four probes would contribute to the scan results I set out to find the new formula. That was a more fundamental change than many people are aware. Originally by: BeanBagKing So now that this has been noticed, instead of just posting "oh yea, woops" mind telling us how they changed? I doubt they will. They never released a single scanning formula. You'll have to wait until it is reverse engineered by players (i'm on it), as it happened with the previous formula. Only last time we were forewarned that scanning changes were coming, so we reverse engineered it on SISI and were able to post it as soon as apochrypha was released. This time I wasn't aware of the change, so gotta take a little time.
Zakarazor Amarr Inadeptus Mechanicus	Posted - 2011.06.23 21:05:00 - [63] Originally by: CCP Veritas Hey there gents. The scanning formulas changed fundamentally. My apologies that the patch notes didn't convey that very well. ...THIS THEY RESPOND TO!??
AviendhaYasu	Posted - 2011.06.23 21:08:00 - [64] Originally by: Zakarazor Originally by: CCP Veritas Hey there gents. The scanning formulas changed fundamentally. My apologies that the patch notes didn't convey that very well. ...THIS THEY RESPOND TO!?? And so well, too.

CCP Veritas	Posted - 2011.06.23 21:25:00 - [65] Originally by: Heitaro Kimura Edited by: Heitaro Kimura on 23/06/2011 20:52:58 Originally by: CCP Veritas Hey there gents. The scanning formulas changed fundamentally. My apologies that the patch notes didn't convey that very well. By "didn't convey that very well", you mean "not at all"? Yeah, pretty much. Some things got dropped on the editing room floor and I apologize for not noticing that sooner.

Zakarazor Amarr Inadeptus Mechanicus	Posted - 2011.06.23 21:27:00 - [66] Edited by: Zakarazor on 23/06/2011 21:27:11
BeanBagKing Terra Incognita Intrepid Crossing	Posted - 2011.06.23 21:27:00 - [67] And you still haven't given us any idea of how they changed. We noticed that it was left out and all we've gotten is acknowledgements, how about giving us the real scoop on what was supposed to be put in the patch notes.
AviendhaYasu	Posted - 2011.06.23 21:31:00 - [68] I really do appreciate the fact that you are even making an attempt to explain anything to the players, and I understand that, as per the last nine years, it is up to us, the players, to bear down and figure out how the game works. What I would like to know is why you're the only dev member to post anything anywhere on the forums that I've seen in the last couple hours. You should tell them that even a "Hey guys, thanks for the input, we'll release a(n) [insert publication type here] explaining what/why we did these things and if/when/how we're going to fix them." type of message would kill at LEAST 40% of the whining and *****ing.

CCP Veritas	Posted - 2011.06.23 21:33:00 - [69] Originally by: BeanBagKing And you still haven't given us any idea of how they changed. We noticed that it was left out and all we've gotten is acknowledgements, how about giving us the real scoop on what was supposed to be put in the patch notes. They changed...a lot. We never released the details of the old formulas, I don't see any reason to change that. Consider it a fun puzzle, like sorting out quantum mechanics.

AviendhaYasu	Posted - 2011.06.23 21:38:00 - [70] Originally by: CCP Veritas Originally by: BeanBagKing And you still haven't given us any idea of how they changed. We noticed that it was left out and all we've gotten is acknowledgements, how about giving us the real scoop on what was supposed to be put in the patch notes. They changed...a lot. We never released the details of the old formulas, I don't see any reason to change that. Consider it a fun puzzle, like sorting out quantum mechanics. Precisely, see my previous post. Why can't the whole devteam be like you? <3
Leah Solo	Posted - 2011.06.23 21:40:00 - [71] Well this 'forgot to mention' change better let my prowler scan my out of a c4 i spent last month in!
Wa'roun Quantum Cats Syndicate	Posted - 2011.06.23 21:40:00 - [72] Linkage
AviendhaYasu	Posted - 2011.06.23 21:54:00 - [73] Originally by: Leah Solo Well this 'forgot to mention' change better let my prowler scan my out of a c4 i spent last month in! Thankfully I left my C5 chain exploration WH the day before the update :O
Rek Seven Gallente Zandathorn Industries	Posted - 2011.06.23 22:00:00 - [74] Originally by: AviendhaYasu C5 chain exploration WH What is that? like a wormhole version of an exploration mission?
AviendhaYasu	Posted - 2011.06.23 22:01:00 - [75] Originally by: Rek Seven Originally by: AviendhaYasu C5 chain exploration WH What is that? like a wormhole version of an exploration mission? Like searching for a particular C5 by hanging out in a C5 with a C5 static, and jumping through every successive C5 wormhole every day.
Rek Seven Gallente Zandathorn Industries	Posted - 2011.06.23 22:04:00 - [76] Oh... Sounds fun
AviendhaYasu	Posted - 2011.06.23 22:06:00 - [77] Originally by: Rek Seven Oh... Sounds fun If anything, it was great scan-practice while I waited for my T3 skills to finish. On second thought, I probably should have stayed in the WH. I would have been forced to get used to the new scan system, and might have been able to contribute valuable info to the formulation of the new formulae.
Dregol	Posted - 2011.06.23 22:10:00 - [78] Originally by: CCP Veritas Originally by: BeanBagKing And you still haven't given us any idea of how they changed. We noticed that it was left out and all we've gotten is acknowledgements, how about giving us the real scoop on what was supposed to be put in the patch notes. They changed...a lot. We never released the details of the old formulas, I don't see any reason to change that. Consider it a fun puzzle, like sorting out quantum mechanics. Seems more like a "we can't be bothered to keep you up to date" than a puzzle. Any other "oh yeah"'s we should know about?
Murdah Blue Republic RvB - BLUE Republic	Posted - 2011.06.23 22:12:00 - [79] Clearly we will just have to pay Aurum for a new type of probe and launcher to be able to scan properly again... All part of the plan.
Placid09 Suddenly Ninjas	Posted - 2011.06.23 22:54:00 - [80] Edited by: Placid09 on 23/06/2011 22:54:22 Originally by: Murdah Clearly we will just have to pay Aurum for a new type of probe and launcher to be able to scan properly again... All part of the plan. Originally by: Dregol Originally by: CCP Veritas They changed...a lot. We never released the details of the old formulas, I don't see any reason to change that. Consider it a fun puzzle, like sorting out quantum mechanics. Seems more like a "we can't be bothered to keep you up to date" than a puzzle. Any other "oh yeah"'s we should know about? I wish I could chalk these up to troll posts, but they sound to accurate too be true. Oh how CCP has strayed from what it was and what it's fanbase begs for.
Ardvaark Ratnik Minmatar Voice of the Blood Acquirers	Posted - 2011.06.23 23:00:00 - [81] Originally by: CCP Veritas Hey there gents. The scanning formulas changed fundamentally. My apologies that the patch notes didn't convey that very well. To get your proper scanning strength back, you now need to buy a boost from the Noble Exchange
Addergebroed	Posted - 2011.06.23 23:08:00 - [82] Originally by: Placid09 Edited by: Placid09 on 23/06/2011 22:54:22 Originally by: Murdah Clearly we will just have to pay Aurum for a new type of probe and launcher to be able to scan properly again... All part of the plan. Originally by: Dregol Originally by: CCP Veritas They changed...a lot. We never released the details of the old formulas, I don't see any reason to change that. Consider it a fun puzzle, like sorting out quantum mechanics. Seems more like a "we can't be bothered to keep you up to date" than a puzzle. Any other "oh yeah"'s we should know about? I wish I could chalk these up to troll posts, but they sound to accurate too be true. Oh how CCP has strayed from what it was and what it's fanbase begs for. This. An o yeah, soz we forgot is totally unacceptable. We pay to play your game and while we know by now that you think we do not pay enough, all players should still be able to acces the rules of the game they p(l)ay.
Ospie The Python Cartel. The Defenders of Pen Island	Posted - 2011.06.23 23:17:00 - [83] Eh, I'm content with the way it was dealt with aside from them actually saying "we changed it lots k?", which you find out almost the instant you try probing for the first time after incarna, not to mention that 8 probes working on same strengths as the old 4 would be insane so it would be expected they make some changes. They didn't mess about denying they changed it once we brought it up either.
daddys helper	Posted - 2011.06.23 23:20:00 - [84] Originally by: CCP Veritas Originally by: BeanBagKing And you still haven't given us any idea of how they changed. We noticed that it was left out and all we've gotten is acknowledgements, how about giving us the real scoop on what was supposed to be put in the patch notes. They changed...a lot. We never released the details of the old formulas, I don't see any reason to change that. Consider it a fun puzzle, like sorting out quantum mechanics. so you're saying you have no idea either
MisterAl tt1	Posted - 2011.06.23 23:27:00 - [85] Originally by: Space Wanderer You'll have to wait until it is reverse engineered by players (i'm on it). Anything I can help you with - feel free to contact me (this is my main). I will possibly ran some tests myself tomorrow afternoon. _________________________ Dynamic WH map for everyone!
Herzog Wolfhammer Gallente Sigma Special Tactics Group	Posted - 2011.06.23 23:38:00 - [86] Originally by: CCP Veritas Originally by: BeanBagKing And you still haven't given us any idea of how they changed. We noticed that it was left out and all we've gotten is acknowledgements, how about giving us the real scoop on what was supposed to be put in the patch notes. They changed...a lot. We never released the details of the old formulas, I don't see any reason to change that. Consider it a fun puzzle, like sorting out quantum mechanics. As an explorer I say: Thanks! I don't log in for an easy game. Never knew or cared for the formula anyway and exploration was getting too easy for the nooblings. That other game that gives quick gratification for little effort is always taking new subscribers so if anybody does not like it, contract your stuff to me. Exploration got harder. Period. So there is no more un-scannable T3 but now it's not just any zit-popping griefer who will be able to scan one down. The phat loot sites that were originally hard to scan may well have gotten harder. So not just any monkey with 4 probes and lvl 4 in everything with a cheap launcher is going to get it. Nothing here is departing from the concepts of the game: nobody is having an "I WIN" button, and rewards are not coming cheaper either. All good.
Tobiaz Spacerats	Posted - 2011.06.23 23:40:00 - [87] Originally by: Arista Shahni Buried under the screaming is http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1533408 CCP rep said to unload the scanner and re-load it (aka repack stuff). That cleared it up for me for the most part with my yuck noob scanning skills (4 Astrometrics, 3's in the subskills, rigged anathema, sisters, 2% implant, etc.) I'm scanning with a slight lowering in ability to ID site type but before I unloaded the launcher I has major issues locking on anything. And speaking of 8 probes, yah, not every one has 5s in all their skills.. :( Wish it was realized mroe often that the entire playerbase is not maxxed out veterans when these stealthnerfs go in.. Only for the hardest sigs and ships are 8 probes necessary and finding those is the rewards for the specialists that bothers with spending a good two months and a big wad of ISK on their profession. EVE can only thrive if there's enough diversity and scanning has already become way too easy. + 1500 votes on MT in EVE \| NO 79.03% \| YES 5.02% \| COSMETIC ONLY 11.23% \| OTHER 4.73%
Emperor Cheney Celebrity Sex Tape	Posted - 2011.06.23 23:48:00 - [88] Edited by: Emperor Cheney on 23/06/2011 23:48:16 Originally by: CCP Veritas Originally by: BeanBagKing And you still haven't given us any idea of how they changed. We noticed that it was left out and all we've gotten is acknowledgements, how about giving us the real scoop on what was supposed to be put in the patch notes. They changed...a lot. We never released the details of the old formulas, I don't see any reason to change that. Consider it a fun puzzle, like sorting out quantum mechanics. Ugh. Well, time to stop scanning for a few weeks (months) until some other brave people figure it out and write a new guide. Hopefully they're able to publish it without paying CCP $99. Otherwise, I'll never even learn how to scan, and just won't access that part of the game's content. Not sure why you guys take having a game without adequate documentation as some kind of virtue. Will user guides show up in the aarum shop? Is that the reason for the gloating?

