| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Jack Miton
Aperture Harmonics
K162
1579
   |
Posted - 2013.04.07 23:27:00 -
[1] - Quote
Ok, sure, good work figuring it out but what is this useful for?
All of this is extremely irrelevant to anything regarding probing ability/speed.
The info here can be summarized in 2 points:
1. More probes = better.
2. 3d layout = better than 2d layout for result strength.
Neither of which are really news.
Also, point 2 is arguable. I probe with a flat layout and I much faster than any 3d layout due to being significantly faster to setup and more importantly due to producing much simpler to read secondary results (ie: rings and spheres) than 3d layouts which will give you rings on all sorts of weird angles. A flat layout will give ring results that are very nearly as good as red dot results due to always being horizontal or vertical and always having a distinct end where the sig is located.
I probe a lot and over the years have tried several layouts but I have always returned to an 8 probe flat setup.
|
Jack Miton
Aperture Harmonics
K162
1579
|
Posted - 2013.04.07 23:51:00 -
[2] - Quote
Inkarr Hashur wrote:Jack Miton wrote:Ok, sure, good work figuring it out but what is this useful for?
All of this is extremely irrelevant to anything regarding probing ability/speed.
The info here can be summarized in 2 points:
1. More probes = better.
2. 3d layout = better than 2d layout for result strength.
Neither of which are really news.
Also, point 2 is arguable. I probe with a flat layout and I much faster than any 3d layout due to being significantly faster to setup and more importantly due to producing much simpler to read secondary results (ie: rings and spheres) than 3d layouts which will give you rings on all sorts of weird angles. A flat layout will give ring results that are very nearly as good as red dot results due to always being horizontal or vertical and always having a distinct end where the sig is located.
I probe a lot and over the years have tried several layouts but I have always returned to an 8 probe flat setup.
At first I wanted to scoff but you actually have a good point. Just moving probes around in 2 dimensions instead of 3 should save a great deal of time. Although, don't you have to use a bigger scanning radius for your probes to make sure you don't miss anything above and below? Meaning you delay getting to that 100% scan.
4 probes at 8au and 4 at 2au catches everything.
Without virtues the smaller probes need to be 1au.
The only things I scan to 100% are WHs. If you want to BM everything, resizing the formation to 2au and 0.5/0.25au is easy and will hit everything.
EDIT: Here's an example: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TisDb8c2aS4 |
Jack Miton
Aperture Harmonics
K162
1583
|
Posted - 2013.04.08 12:48:00 -
[3] - Quote
Suit yourself.
For the record: If you think that a covops is overkill for probing then you are doing it wrong.
Space Wanderer wrote:With the information written up here you can already know much about a layout before even trying it. You could probably have weeded out most of them as not useful for your purposes even before having to actually try them.
here's what you don't get though...
with your information, youre going to end up with a 3d probe layout as being the best on paper for strength, which it is.
in reality though, if youre probing many sigs your 3d layout will be slower than my simpler 2d layout which is something no formula