CCP Veritas	Posted - 2011.06.24 00:02:00 - [89] Originally by: Emperor Cheney Ugh. Well, time to stop scanning for a few weeks (months) until some other brave people figure it out and write a new guide. Well that's a bit melodramatic don't you think? All the old ideas are still correct - get probes out, surround your target with them, narrow in from there. Just use more than four probes cause probe 5 and above help now. That the formula pumping the numbers changed doesn't mean the guiding principals changed.


CCP Veritas	Posted - 2011.06.24 00:04:00 - [90] Originally by: daddys helper Originally by: CCP Veritas They changed...a lot. We never released the details of the old formulas, I don't see any reason to change that. Consider it a fun puzzle, like sorting out quantum mechanics. so you're saying you have no idea either Well, I coded it, so I'm pretty sure I know it rather intimately.

Zverofaust Gallente Incompertus INC Fatal Ascension	Posted - 2011.06.24 00:06:00 - [91] Can you code me a bear riding a dragon CCP Veritas? Slide it into the game somewhere, I'll find it...
Ris Dnalor Minmatar Fleet of Doom RaVeN Federation	Posted - 2011.06.24 00:10:00 - [92] Originally by: CCP Veritas Originally by: Emperor Cheney Ugh. Well, time to stop scanning for a few weeks (months) until some other brave people figure it out and write a new guide. Well that's a bit melodramatic don't you think? All the old ideas are still correct - get probes out, surround your target with them, narrow in from there. Just use more than four probes cause probe 5 and above help now. That the formula pumping the numbers changed doesn't mean the guiding principals changed. You're dumbing down everything else, and now you're surprised when the people that are left expect to be spoonfed eh? really?
Emperor Cheney Celebrity Sex Tape	Posted - 2011.06.24 00:15:00 - [93] Edited by: Emperor Cheney on 24/06/2011 00:15:40 Being transparent does not equal "dumbing down." This is a common confusion, complexity versus complication. EVE is a great game despite its faults, not because of them.
Varcaus	Posted - 2011.06.24 00:16:00 - [94] I was using 5 probes before so i guess this wont affect me much c/d?
Herzog Wolfhammer Gallente Sigma Special Tactics Group	Posted - 2011.06.24 00:21:00 - [95] Originally by: Varcaus I was using 5 probes before so i guess this wont affect me much c/d? I was up to 7 and that's because I never could find a pattern for the 8th.
TZeer BURN EDEN	Posted - 2011.06.24 00:23:00 - [96] Originally by: CCP Veritas Originally by: daddys helper Originally by: CCP Veritas They changed...a lot. We never released the details of the old formulas, I don't see any reason to change that. Consider it a fun puzzle, like sorting out quantum mechanics. so you're saying you have no idea either Well, I coded it, so I'm pretty sure I know it rather intimately. Any possibility to code in a longer scan time, or something that doesn't make sniping a suicidal thing to do?
Republica Winder Caldari State War Academy	Posted - 2011.06.24 02:37:00 - [97] Originally by: CCP Veritas Originally by: Emperor Cheney Ugh. Well, time to stop scanning for a few weeks (months) until some other brave people figure it out and write a new guide. Well that's a bit melodramatic don't you think? All the old ideas are still correct - get probes out, surround your target with them, narrow in from there. Just use more than four probes cause probe 5 and above help now. That the formula pumping the numbers changed doesn't mean the guiding principals changed. You do realize you are speaking to the people who pay your salary, right? Changes like this ARE SUPPOSED TO BE IN PATCH NOTES. Given your shoddy QA, how can you be sure it's even working right? Since no one knew about it, NO ONE TESTED IT!
Rasz Lin Caldari Uitraan Diversified Holdings Incorporated	Posted - 2011.06.24 02:47:00 - [98] Originally by: Hannibal Ord You will need an Nvidia card to take full advantage of the probing mechanics. and Noble probes/launcher
OMGWTFResearch	Posted - 2011.06.24 02:49:00 - [99] Originally by: CCP Veritas Originally by: Emperor Cheney Ugh. Well, time to stop scanning for a few weeks (months) until some other brave people figure it out and write a new guide. Well that's a bit melodramatic don't you think? All the old ideas are still correct - get probes out, surround your target with them, narrow in from there. Just use more than four probes cause probe 5 and above help now. That the formula pumping the numbers changed doesn't mean the guiding principals changed. Most companies do not allow that kind of questioning towards their customers. Not to mention downright rudeness with your use of I doubt CCP is any different. Please consult your companies rules and regulations before you end up causing another PR disaster for your company. And to be frank You are being QUITE rude with your refusal to give basic info that impacts entire industries in this game. We had NO WARNING therefore no time to prepare for the change. The nice thing to do is atleast indicate info we can use to rewrite the guides.
Selinate Amarr Mocking Birds	Posted - 2011.06.24 02:51:00 - [100] Originally by: CCP Veritas All the old ideas are still correct - get probes out, surround your target with them, narrow in from there. Just use more than four probes cause probe 5 and above help now. Only thing about this is that, in the past, I didn't have trouble at all scanning down sites in high sec with a punisher. Now I'm finding sites in high sec that I can't scan down with a rigged anathema. Seems like the guiding principles have to change if it became that much harder, but that's just from my perspective...
Rasz Lin Caldari Uitraan Diversified Holdings Incorporated	Posted - 2011.06.24 02:59:00 - [101] Originally by: CCP Veritas Originally by: daddys helper Originally by: CCP Veritas They changed...a lot. We never released the details of the old formulas, I don't see any reason to change that. Consider it a fun puzzle, like sorting out quantum mechanics. so you're saying you have no idea either Well, I coded it, so I'm pretty sure I know it rather intimately. If anyone read glassdoor CCP employee reviews you will understand this attitude quickly. Documentation is required in Agility .. unless you are facebook buddy with your manager, drink with him or make him laugh, one of those makes you immune to corporate policies and you become sacred cow. Who wants to bet this was a ninja patch with no documentation, no changelog, and no planning?
Caphelo	Posted - 2011.06.24 03:05:00 - [102] Edited by: Caphelo on 24/06/2011 03:06:33 Originally by: CCP Veritas All the old ideas are still correct - get probes out, surround your target with them, narrow in from there. Just use more than four probes cause probe 5 and above help now. That the formula pumping the numbers changed doesn't mean the guiding principals changed. Wow. Do you even play your own game? How the hell do you come up with an idea that makes it MORE of a clickfest and think it's good? "Let's see, probing requires four probes right now, clicking and dragging four items isn't enough tedium, let's make it 8! Where's my promotion?"
Selinate Amarr Mocking Birds	Posted - 2011.06.24 03:10:00 - [103] Originally by: Caphelo Edited by: Caphelo on 24/06/2011 03:06:33 Originally by: CCP Veritas All the old ideas are still correct - get probes out, surround your target with them, narrow in from there. Just use more than four probes cause probe 5 and above help now. That the formula pumping the numbers changed doesn't mean the guiding principals changed. Wow. Do you even play your own game? How the hell do you come up with an idea that makes it MORE of a clickfest and think it's good? "Let's see, probing requires four probes right now, clicking and dragging four items isn't enough tedium, let's make it 8! Where's my promotion?" For once I agree with someone raging (even if I would prefer less rage since rage is just.... meh). This has pretty much caused me to not explore anywhere near as often as I used to before I started noticing this. It just makes it more of a pain in the ass. I really would like if it was changed back.
ELECTR0FREAK Eye of God	Posted - 2011.06.24 03:34:00 - [104] Same thing happened with the missile damage formula, why is everyone surprised? I discovered the formula back in 2005 when missiles were originally revamped. They were tweaked again in 2008 (with little fanfare) and the formula was rediscovered by some other guys here on the forum. Most people kept on firing away with their missiles and hardly noticed a thing. Obviously this change made a more visible change and should probably have been communicated a little better, but I'm surprised that people are acting so shocked that CCP changes formulas for game mechanics without posting the intimate details of the change. They've never done it that way so people can really stop acting like it's a personal affront that they didn't post the formula. In short: CCP should have worded it as such: All probes can now contribute to a scan result, as opposed to the previous limit of four. More than four probes will need to be used to match pre-patch scanning effectiveness. Discoverer of the Original Missile Damage Formula
Muddy Miner Gallente Tiny Fleet	Posted - 2011.06.24 03:44:00 - [105] I've always used five myself. wave Epic EvE Thread "[Competition] Best picture of door"
Zachstar	Posted - 2011.06.24 04:19:00 - [106] Edited by: Zachstar on 24/06/2011 04:22:10 Edited by: Zachstar on 24/06/2011 04:20:04 Originally by: CCP Veritas Originally by: Emperor Cheney Ugh. Well, time to stop scanning for a few weeks (months) until some other brave people figure it out and write a new guide. Well that's a bit melodramatic don't you think? All the old ideas are still correct - get probes out, surround your target with them, narrow in from there. Just use more than four probes cause probe 5 and above help now. That the formula pumping the numbers changed doesn't mean the guiding principals changed. Oh By the way I tried your "You can use more probes now" thing. Located a site to be found with 4 got to 3.2 percent launched a 5th and guess what? still 3.2 percent. IF what you said was correct that 5th probe ought to have given more towards the percent no? Care to explain? Edit2: Just tried with 7 and guess what? Three Point Two Percent
Arista Shahni Amarr Murasaki Mining and Manufacturing	Posted - 2011.06.24 04:53:00 - [107] Originally by: Tobiaz Only for the hardest sigs and ships are 8 probes necessary and finding those is the rewards for the specialists that bothers with spending a good two months and a big wad of ISK on their profession. EVE can only thrive if there's enough diversity and scanning has already become way too easy. Well, I've only been subbed for 4 months. I've been bothering with my profession.. it's just painfully new, like the toon. (Covert ops, scanning, etc, with noobish non-optimisation of training queues and lack of 'feed them in fast' funds thrown in there and all.) Was also subbed briefly in 2009 though so I know the pattern and I"m willing to wait the few more months and give it the attention it needs to do exploration full time. I am enjoying it as a niche profession and it shouldn't be launch-probe click button lol-win. Just sort of personally hurt because I had just reached the point of not having to cry for a more accomplished (read: older account) corpmate to come zero in a sig for me. (This is highsec I'm talking about BTW.) Once I repacked the launcher and fiddled with probe positioning by tightening up the diamond I was using a little more, things re-clarified again well enough to be comfortable. My QQ is more of an "okay." meme-face than a "FUUUUUU" meme-face, if that makes sense. It will wash once the skills get a few more weeks into them anyway, I'm sure.
Ospie The Python Cartel. The Defenders of Pen Island	Posted - 2011.06.24 05:06:00 - [108] Originally by: Zachstar Edited by: Zachstar on 24/06/2011 04:22:10 Edited by: Zachstar on 24/06/2011 04:20:04 Originally by: CCP Veritas Originally by: Emperor Cheney Ugh. Well, time to stop scanning for a few weeks (months) until some other brave people figure it out and write a new guide. Well that's a bit melodramatic don't you think? All the old ideas are still correct - get probes out, surround your target with them, narrow in from there. Just use more than four probes cause probe 5 and above help now. That the formula pumping the numbers changed doesn't mean the guiding principals changed. Oh By the way I tried your "You can use more probes now" thing. Located a site to be found with 4 got to 3.2 percent launched a 5th and guess what? still 3.2 percent. IF what you said was correct that 5th probe ought to have given more towards the percent no? Care to explain? Edit2: Just tried with 7 and guess what? Three Point Two Percent As I said earlier, it seems (from my experience so far) that the actual positioning of probes is far more important now. Possibly to the point where 6 well placed probes will give a better result than those same 6 probes with a 7th out doing some random stuff pulling the focus of the probe away. This IS speculation on my behalf based on my testing so far (which is not extensive, but is enough to feel comfortable with the new system). Again as I stated earlier simply by moving 2 out of 6 probes a very small distance I was able to bring a result on a previously unprobeable loki from 27% to 68% using same strength probes.
Cloora APEX Unlimited APEX Conglomerate	Posted - 2011.06.24 05:23:00 - [109] This kinda sux. I don't know if anyone else had this style of probing as I did, but as a PvP combat prober I am pretty 1337 (sorry to toot my own horn). My alliance likes to catch people that go GCC after they commit a crime in low sec. We either get them WHILE they commit the crime through bait or using mission runners and hapless noob miners as bait (they don't know they are bait) I ALWAYS used 8 probes. I was made fun of by people that thought they knew about probing and thought I was an idiot for using 8 probes and they saw them on scanner. I was actually using 2 groups of 4 probes since 4 was all you needed. I had them grouped in a 0.5 AU range cluster and off directional. I used to alts for a total of 16 probes. "16 Sisters probes? Really? I could have most of the celestial groups covered with these 4 groups of 4 probes. Most people run to a planet after commiting a crime. Some warp around on grid. Either way, I get em. I would have to move them around to get normal safes, but for the most part I caught 80% of my prey this way. This is the first time I have shared my sekrit with anyone outside my alliance. It might be something other people are using but I developed this style all by myself hunting pirates. It all started when I use to probe out sniper HACs in Aunenen... ah the memories! So the cat is out of the bag. But with this change it won't matter if I share my methods because now it is useless.... ------------------------------------------ CEO and Major Shareholder of the APEX Conglomerate Producer of Starsi brand softdrinks and Torped-Os! brand cereal as well as many other fine products
Frau Klaps Amarr Trillionaire High-Rollers Suicidal Bassoon Orkesta	Posted - 2011.06.24 05:31:00 - [110] Originally by: CCP Veritas Originally by: Emperor Cheney Ugh. Well, time to stop scanning for a few weeks (months) until some other brave people figure it out and write a new guide. Well that's a bit melodramatic don't you think? All the old ideas are still correct - get probes out, surround your target with them, narrow in from there. Just use more than four probes cause probe 5 and above help now. That the formula pumping the numbers changed doesn't mean the guiding principals changed. I spent about 6 hours testing out damn near all aspects of probing and frankly concluded what I had assumed within the first 30 minutes of doing so. I just needed to do so in some combat situations and you know how hard it is to get hostiles to behave as you want them to. It's like trying to replace trained actors with cats Anyway, everyone whining about undocumented changes... it WAS documented, there was a change, you just have to get your thumb out of your arse and figure stuff out. It's not exactly hard. When apocrypha was released the difficulty of scanning dropped radically and many MANY people got in on the act and were enthusiastic about learning the ins and outs of how it works. There were multi-page threads full of theory crafting which were great fun to read and contribute to. What you are asking for here is a complete removal of any ... exploration ... of the mechanic which supports exploration. Granted it affects pvp scanning too but not that much and anyone dedicated to doing so will make an effort. Everyone else can GTFO and stop crying, thanks. ~~~ (ಠ_ృ)
Fighter26 Orion's Fist	Posted - 2011.06.24 05:36:00 - [111] Edited by: Fighter26 on 24/06/2011 05:37:11 Originally by: CCP Veritas Yeah, pretty much. Some things got dropped on the editing room floor and I apologize for not noticing that sooner. Originally by: CCP Veritas They changed...a lot. We never released the details of the old formulas, I don't see any reason to change that. Consider it a fun puzzle, like sorting out quantum mechanics. Smile Pathetic. This is not the attitude CCP should be offering to a community that was bull**ed over micro-transactions. You are wrong. Perhaps you should buy a monocle to see the reason you are wrong.** This is just another slap in the face to your loyal community- try to treat them right while they are still loyal. -Fighter -
Frau Klaps Amarr Trillionaire High-Rollers Suicidal Bassoon Orkesta	Posted - 2011.06.24 05:46:00 - [112] Originally by: Fighter26 Pathetic. This is not the attitude CCP should be offering to a community that was bull**ed over micro-transactions. You are wrong. Perhaps you should buy a monocle to see the reason you are wrong. This is just another slap in the face to your loyal community- try to treat them right while they are still loyal. -Fighter Rosewood, Mahogany, Teak? ~~~ (ಠ_ృ)**
Cutslawn2	Posted - 2011.06.24 06:07:00 - [113] Originally by: Frau Klaps Originally by: Fighter26 Pathetic. This is not the attitude CCP should be offering to a community that was bull**ed over micro-transactions. You are wrong. Perhaps you should buy a monocle to see the reason you are wrong.** This is just another slap in the face to your loyal community- try to treat them right while they are still loyal. -Fighter Rosewood, Mahogany, Teak? Lol?
Zachstar	Posted - 2011.06.24 06:14:00 - [114] Edited by: Zachstar on 24/06/2011 06:14:40 Originally by: Ospie Originally by: Zachstar Edited by: Zachstar on 24/06/2011 04:22:10 Edited by: Zachstar on 24/06/2011 04:20:04 Originally by: CCP Veritas Originally by: Emperor Cheney Ugh. Well, time to stop scanning for a few weeks (months) until some other brave people figure it out and write a new guide. Well that's a bit melodramatic don't you think? All the old ideas are still correct - get probes out, surround your target with them, narrow in from there. Just use more than four probes cause probe 5 and above help now. That the formula pumping the numbers changed doesn't mean the guiding principals changed. Oh By the way I tried your "You can use more probes now" thing. Located a site to be found with 4 got to 3.2 percent launched a 5th and guess what? still 3.2 percent. IF what you said was correct that 5th probe ought to have given more towards the percent no? Care to explain? Edit2: Just tried with 7 and guess what? Three Point Two Percent As I said earlier, it seems (from my experience so far) that the actual positioning of probes is far more important now. Possibly to the point where 6 well placed probes will give a better result than those same 6 probes with a 7th out doing some random stuff pulling the focus of the probe away. This IS speculation on my behalf based on my testing so far (which is not extensive, but is enough to feel comfortable with the new system). Again as I stated earlier simply by moving 2 out of 6 probes a very small distance I was able to bring a result on a previously unprobeable loki from 27% to 68% using same strength probes. It has always been that it always used the closest probes to the target for the result. That never changed. What he is Claiming is that more probes actually help. Which is BS in my opinion because I tested. 5 probes 6 and 7 all had the same result. I think it is an attempt to hide the fact that there was a massive reduction in scan strength eh CCP?
Lucas41 Gallente SOMACOM Growth Disorders	Posted - 2011.06.24 06:16:00 - [115] I first noticed it when trying to probe my way out of my wh. In rigged Anathema I could no longer use the probing method that had worked a few days ago. I was forced to actually earn my keep and probe down each sig I came across until I found the right one.
OMGWTFResearch	Posted - 2011.06.24 06:21:00 - [116] BTW I used to probe in the days where you had to use a probe just to see what kind was in system. That was Nintendo hard and did need to be changed. Yet this change to make it harder in my opinion is being hidden in a bunch of bs saying you can use more probes to get a better result. You could always use more probes to get a better result if you had some closer to the target than others. The claim is the more you have the better you have. I tested it and it was not the case now CCP I request an explanation.
MisterAl tt1	Posted - 2011.06.24 06:57:00 - [117] Originally by: CCP Veritas Well, I coded it, so I'm pretty sure I know it rather intimately. Well, please. There are two screenshots on the 1st or 2nd page, with 4 and 8 probes giving THE SAME results, when being on the same horyzon with the signature. Maybe you will explain at least that? As it deffinitelly looks like a bug for many people. _________________________ Dynamic WH map for everyone!
Vice Admiral Spreadsheet Caldari	Posted - 2011.06.24 07:25:00 - [118] Sure is a lot of derp in this thread Try arranging probes in different patterns. The mechanics have changed. A 2D horizon probably isn't good enough any more. Put a probe above, a probe below, one each on "north, south, east and west". Put one probe right on the sig for positioning and the final one...somewhere else. We just need wizards to work out the best way to scan, now.
Fighter26 Orion's Fist	Posted - 2011.06.24 07:37:00 - [119] Originally by: Vice Admiral Spreadsheet Sure is a lot of derp in this thread Try arranging probes in different patterns. The mechanics have changed. A 2D horizon probably isn't good enough any more. Put a probe above, a probe below, one each on "north, south, east and west". Put one probe right on the sig for positioning and the final one...somewhere else. We just need wizards to work out the best way to scan, now. No. The issue is that CCP went and took the whole probe system out behind the chemical shed (shot it and left for dead) and replaced it with a ******ed puppy, but it is okay because it will all work out with more probes... and then the extra probes do NOTHING. But it is a big secret the code so users cannot help out in troubleshooting the issues for the broken untested new system which was implemented because a dev felt like it. -
Space Wanderer	Posted - 2011.06.24 07:49:00 - [120] Frankly, I find most of the replies in this thread disgusting. When apochrypha came out there were many threads out there trying to find out the ins and outs of probing. The usual quota of "it's too hard!" (sic! ) was there but most of the people were trying to understand the new mechanics and it was a really fun discussion. What do I see now? A single thread full of self-styled "explorers", some of them not even knowing the basics of the old scan formula, and crying to be spoonfed. In the middle of that, few voices that actually try to exchange information, drowned in the noise of people shouting "gimmegimmegimme". I am seriously tempted to not write down the formula even if I mamage to derive it. But after all I am pretty sure that most of those who didn't bother to learn the previous the previous formula will bother even less with the new one (it's more complex) so it's probably not an issue. Still CCP, I agree with those who say that this is your fault. You spoonfeed people, and then you are surprised when they shout "gimme" at every occasion?
Fighter26 Orion's Fist	Posted - 2011.06.24 07:55:00 - [121] Edited by: Fighter26 on 24/06/2011 07:57:09 Edited by: Fighter26 on 24/06/2011 07:56:48 Originally by: Space Wanderer Frankly, I find most of the replies in this thread disgusting. When apochrypha came out there were many threads out there trying to find out the ins and outs of probing. The usual quota of "it's too hard!" (sic! ) was there but most of the people were trying to understand the new mechanics and it was a really fun discussion. What do I see now? A single thread full of self-styled "explorers", some of them not even knowing the basics of the old scan formula, and crying to be spoonfed. In the middle of that, few voices that actually try to exchange information, drowned in the noise of people shouting "gimmegimmegimme". I am seriously tempted to not write down the formula even if I mamage to derive it. But after all I am pretty sure that most of those who didn't bother to learn the previous the previous formula will bother even less with the new one (it's more complex) so it's probably not an issue. Still CCP, I agree with those who say that this is your fault. You spoonfeed people, and then you are surprised when they shout "gimme" at every occasion? Spoonfed? A simple patch notes statement: "Scan probe formula has changed." is sufficient. You know- on the patch notes which were released 10 hours before update extended downtime? Hell, it would have been nice to discuss the changes with the community and see what they want. I will not try to sell you the idea that players should have a say in game development, clearly you do not believe that. However, noting a critical game mechanic has been messed with which affects a huge portion of game play is sort of important to at least note in a game change log (patch notes.) edit: GIMMIE GIMMIE GIMMIE deal with it. -
Sri Nova	Posted - 2011.06.24 07:57:00 - [122] Originally by: CCP Veritas All the old ideas are still correct - get probes out, surround your target with them, narrow in from there. Just use more than four probes cause probe 5 and above help now. That the formula pumping the numbers changed doesn't mean the guiding principals changed. have not done enough experimenting but i have noticed some wonkiness to the scanning system . i scan down drones every now and then and while some times i can have hard time finding a certin set . i have never had a result just disapear less some one packed em up . after the new patch im getting results that will just disappear after i drop to the next au . i had a set of 5 mining drones II at 8au all nice and centered droped down to 4 au and poof they were gone ... checked the directional it said they was still there . fiddled around up down eliminate the chance of possible echo gone no longer showing up in the probes . so i went back to 16 au and and i was locking in on the same blob of drones wrote down the scan result number just so i could keep track of it case it was a false positive or something . got back down to 4 au again and poof there were gone . to sum it all up it an hour of fiddling and narrowing down the drones location via directional and guessing at 2 au intervals until i got a yellow result which then was finally able to get to 100% . odd thing was that there location was with in the center of that 4au probe setup i had. scanned down 20 more or so drones with out to much hassle after . only time i have ever seen that happen is when was a ship packs up its drones . this was not the case cause after my third attempt i scanned for ships to make sure one was not there causing the phenomena. music the paint dance floor the canvas your body the brush
Space Wanderer	Posted - 2011.06.24 08:10:00 - [123] Originally by: Fighter26 However, noting a critical game mechanic has been messed with which affects a huge portion of game play is sort of important to at least note in a game change log (patch notes.) I won't dispute that. Still, the fact that the change had happened should have been apparent to any self-respecting explorer after reading the patch note about the number of probes. What is more, most people in this thread are crucifying CCP veritas for not releasing the details of the scanning formula.
Zachstar	Posted - 2011.06.24 08:18:00 - [124] My problem is A) There was no warning B) What was said about more probes = better results has shown to not be the case. BTW for the one talking about the "pattern" Even before the change it was good to have a probe on top and on bottom because the system is based on which probes are closet to the target. The new system in my opinion is NO different it is just the strength of the probes is reduced. Hidden under "Just use more probes" which they assume most people are doing. I have shown that adding more probes does NOT increase strength if that was the case it would have increased the percentage by a large amount.
Zachstar	Posted - 2011.06.24 08:21:00 - [125] Edited by: Zachstar on 24/06/2011 08:21:39 Originally by: Space Wanderer Originally by: Fighter26 However, noting a critical game mechanic has been messed with which affects a huge portion of game play is sort of important to at least note in a game change log (patch notes.) I won't dispute that. Still, the fact that the change had happened should have been apparent to any self-respecting explorer after reading the patch note about the number of probes. What is more, most people in this thread are crucifying CCP veritas for not releasing the details of the scanning formula. My disagreement with CCP veritas is mainly due to the attitude he has shown in this topic in my opinion. And that what he has said about more probes = better scan result I have shown not to be true. I don't expect to be spoonfed but I do expect what gets said to be true.
Mara Rinn	Posted - 2011.06.24 08:21:00 - [126] Slap in the face? SLAP IN THE FACE? Where did all these WoWtards come from? I thought I'd escaped that nonsense four years ago CCP Veritas is showing the appropriate amount of respect to people in this thread. Whiny ***y customers may be customers, but whiny *y people can talk to the hand. Probing has changed, the sensible players are trying to figure out how. The whiny **y WoWtards are talking about "slap in the face" and "where's the step by step guide". Probing was far too easy* before the patch. [ Australian players join channel ANZAC ]
Zachstar	Posted - 2011.06.24 08:30:00 - [127] Originally by: Mara Rinn Slap in the face? SLAP IN THE FACE? Where did all these WoWtards come from? I thought I'd escaped that nonsense four years ago CCP Veritas is showing the appropriate amount of respect to people in this thread. Whiny ***y customers may be customers, but whiny *y people can talk to the hand. Probing has changed, the sensible players are trying to figure out how. The whiny **y WoWtards are talking about "slap in the face" and "where's the step by step guide". Probing was far too easy* before the patch. Except they are not saying they reduced scan strength they are saying just use more probes which I have shown to have no effect. If it was a reduction they need to explain why like they normally do because it affects an entire line of industries. EvE isnt WoW check the butterfly effect trailer to know why.
JimmyThePimp Black Viper Nomads	Posted - 2011.06.24 08:54:00 - [128] christ allimighty, will you people calm the ** down. for anyone that knows sig sizes, scale it down by 1. for anyone that doesnt, bloody well learn allready. if you knew how to scan before you still know how to scan now, nothing is different! if you blindly stumble around with 7 probes at max ranges then your a ing idiot and should let someone else scan for you. finding sites / wh's is exactly the same, just scale the size. finding ships is (guess what) exactly the same. the only change is at larger scanning ranges, and if your combat scanning a ship at over 1au range then for s sake get back in a rifter and eve academy or red v blue cause you dont know what your doing and someone will teach you. theres nothing more irritating than sitting cloaked off the side of your pos, watching you spend 2 ing hours scanning down the only wh in your system because you dont know what your doing. if you cant probe, stay out of wh's, i want to kill people not stare at pos shields. debate over, get off the forums and into the game to practice probing. now you **ing muppet.
Zachstar	Posted - 2011.06.24 09:11:00 - [129] Yet the "change" was to use more probes yet I have shown more probes to have no effect. To be frank you are acting like this topic is similar to the CCP apology thread above. This is of course a smaller issue compared to that leak. Yet it was said to use more probes to get a result. I put out more probes and moved them yet result remains the same. Having 5-7 probes over the 4 ought to automatically give more no? It is nothing about being easy mode I just want a straight answer.

CCP Veritas	Posted - 2011.06.24 09:30:00 - [130] Originally by: Zachstar Oh By the way I tried your "You can use more probes now" thing. Located a site to be found with 4 got to 3.2 percent launched a 5th and guess what? still 3.2 percent. IF what you said was correct that 5th probe ought to have given more towards the percent no? Care to explain? Edit2: Just tried with 7 and guess what? Three Point Two Percent Could you post screen shots of your probe placement please? It would help me to explain.


CCP Veritas	Posted - 2011.06.24 09:37:00 - [131] Originally by: Fighter26 Spoonfed? A simple patch notes statement: "Scan probe formula has changed." is sufficient. FWIW, I agree with you completely. Somewhere along the line that statement got changed and I'm deeply sorry that I did not notice it sooner.

Rage Spear Minmatar Republic Military School	Posted - 2011.06.24 09:37:00 - [132] hehe, this is actually pretty funny: CCP tries as hard as possible to attract a different kind of customer by dumbing down sections of the game (probing being a very good example, how many of you remember how insanely hard and dull probing used to be?) New players get used to the easy way where everything is given to you on a plate. CCP make a change in the way they always have: by not bothering to mention it and certainly not spelling out the changes in detail (whether through laziness, incompetence or design is another matter). New whiny, entitled players (you know, the ones they specifically targeted and wanted to recruit) cry and ***** and moan. CCP have never explained the detailed numbers behind the game: missile damage, gun tracking, exploration etc. All those guides you use instead of thinking for yourselves were written by other players...if you can't figure it out just wait and maybe someone cleverer than you will write it down and let you read it. or maybe not
Zachstar	Posted - 2011.06.24 09:39:00 - [133] Originally by: CCP Veritas Originally by: Zachstar Oh By the way I tried your "You can use more probes now" thing. Located a site to be found with 4 got to 3.2 percent launched a 5th and guess what? still 3.2 percent. IF what you said was correct that 5th probe ought to have given more towards the percent no? Care to explain? Edit2: Just tried with 7 and guess what? Three Point Two Percent Could you post screen shots of your probe placement please? It would help me to explain. I was directly testing your more probes = better deal. So I had 4 probes at 32au around an area of interest. Afterwards I moved probes virtually right on to the others to minimize any effect distance had of effect. Even tho the probes were at the same distance there was no increase in scan strength. Before y'all call me a noob I know you are supposed to move the extra probes into top, bottom and sides but you could do that before because it only showed best result. I was testing the mere idea that more probes = better which I found not to be the case. What I am suspecting is a reduction in scan strength being coupled with encouragement to use more probes which works like the old system which I find at best silly.
MisterAl tt1	Posted - 2011.06.24 09:45:00 - [134] Originally by: CCP Veritas Could you post screen shots of your probe placement please? It would help me to explain. My screenshots with 4 and 8 probes giving the same are on the 1st page of the topic. The case is it "works" only when all the probes and the sig is on the same horyzon. Well... Looks like I write it the third time. Surprised you didn't see it. Anyway, thank you for cooperation. _________________________ Dynamic WH map for everyone!

CCP Veritas	Posted - 2011.06.24 09:50:00 - [135] Originally by: MisterAl tt1 Originally by: CCP Veritas Could you post screen shots of your probe placement please? It would help me to explain. My screenshots with 4 and 8 probes giving the same are on the 1st page of the topic. The case is it "works" only when all the probes and the sig is on the same horyzon. Well... Looks like I write it the third time. Surprised you didn't see it. Anyway, thank you for cooperation. I did see yours MisterAl - I don't need anything more from you to look at it. I'll be back once I've made certain what I think is going on is what's going on.

Zachstar	Posted - 2011.06.24 09:53:00 - [136] Or http://img691.imageshack.us/img691/5577/scanerror.jpg Taken in a covops with sisters probes if that has any effect.
Rek Seven Gallente Zandathorn Industries	Posted - 2011.06.24 09:55:00 - [137] Edited by: Rek Seven on 24/06/2011 09:56:07 CCP Veritas, I'm just annoyed that my abilities have been lowered. I don't remember the exploration tutorial saying only 4 probes count so i trained up so i could use 7 and i used 7 probes to pin a sig down even before the patch. If i understand what has bee said in this thread correctly, i now have to train for 8 probes to give me the same scan strength that i previously had. Do you think this is fair considering that i have remapped away from scanning related skills?
Zachstar	Posted - 2011.06.24 09:55:00 - [138] Originally by: CCP Veritas Originally by: MisterAl tt1 Originally by: CCP Veritas Could you post screen shots of your probe placement please? It would help me to explain. My screenshots with 4 and 8 probes giving the same are on the 1st page of the topic. The case is it "works" only when all the probes and the sig is on the same horyzon. Well... Looks like I write it the third time. Surprised you didn't see it. Anyway, thank you for cooperation. I did see yours MisterAl - I don't need anything more from you to look at it. I'll be back once I've made certain what I think is going on is what's going on. I was just thinking could this be related to the massive issues with drones and missiles that required repackaging and refitting to work? If that is the case I will try this again and take back my statements.
Zachstar	Posted - 2011.06.24 09:58:00 - [139] Originally by: Rek Seven CCP Veritas, I'm just annoyed that my abilities have be lowered. I don't remember the exploration tutorial saying only 4 probes could so i trained up so i could use 7 and used 7 probes to pin a sig down even before the patch. If i understand what has bee said in this thread correctly, i now have to train for 8 probes to give me the same scan strength that i previously had. Do you think this is fair considering that i have remapped away from scanning related skills? Let's wait for him to come back. If this is related to the Drone bug it may not be as bad as it looks.
Skippermonkey Suddenly Ninjas Tear Extraction And Reclamation Service	Posted - 2011.06.24 09:58:00 - [140] Edited by: Skippermonkey on 24/06/2011 09:58:43 Originally by: Zachstar ~image~ Taken in a covops with sisters probes if that has any effect. OMFG - dropping probes on top of each other at the same scan range and expecting a better hit on a signature? Wow... just wow - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - EVE: TESTING GROUNDS FOR WoD & DUST SINCE 2011
Rek Seven Gallente Zandathorn Industries	Posted - 2011.06.24 09:58:00 - [141] Originally by: Rage Spear hehe, this is actually pretty funny: CCP tries as hard as possible to attract a different kind of customer by dumbing down sections of the game (probing being a very good example, how many of you remember how insanely hard and dull probing used to be?) New players get used to the easy way where everything is given to you on a plate. CCP make a change in the way they always have: by not bothering to mention it and certainly not spelling out the changes in detail (whether through laziness, incompetence or design is another matter). New whiny, entitled players (you know, the ones they specifically targeted and wanted to recruit) cry and ***** and moan. CCP have never explained the detailed numbers behind the game: missile damage, gun tracking, exploration etc. All those guides you use instead of thinking for yourselves were written by other players...if you can't figure it out just wait and maybe someone cleverer than you will write it down and let you read it. or maybe not I don't get this whole "dumbing down" talk. Was it dumbing down when we went from horse and carriage to the automobile?

CCP Veritas	Posted - 2011.06.24 09:59:00 - [142] Originally by: Zachstar I was directly testing your more probes = better deal. So I had 4 probes at 32au around an area of interest. Afterwards I moved probes virtually right on to the others to minimize any effect distance had of effect. Even tho the probes were at the same distance there was no increase in scan strength. Before y'all call me a noob I know you are supposed to move the extra probes into top, bottom and sides but you could do that before because it only showed best result. I was testing the mere idea that more probes = better which I found not to be the case. What I am suspecting is a reduction in scan strength being coupled with encouragement to use more probes which works like the old system which I find at best silly. So you had multiple probes in the same (rough) position? Indeed, repeats like that aren't going to help. Another way of wording my point about 8 probes is that the previous system would take the best 4 (kinda...it was a little bad about that choice actually), while the new system will use information from all 8. If the information from some of them is redundant, then they may as well not be there, but if there's any additional information from them at all, then they will help, all the way up to the last one.

Zachstar	Posted - 2011.06.24 10:02:00 - [143] Originally by: Skippermonkey Edited by: Skippermonkey on 24/06/2011 09:58:43 Originally by: Zachstar ~image~ Taken in a covops with sisters probes if that has any effect. OMFG - dropping probes on top of each other at the same scan range and expecting a better hit on a signature? Wow... just wow The new system is supposed to be more probes = better strength. Again if I had moved the probes to a different position that would be ruining the test because it would be like the old system of best 4. Also check the images on the first page. he had them CLOSER than I for no effect.

CCP Veritas	Posted - 2011.06.24 10:04:00 - [144] Originally by: Rek Seven Edited by: Rek Seven on 24/06/2011 09:56:07 CCP Veritas, I'm just annoyed that my abilities have been lowered. I don't remember the exploration tutorial saying only 4 probes count so i trained up so i could use 7 and i used 7 probes to pin a sig down even before the patch. If i understand what has bee said in this thread correctly, i now have to train for 8 probes to give me the same scan strength that i previously had. Do you think this is fair considering that i have remapped away from scanning related skills? Before the patch, scanning results were based on the best 4 hits for any given target. When tracking down something in particular, having 4 out in a good configuration was the best you could do. Now the best you can do is having 8 out in a good configuration. It's balanced roughly so that 6-or-so is about the same as 4 used to be. So...assuming you set your 7 up to give good coverage of the target, you'll probably be getting better results than you used to. Training up so you can launch 8 would make them even better.

Space Wanderer	Posted - 2011.06.24 10:04:00 - [145] Edited by: Space Wanderer on 24/06/2011 10:04:40 Originally by: CCP Veritas Another way of wording my point about 8 probes is that the previous system would take the best 4 (kinda...it was a little bad about that choice actually), Eheh, I know. I remember when I found out the choice algorithm, how I managed to force the algorithm to choose non-optimal probes. Since then, only four probes for me. Glad to know that now it makes sense to have astrometrics at 5.
Skippermonkey Suddenly Ninjas Tear Extraction And Reclamation Service	Posted - 2011.06.24 10:06:00 - [146] tbh, i dont even know why they changed scanning, it was runnign farily well as it was. All they've done is nerf the scan res of each probe or something and turned it into an even more clickfest. GIVE US PROBE FORMATIONS AND ILL FORGIVE YOU CCP - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - EVE: TESTING GROUNDS FOR WoD & DUST SINCE 2011
Zachstar	Posted - 2011.06.24 10:09:00 - [147] Originally by: CCP Veritas Originally by: Rek Seven Edited by: Rek Seven on 24/06/2011 09:56:07 CCP Veritas, I'm just annoyed that my abilities have been lowered. I don't remember the exploration tutorial saying only 4 probes count so i trained up so i could use 7 and i used 7 probes to pin a sig down even before the patch. If i understand what has bee said in this thread correctly, i now have to train for 8 probes to give me the same scan strength that i previously had. Do you think this is fair considering that i have remapped away from scanning related skills? Before the patch, scanning results were based on the best 4 hits for any given target. When tracking down something in particular, having 4 out in a good configuration was the best you could do. Now the best you can do is having 8 out in a good configuration. It's balanced roughly so that 6-or-so is about the same as 4 used to be. So...assuming you set your 7 up to give good coverage of the target, you'll probably be getting better results than you used to. Training up so you can launch 8 would make them even better. Once you get that working may I request a feature then? Have you noticed Veritas that it is becoming even more of a clickfest? Is there a way you can make it where all probes can close in or widen on themselves by some key combo? Such as how shift click moves all in direction I request them to move in as this becomes quite the issue when dealing with the tiny tiny spaces after 0.25
Rek Seven Gallente Zandathorn Industries	Posted - 2011.06.24 10:11:00 - [148] Edited by: Rek Seven on 24/06/2011 10:12:35 Originally by: CCP Veritas Originally by: Rek Seven Edited by: Rek Seven on 24/06/2011 09:56:07 CCP Veritas, I'm just annoyed that my abilities have been lowered. I don't remember the exploration tutorial saying only 4 probes count so i trained up so i could use 7 and i used 7 probes to pin a sig down even before the patch. If i understand what has bee said in this thread correctly, i now have to train for 8 probes to give me the same scan strength that i previously had. Do you think this is fair considering that i have remapped away from scanning related skills? Before the patch, scanning results were based on the best 4 hits for any given target. When tracking down something in particular, having 4 out in a good configuration was the best you could do. Now the best you can do is having 8 out in a good configuration. It's balanced roughly so that 6-or-so is about the same as 4 used to be. So...assuming you set your 7 up to give good coverage of the target, you'll probably be getting better results than you used to. Training up so you can launch 8 would make them even better. Well unforgettably 7 probes seem to be slightly weaker than the old 4. Perhaps i'm positioning them wrong. I have one in the middle, one in the north, east, south,west position and one on the top and bottom... these are all positioned around the center probe and the center probe is positioned on the sig.

CCP Veritas	Posted - 2011.06.24 10:11:00 - [149] Originally by: Skippermonkey tbh, i dont even know why they changed scanning, it was runnign farily well as it was. I suppose I can let that reason be known. I'm a performance guy; I fix lag. My interest in changing scanning is purely because it needed to be changed for technical reasons. The old algorithm was horrifically inefficient at scale. There was no way I could fix the scaling without changing the behavior of it, so I wrote them ground-up to be scalable while keeping the original design goals intact.


CCP Veritas	Posted - 2011.06.24 10:13:00 - [150] Originally by: Zachstar Once you get that working may I request a feature then? Have you noticed Veritas that it is becoming even more of a clickfest? Is there a way you can make it where all probes can close in or widen on themselves by some key combo? Such as how shift click moves all in direction I request them to move in as this becomes quite the issue when dealing with the tiny tiny spaces after 0.25 Team BFF did that in one of their recent releases. Control-drag will change your world man.

Jon Whayne	Posted - 2011.06.24 10:13:00 - [151] Hello folks, I do scan since I play EVE. Oh, and I love it. Without this postings I wouldn't even have noticed a difference, which is a funny thing. I always scanned with 5 probes, dunno why. Now, with 5 probes out I get the same results from WHs, DED-Plexes, Magnos, Gravis and all the other stuff out there. So for me, practically, nothing has changed. Just my 2 cents :)
Zachstar	Posted - 2011.06.24 10:14:00 - [152] Originally by: Skippermonkey tbh, i dont even know why they changed scanning, it was runnign farily well as it was. All they've done is nerf the scan res of each probe or something and turned it into an even more clickfest. GIVE US PROBE FORMATIONS AND ILL FORGIVE YOU CCP Well I will admit this does make Astro V viable again and I have to give CCP Veritas credit for that. However yes we do need things like preset formations that close and open on themselves with a key combo to make this less of a clickfest for two reasons. A) The current system has issues with pointer depth detection and it gets more severe with lack of FPS. Meaning those who can run with Interval to immediate and now overheat their GPU have a gameplay advantage over those that don't. B) Even with good FPS it becomes extremely difficult to work the probes in a small space and this can be affected by monitor size.
Rek Seven Gallente Zandathorn Industries	Posted - 2011.06.24 10:15:00 - [153] Originally by: CCP Veritas Team BFF did that in one of their recent releases. Control-drag will change your world man. Yes this was an awesome change.
MisterAl tt1	Posted - 2011.06.24 10:16:00 - [154] Seems like I have to appologise to Veritas for being very persistent. I'm sorry. Well, the idea that redundant probes does not contribute is clear. Then, may we assume that for probes on the same horyzon the signal over some point is considered "not valid" and thus to get a better signal strenght we need to either put probes closer with smaller radius, or move some probes up and down? This would explain my screenshots. _________________________ Dynamic WH map for everyone!
Angst IronShard Minmatar Sense of Serendipity Echoes of Nowhere	Posted - 2011.06.24 10:21:00 - [155] Edited by: Angst IronShard on 24/06/2011 10:22:24 We really need a devblog on the new probing system. I found the probing system is one step harder than before. I use 5 probes. Before and still now ie. 1 on the signal (4AU range) and 4 (8AU range)in square around the smaller probe. And I diminish the probes ranges as long as I get a stronger signal. I live in WH so I spent much time probing. For the same type of signature said D364 wormhole (our static) : - Before patch I found it with my 4 probes at 1AU range and the center probe at 0.5AU range. - Now I need to set down all my 5 probes to 0.25AU range to get the 100% signal However tt's still possible with my skills to probe all signals, but I see a probing nerf instead of a ship's balance ! . ____________________________________________ Freedom is nothing but a chance to be better.

CCP Veritas	Posted - 2011.06.24 10:22:00 - [156] Originally by: MisterAl tt1 Seems like I have to appologise to Veritas for being very persistent. I'm sorry. Well, the idea that redundant probes does not contribute is clear. Then, may we assume that for probes on the same horyzon the signal over some point is considered "not valid" and thus to get a better signal strenght we need to either put probes closer with smaller radius, or move some probes up and down? This would explain my screenshots. Yes, you're on the right track. Essentially the large-radius probes aren't telling your scanning computer anything that the smaller-radius probes didn't already know. If you brought them down to the same radius as the small-radius probes and in to the same distance from the target, they would be contributing. They would contribute even more if moved further away from the existing probes (up and down, in your case).

Zachstar	Posted - 2011.06.24 10:23:00 - [157] Originally by: CCP Veritas Originally by: Skippermonkey tbh, i dont even know why they changed scanning, it was runnign farily well as it was. I suppose I can let that reason be known. I'm a performance guy; I fix lag. My interest in changing scanning is purely because it needed to be changed for technical reasons. The old algorithm was horrifically inefficient at scale. There was no way I could fix the scaling without changing the behavior of it, so I wrote them ground-up to be scalable while keeping the original design goals intact. I am surprised you were not given a dev blog to explain this. A bit off topic but the similar late in coming out with intentions and reasons is why there is a 50+ Page topic above this. As long as you are willing to hear us out and fix any bits of issues we can expose I accept the changes and I hope you and the other members of CCP will continue to be open with the community and allow us to help make EVE the amazing MMO it is today. Originally by: MisterAl tt1 Seems like I have to appologise to Veritas for being very persistent. I'm sorry. Well, the idea that redundant probes does not contribute is clear. Then, may we assume that for probes on the same horyzon the signal over some point is considered "not valid" and thus to get a better signal strenght we need to either put probes closer with smaller radius, or move some probes up and down? This would explain my screenshots. Closer to the target ought to mean better results no? Regardless of orientation unless I continue to fail to understand the new system. Originally by: CCP Veritas Originally by: Zachstar Once you get that working may I request a feature then? Have you noticed Veritas that it is becoming even more of a clickfest? Is there a way you can make it where all probes can close in or widen on themselves by some key combo? Such as how shift click moves all in direction I request them to move in as this becomes quite the issue when dealing with the tiny tiny spaces after 0.25 Team BFF did that in one of their recent releases. Control-drag will change your world man. I am epic fail. Sorry about that and thanks for the heads up as that will save ALOT of time. Still probe formations pretty please?
Rek Seven Gallente Zandathorn Industries	Posted - 2011.06.24 10:25:00 - [158] CCP Veritas, Can you post a screen shot of the ideal probe positioning in relation to a sig pleas?
Zachstar	Posted - 2011.06.24 10:26:00 - [159] Originally by: CCP Veritas Originally by: MisterAl tt1 Seems like I have to appologise to Veritas for being very persistent. I'm sorry. Well, the idea that redundant probes does not contribute is clear. Then, may we assume that for probes on the same horyzon the signal over some point is considered "not valid" and thus to get a better signal strenght we need to either put probes closer with smaller radius, or move some probes up and down? This would explain my screenshots. Yes, you're on the right track. Essentially the large-radius probes aren't telling your scanning computer anything that the smaller-radius probes didn't already know. If you brought them down to the same radius as the small-radius probes and in to the same distance from the target, they would be contributing. They would contribute even more if moved further away from the existing probes (up and down, in your case). I am getting a picture of what the confusion was all about this. When done right it looks almost exactly like the best 4 system except with smaller signature. That is what caused the firestorm. A bit of bad luck and otherwise indeed it would have been good fun to let us figure it out. After downtime I will spend more time getting used to this new system.
Emperor Cheney Celebrity Sex Tape	Posted - 2011.06.24 10:27:00 - [160] Originally by: Rage Spear CCP have never explained the detailed numbers behind the game: missile damage, gun tracking, exploration etc. All those guides you use instead of thinking for yourselves were written by other players...if you can't figure it out just wait and maybe someone cleverer than you will write it down and let you read it. or maybe not I agree CCP has always done it this way, however, that has always been a fundamentally dumb way of doing it. CCP's viewing of a lack of documentation as being somehow virtuous is inane. It serves no positive function, except in assisting some of its dimmer customers feel superior to the customers of other games, presumably for their ability to tolerate poor quality and their willingness to do work creating documentation that really someone should have been paid for. It's not really a feature. It's just being lazy. Fanboys like to believe it's a feature, because fanboys are dumb, and eager for anything that can differentiate GAME X from their hated rival, GAME Y. However, I tolerated it because hey, this is just a fun little game run by a crazy little studio called CCP, no biggie. But now CCP wants to play with the big boys and turn this game into a subscription + (coming soon) pay to win model. With that, CCP and EVE Online stopped being a fun little community I could imagine myself as being part of, and started being just another faceless corporation that provided services in exchange for money. And if that's how it is, then frankly, the bar for quality expected has risen dramatically.
Frau Klaps Amarr Trillionaire High-Rollers Suicidal Bassoon Orkesta	Posted - 2011.06.24 10:30:00 - [161] Originally by: CCP Veritas Before the patch, scanning results were based on the best 4 hits for any given target. When tracking down something in particular, having 4 out in a good configuration was the best you could do. Now the best you can do is having 8 out in a good configuration. It's balanced roughly so that 6-or-so is about the same as 4 used to be. So...assuming you set your 7 up to give good coverage of the target, you'll probably be getting better results than you used to. Training up so you can launch 8 would make them even better. I've done extensive testing on this and while I've got single target probing down fine, I am not so happy that I can no longer use my 8 probes to plonk 4 on two different locations (usually gates) in order to get intel and warp-ins as required. This functionality has essentially been lost. The deep space probe nerf was a pain in the butt but necessary, this new change removes techniques that worked before because you have to use more than 4 probes to get a good result (6 seems to be the best number to bet on). I WANT MORE PROBES TO PLAY WITH THANKS :P 12 would be nice so I can carry on with my playstyle. ~~~ (ಠ_ృ)
Zachstar	Posted - 2011.06.24 10:30:00 - [162] Originally by: Emperor Cheney Originally by: Rage Spear CCP have never explained the detailed numbers behind the game: missile damage, gun tracking, exploration etc. All those guides you use instead of thinking for yourselves were written by other players...if you can't figure it out just wait and maybe someone cleverer than you will write it down and let you read it. or maybe not I agree CCP has always done it this way, however, that has always been a fundamentally dumb way of doing it. CCP's viewing of a lack of documentation as being somehow virtuous is inane. It serves no positive function, except in assisting some of its dimmer customers feel superior to the customers of other games, presumably for their ability to tolerate poor quality and their willingness to do work creating documentation that really someone should have been paid for. It's not really a feature. It's just being lazy. Fanboys like to believe it's a feature, because fanboys are dumb, and eager for anything that can differentiate GAME X from their hated rival, GAME Y. However, I tolerated it because hey, this is just a fun little game run by a crazy little studio called CCP, no biggie. But now CCP wants to play with the big boys and turn this game into a subscription + (coming soon) pay to win model. With that, CCP and EVE Online stopped being a fun little community I could imagine myself as being part of, and started being just another faceless corporation that provided services in exchange for money. And if that's how it is, then frankly, the bar for quality expected has risen dramatically. Can you please keep the MT firestorm in the proper topic? A CCP dev is taking time out to explain a change that is causing issues. You know what we have been ASKING them to do all day yesterday?
Zachstar	Posted - 2011.06.24 10:34:00 - [163] Originally by: Frau Klaps Originally by: CCP Veritas Before the patch, scanning results were based on the best 4 hits for any given target. When tracking down something in particular, having 4 out in a good configuration was the best you could do. Now the best you can do is having 8 out in a good configuration. It's balanced roughly so that 6-or-so is about the same as 4 used to be. So...assuming you set your 7 up to give good coverage of the target, you'll probably be getting better results than you used to. Training up so you can launch 8 would make them even better. I've done extensive testing on this and while I've got single target probing down fine, I am not so happy that I can no longer use my 8 probes to plonk 4 on two different locations (usually gates) in order to get intel and warp-ins as required. This functionality has essentially been lost. The deep space probe nerf was a pain in the butt but necessary, this new change removes techniques that worked before because you have to use more than 4 probes to get a good result (6 seems to be the best number to bet on). I WANT MORE PROBES TO PLAY WITH THANKS :P 12 would be nice so I can carry on with my playstyle. Perhaps a middle ground to restore this and to put more incentive for training perhaps Astro V can jump in probe amount to 12? Or? A sub middle ground could be a preset pattern so that an experienced prober can quickly move it to track down another target?
Rek Seven Gallente Zandathorn Industries	Posted - 2011.06.24 10:35:00 - [164] Originally by: Frau Klaps I've done extensive testing on this and while I've got single target probing down fine, I am not so happy that I can no longer use my 8 probes to plonk 4 on two different locations (usually gates) in order to get intel and warp-ins as required. This functionality has essentially been lost. The deep space probe nerf was a pain in the butt but necessary, this new change removes techniques that worked before because you have to use more than 4 probes to get a good result (6 seems to be the best number to bet on). I WANT MORE PROBES TO PLAY WITH THANKS :P 12 would be nice so I can carry on with my playstyle. Excellent point. Seems like they should now limit the scan contribution to 8 probes and raise the maximum amount for probes in space to 16...
Arista Shahni Amarr Murasaki Mining and Manufacturing	Posted - 2011.06.24 10:38:00 - [165] Edited by: Arista Shahni on 24/06/2011 10:37:51 Originally by: CCP Veritas Yes, you're on the right track. Essentially the large-radius probes aren't telling your scanning computer anything that the smaller-radius probes didn't already know. If you brought them down to the same radius as the small-radius probes and in to the same distance from the target, they would be contributing. They would contribute even more if moved further away from the existing probes (up and down, in your case). Thank you, a complete noob to probing and EVE is assisted. :D
Zachstar	Posted - 2011.06.24 10:42:00 - [166] Originally by: CCP Veritas Originally by: Zachstar Once you get that working may I request a feature then? Have you noticed Veritas that it is becoming even more of a clickfest? Is there a way you can make it where all probes can close in or widen on themselves by some key combo? Such as how shift click moves all in direction I request them to move in as this becomes quite the issue when dealing with the tiny tiny spaces after 0.25 Team BFF did that in one of their recent releases. Control-drag will change your world man. Side question and being completely noob here. Do I hold control and click to move a probe to move them all in and out at the same time? I am likely confused but that isn't working for me.

CCP Veritas	Posted - 2011.06.24 10:45:00 - [167] Originally by: Zachstar Originally by: CCP Veritas Originally by: Zachstar Once you get that working may I request a feature then? Have you noticed Veritas that it is becoming even more of a clickfest? Is there a way you can make it where all probes can close in or widen on themselves by some key combo? Such as how shift click moves all in direction I request them to move in as this becomes quite the issue when dealing with the tiny tiny spaces after 0.25 Team BFF did that in one of their recent releases. Control-drag will change your world man. Side question and being completely noob here. Do I hold control and click to move a probe to move them all in and out at the same time? I am likely confused but that isn't working for me. The caffeine hadn't set in yet. It's Alt, not control.

Orion TashMurkon	Posted - 2011.06.24 10:45:00 - [168] Edited by: Orion TashMurkon on 24/06/2011 10:45:29 gahh the more i think about, the angrier it makes me. when i read the patch notes it sounded like we could scan with one probe! now we must use 8! grrrrrrrrrrrrrr
Rek Seven Gallente Zandathorn Industries	Posted - 2011.06.24 10:47:00 - [169] Originally by: Zachstar Originally by: CCP Veritas Originally by: Zachstar Once you get that working may I request a feature then? Have you noticed Veritas that it is becoming even more of a clickfest? Is there a way you can make it where all probes can close in or widen on themselves by some key combo? Such as how shift click moves all in direction I request them to move in as this becomes quite the issue when dealing with the tiny tiny spaces after 0.25 Team BFF did that in one of their recent releases. Control-drag will change your world man. no Ctrl does nothing. You hold **** to move all probes at once and use use alt to move probes towards/away from each other while retaining the same formation. Side question and being completely noob here. Do I hold control and click to move a probe to move them all in and out at the same time? I am likely confused but that isn't working for me.
Zachstar	Posted - 2011.06.24 10:47:00 - [170] Originally by: CCP Veritas Originally by: Zachstar Originally by: CCP Veritas Originally by: Zachstar Once you get that working may I request a feature then? Have you noticed Veritas that it is becoming even more of a clickfest? Is there a way you can make it where all probes can close in or widen on themselves by some key combo? Such as how shift click moves all in direction I request them to move in as this becomes quite the issue when dealing with the tiny tiny spaces after 0.25 Team BFF did that in one of their recent releases. Control-drag will change your world man. Side question and being completely noob here. Do I hold control and click to move a probe to move them all in and out at the same time? I am likely confused but that isn't working for me. The caffeine hadn't set in yet. It's Alt, not control. Oh how I know what lack of caffeine is like! No problem! And WOW this is exactly what I needed! I was wondering how those probe guys suddenly got so effective. I take all my statements back as this is awesome!
MisterAl tt1	Posted - 2011.06.24 10:52:00 - [171] Originally by: CCP Veritas Yes, you're on the right track. Essentially the large-radius probes aren't telling your scanning computer anything that the smaller-radius probes didn't already know. If you brought them down to the same radius as the small-radius probes and in to the same distance from the target, they would be contributing. They would contribute even more if moved further away from the existing probes (up and down, in your case). Thank you for the explanation. Now it makes sence. Will run tests some time later, but for now it seems that just to move probes from the central square up and down will be enough to make all probes contribute. Overall it gives to 3d formations more plusses then they used to have. Earlier it was enough to have all the probes in 2d, now even me would have to move some up and down. _________________________ Dynamic WH map for everyone!
Zachstar	Posted - 2011.06.24 10:53:00 - [172] Actually I need to come out and fully apologize. The last few days have been a bit sore for the community with the leak and issues with Captains Quarters. I should have been more professional in my posts on this change. While my opinion is this info being out sooner could have helped I do understand the want to let the community find out about these new features if possible. This kind of interacting with the community as much/soon as possible in my opinion will help prevent situations and out of control speculation from developing in the future. Yet we as a community do need to be more professional so that we can maintain this positive company/customer relationship that other MMOs could only dream of.
Zachstar	Posted - 2011.06.24 11:04:00 - [173] Went out and tested it right before downtime and with the Alt-Drag system and a good intial placement it is working SO much better than the old 2D system. Because now I can bring them closer without worrying about losing the contact because of vertical orientation. It is a very fair tradeoff of signature for contribution and at the same time you made Astrometrics a viable skill to have again! I do slightly agree that this slightly gives a disadvantage to those who used to be able to probe 2 spots at the same time. Tho I wonder if that was intended. Perhaps you can say?
MisterAl tt1	Posted - 2011.06.24 11:04:00 - [174] People report that at least implant for the scan-time does not work. _________________________ Dynamic WH map for everyone!

CCP Veritas	Posted - 2011.06.24 11:06:00 - [175] Originally by: MisterAl tt1 PS. Forwarded this info to the eve-ru forums. Thank you very much for that. For my part, I'm going to get these ideas expressed in devblog form which'll get translated of course. I intended to have such a devblog ready for the release but I let other things take my attention instead. That's my fault.

Rek Seven Gallente Zandathorn Industries	Posted - 2011.06.24 11:12:00 - [176] Originally by: CCP Veritas Originally by: MisterAl tt1 PS. Forwarded this info to the eve-ru forums. Thank you very much for that. For my part, I'm going to get these ideas expressed in devblog form which'll get translated of course. I intended to have such a devblog ready for the release but I let other things take my attention instead. That's my fault. Thanks again for taking the time to explain this change to us. The developer and player relationship is the second thing i like most about eve. I'm still waiting for you to post that scree shot though...
Jaigar	Posted - 2011.06.24 11:18:00 - [177] Originally by: Splodger What has changed is the displayed value of a signature, the signature itself is still the same size (to give anyone benefit of the doubt they may be slightly smaller). I cannot notice any difference scanning before with 4 probes and after patch. The value displayed has changed but inherently the signature itself hasnt changed, it still requires same number of passes to get to 100% The difference now is that when using more than 4 probes is that any overlay in the total area coverage will now yield a higher signature strength of that signature/multiple signatures under coverage when using more than 4 probes. However when scanning to a smaller signature size using more than 4 probes will diminish the returns the closer you focus into the signature. Multiple probes speeds up the triagulation and identification process but doesnt assist in the finale pinpointing of signatures below a certain threshold. Logically this makes sense, but the patch notes arnt very clear and this is just my theory into the way CCP has modified the way they work. __________________________ Wormhole Exploration Tool Wormnav.com Not entirely true. I was playing around with my cheetah yesterday, had someone stick 2 ECCM modules on their ship. Anyways, with both ECCM modules running, I was able to get 62% scan strength about with 5 probes, dropped a 6th and got 68% (sisters combat @ .5 AU) But something is funky. After he turned off his second ECCM and went from 71 to 39 about, there was very little change in probe strength.
Shpenat	Posted - 2011.06.24 11:24:00 - [178] Thank you CCP Veritas for being so open with the community. So far you appear to be the only dev to give some answers. Kudos to you.
Ospie The Python Cartel. The Defenders of Pen Island	Posted - 2011.06.24 11:32:00 - [179] Thanks for the support.
Etrad Tal	Posted - 2011.06.24 12:04:00 - [180] Prior to the Incarna it was possible to scan in a C5 wormhole the outgoing H296 and incoming K162 with 7 probes if you had perfect scanning skills (incl. cov ops V), a cov ops, sisters launcher and sisters core probes the following way: One probe placed in the middle with 1 au radius and the remaining 6 placed one in every direction at 4 au radius so that in the middle all 7 probes overlap. With the deployment of incarna it isn't anymore possible to get 100% hits. You have to reduce the radius of the 6 corner probes to 2 au radius. That's a pretty big nerf in my opinion.
w0rmy Destructive Influence	Posted - 2011.06.24 12:09:00 - [181] Originally by: CCP Veritas Well, I coded it, so I'm pretty sure I know it rather intimately. Sweet, wont take you long to fix it then. Originally by: CCP Oveur I'm very sorry w0rmy, I beg your forgiveness.
Hoshi The Einherjar Corporation	Posted - 2011.06.24 12:53:00 - [182] I am a bit concerned about not releasing info that the scan system is changing in advance. I mean how are we supposed to be able to give feedback and bug reports about if we don't know about it. Or are you so sure that it doesn't contain any bugs or unconsidered side consequences that it didn't need player testing on sisi? Considering past CCP performance that's a very gutsy stance to take. I took part of the testing process of the 2 last scan changes and both of those got some fundamental and important changes pre release based feedback on by me and others. We don't need formulas, we can figure out those ourselves (a few hint are of course welcome, specially since we didn't get any advance warning) but we do need time to figure out the intended and unintended consequences of this change. ---------------------------------------- "Memories are meant to fade. They're designed that way for a reason."
Dnai Hsrang Caldari Cardinal Enterprises	Posted - 2011.06.24 20:00:00 - [183] @CCP Veritas ... Any change you will bring back the ability to click on a signal before it is 100% and have the "cursor" on it. I used to be able to have a square around the signal I was working that was visible without probes on top of it. This was a nice feature.
Marketing Weasel	Posted - 2011.06.25 20:10:00 - [184] Originally by: CCP Veritas All the old ideas are still correct - get probes out, surround your target with them, narrow in from there. Just use more than four probes cause probe 5 and above help now. That the formula pumping the numbers changed doesn't mean the guiding principals changed. Great, you f*wad So tell me, with maxed skills can one still cover two gates with 4 probes each and get hits on frigates in the first go (i.e. maybe even before they warp)? Or did you CCP buttclowns only consider scanning one ship at a time, because hey, none of you have any idea how this game is actually played anyway? All the rage with this release isn't the price of monocles, because tbh nobody give a f* about hello kitty trinkets anyway. Its getting to the last straw with CCP incompetence, failure to consult (and value the opinion of) the player base, CCP being dishonest and scheming and manipulative. We're bittervets because CCP KEEPS F***ING UP THE GAME! Enough; Unsubscribe.
Anna Maziarczyk	Posted - 2011.06.25 20:18:00 - [185] Originally by: CCP Veritas Originally by: Skippermonkey tbh, i dont even know why they changed scanning, it was runnign farily well as it was. I suppose I can let that reason be known. I'm a performance guy; I fix lag. My interest in changing scanning is purely because it needed to be changed for technical reasons. The old algorithm was horrifically inefficient at scale. There was no way I could fix the scaling without changing the behavior of it, so I wrote them ground-up to be scalable while keeping the original design goals intact. tl:dr The new $20 NEX Probes need to be better than free probes. So we made it more granular.
Cloora APEX Unlimited APEX Conglomerate	Posted - 2011.06.25 20:45:00 - [186] So as far as combat scanning goes not much has changed for me. Using my Falcon I am still able to get cruisers and up pretty easy with 4 probes. ------------------------------------------ CEO and Major Shareholder of the APEX Conglomerate Producer of Starsi brand softdrinks and Torped-Os! brand cereal as well as many other fine products
Kata Amentis Re-Awakened Technologies Inc	Posted - 2011.06.26 11:49:00 - [187] I've been playing with the core probes the last few days... using more probes (8 if possible) seems to put things back to how they were before, but you do seem to need to use smaller radius probes to get the "type" of signature than you did before... which is a real pain if you are sweeping a virgin wspace system with tens of signatures for only wormholes. So two requests really: 1 can you put the autolaunch toggle option back in for probe launchers, so you don't have to manually launch 8 probes every time? it made sense taking it out when we only needed a couple of probes, but we pretty much need a full magazine of them each time now. 2 can someone have a look at the thresholds for giving the signature type back given the new mechanics? "Up and up, how far can we go? and how far must we fall to get there?"
April101976	Posted - 2011.06.26 17:31:00 - [188] Originally by: CCP Veritas Originally by: daddys helper Originally by: CCP Veritas They changed...a lot. We never released the details of the old formulas, I don't see any reason to change that. Consider it a fun puzzle, like sorting out quantum mechanics. so you're saying you have no idea either Well, I coded it, so I'm pretty sure I know it rather intimately. , With respect CCP Veritas, With the current mood ofthe Eve base do you think it is a time for coy bull@$#%?
Ginny Xuun	Posted - 2011.06.26 17:38:00 - [189] Originally by: Shpenat Thank you CCP Veritas for being so open with the community. So far you appear to be the only dev to give some answers. Kudos to you. ^
Maldad Asesino	Posted - 2011.06.27 12:39:00 - [190] Scanning seems broken to me. Im using 7 probes, conventional 5 4+1center and then 1 above and 1 below the center. my results are radically crappy, before i could scan down ships with ease and I really enjoyed scanning in general (ninja salvager) But now I'm finding it hard as hell to get battleship filter sigs narrowed down at all.. Also I saw someone suggesting sister equipment to the noobs in the rookie help channel lol.
Fractal Muse	Posted - 2011.06.27 13:11:00 - [191] Originally by: April101976 With respect CCP Veritas, With the current mood ofthe Eve base do you think it is a time for coy bull@$#%? Oh don't be a bad pony! CCP Veritas helped out and responded a fair bit in this thread. If -all- CCP posters did what he did then the current mood wouldn't exist. Give credit where credit is due.
Miss Rabblt	Posted - 2011.06.27 13:22:00 - [192] Originally by: Rek Seven Originally by: Frau Klaps I've done extensive testing on this and while I've got single target probing down fine, I am not so happy that I can no longer use my 8 probes to plonk 4 on two different locations (usually gates) in order to get intel and warp-ins as required. This functionality has essentially been lost. The deep space probe nerf was a pain in the butt but necessary, this new change removes techniques that worked before because you have to use more than 4 probes to get a good result (6 seems to be the best number to bet on). I WANT MORE PROBES TO PLAY WITH THANKS :P 12 would be nice so I can carry on with my playstyle. Excellent point. Seems like they should now limit the scan contribution to 8 probes and raise the maximum amount for probes in space to 16... what have we (0.0 sov citizens) got after JB network got destroyed? Nothing. Except unnecessary effort to restore it. So i don't support this product and/or service
Quinn Diaz DON'T DO IT DAD	Posted - 2011.06.27 13:53:00 - [193] Scanning being hard? I'm really sorry because I really don't want to act an elitist jerk. HOWEVER. After living in a wormhole for about a year, spending a great deal of time scanning every day, and observing (stalking) other people, using my d-scan to see how they scan, where they place their probes and how fast they narrow down a signature. I must say that 90% of the players I see are totally worthless. I know that practice makes perfect, but when you see other people living in wormholes, having done so even longer than myself, I get scared when they take 5 minutes probing a signature I got a 100% hit on in less than 1. There are so many tricks a knowing player can use to his advantage while probing, unfortunately the average joe is not interrested in learning, but rather stay bad.
Runnin Through	Posted - 2011.06.27 14:02:00 - [194] Originally by: Marketing Weasel All the rage with this release isn't the price of monocles, because tbh nobody give a f*** about hello kitty trinkets anyway. Its getting to the last straw with CCP incompetence, failure to consult (and value the opinion of) the player base, CCP being dishonest and scheming and manipulative. Thank you! People hardly mention this, and i belive the "anti-protest" ones just don't get it that its not about thoose damn manacles. +1
Thallus Tage	Posted - 2011.06.27 14:03:00 - [195] But were you looking at your scan results through a Monocle?
Ana Vyr Caldari	Posted - 2011.06.27 14:45:00 - [196] Thanks Veritas! I appreciate the input. This thread has the look and feeel of an old school CCP thread. Bit of back and forth, some solid information from development, some input from the dedicated scanners. I wish we could get back to this sort of thing across the board.
Sujanra Acoma Minmatar Shadow Kitty Legion Rura-Penthe	Posted - 2011.06.27 14:59:00 - [197] Originally by: CCP Veritas Originally by: Emperor Cheney Ugh. Well, time to stop scanning for a few weeks (months) until some other brave people figure it out and write a new guide. Well that's a bit melodramatic don't you think? All the old ideas are still correct - get probes out, surround your target with them, narrow in from there. Just use more than four probes cause probe 5 and above help now. That the formula pumping the numbers changed doesn't mean the guiding principals changed. EVE players? Melodramatic? No!
MisterAl tt1	Posted - 2011.07.07 12:46:00 - [198] I didn't scan for some time, but people say, that after one of the last small patches scanning has become easier again. The first idea was, that skills and implants started working as they should. However, the signal strength I get from a single probe on top of the signature didn't change. Maybe it is just a limit, so it did not rise with the fix? Any ideas? _________________________ Dynamic WH map for everyone!
Ingvar Angst Amarr Nasty Pope Holding Corp Talocan United	Posted - 2011.07.07 12:57:00 - [199] For what it's worth in contributing to this thread, I've always used six combat probes set up like this: 5 probes at a certain range, for example 16AU set up with one in the center and four covering the cardinal points (N,S,E,W) and the sixth also in the center one range smaller (8AU for this example). I've actually noticed a slight improvement in scanning strength (or course due to all six probes counting). When scanning an A239 hole, I used to have to have all probes at minimum distance, then take the two center probes and move them above and below the hole to hit 100%. Now the probes at minimum scan to 100 without needing to tweak the positioning of the center probes. I use combats because you never know when that uninvited ship may appear in your hole... There is no monocle.
Slade Trillgon Endless Possibilities Inc.	Posted - 2011.07.07 13:15:00 - [200] Edited by: Slade Trillgon on 07/07/2011 13:18:53 EDIT: Quote Fail The changes were listed in the patch notes; you just need to know how to make inferences. I also believe that these following two posts deserve a bump. Originally by: Space Wanderer Originally by: BeanBagKing Wait, what? They didn't convey a change in formula at all, there was no "not very well" about it. That's not entirely true. The second I read that more than four probes would contribute to the scan results I set out to find the new formula. That was a more fundamental change than many people are aware. Originally by: BeanBagKing So now that this has been noticed, instead of just posting "oh yea, woops" mind telling us how they changed? I doubt they will. They never released a single scanning formula. You'll have to wait until it is reverse engineered by players (i'm on it), as it happened with the previous formula. Only last time we were forewarned that scanning changes were coming, so we reverse engineered it on SISI and were able to post it as soon as apochrypha was released. This time I wasn't aware of the change, so gotta take a little time. Originally by: CCP Veritas They changed...a lot. We never released the details of the old formulas, I don't see any reason to change that. Consider it a fun puzzle, like sorting out quantum mechanics. Originally by: Herzog Wolfhammer As an explorer I say: Thanks! I don't log in for an easy game. Never knew or cared for the formula anyway and exploration was getting too easy for the nooblings. That other game that gives quick gratification for little effort is always taking new subscribers so if anybody does not like it, contract your stuff to me. Exploration got harder. Period. So there is no more un-scannable T3 but now it's not just any zit-popping griefer who will be able to scan one down. The phat loot sites that were originally hard to scan may well have gotten harder. So not just any monkey with 4 probes and lvl 4 in everything with a cheap launcher is going to get it. Nothing here is departing from the concepts of the game: nobody is having an "I WIN" button, and rewards are not coming cheaper either. All good. Originally by: Space Wanderer Frankly, I find most of the replies in this thread disgusting. When apochrypha came out there were many threads out there trying to find out the ins and outs of probing. The usual quota of "it's too hard!" (sic! ) was there but most of the people were trying to understand the new mechanics and it was a really fun discussion. What do I see now? A single thread full of self-styled "explorers", some of them not even knowing the basics of the old scan formula, and crying to be spoonfed. In the middle of that, few voices that actually try to exchange information, drowned in the noise of people shouting "gimmegimmegimme". I am seriously tempted to not write down the formula even if I mamage to derive it. But after all I am pretty sure that most of those who didn't bother to learn the previous the previous formula will bother even less with the new one (it's more complex) so it's probably not an issue. Still CCP, I agree with those who say that this is your fault. You spoonfeed people, and then you are surprised when they shout "gimme" at every occasion? Thank you for your time Space Wanderer and CCP Veritas. Slade :Signature Temporarily Disabled:
Ranka Mei Caldari	Posted - 2011.07.07 13:31:00 - [201] Oh, for fvck's sake! You already got your unprobability nerf. Work a little for your money, you lousy bum! LOL. You lazy pirates are too much! -- "All your monies AUR belong to us." -- CCP
Mr Kidd	Posted - 2011.07.07 13:33:00 - [202] Originally by: Ingvar Angst For what it's worth in contributing to this thread, I've always used six combat probes set up like this: 5 probes at a certain range, for example 16AU set up with one in the center and four covering the cardinal points (N,S,E,W) and the sixth also in the center one range smaller (8AU for this example). I've actually noticed a slight improvement in scanning strength (or course due to all six probes counting). When scanning an A239 hole, I used to have to have all probes at minimum distance, then take the two center probes and move them above and below the hole to hit 100%. Now the probes at minimum scan to 100 without needing to tweak the positioning of the center probes. I use combats because you never know when that uninvited ship may appear in your hole... If you were using more than 4 probes before the Incarna change, you should notice improvements. If you were only using 4 probes before Incarna you should notice a degradation. The new algorithm takes into account all probes being used whereas the old algorithm only used the best 4 probes regardless of how many you used. With this new change it is advantageous to use as many probes as your skills allow since they now all contribute to the sig strength of the target being probed.
Jake Holden	Posted - 2011.07.07 13:38:00 - [203] Still being able to probe everything in nullsec using 4+1 probes. All level 4 skills, covert ops frigate, normal launcher normal probes. Not seeing the issue here :>
Mr Kidd	Posted - 2011.07.07 13:40:00 - [204] Originally by: Jake Holden Still being able to probe everything in nullsec using 4+1 probes. All level 4 skills, covert ops frigate, normal launcher normal probes. Not seeing the issue here :> And you're not seeing the improvements of using every probe you can. I'm getting a lot more incidental results which is good because that means I don't have to probe out every sig. Your loss.

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 :: [one page]

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.

(ಠ_ృ)

(ಠ_ృ)

(ಠ_ృ)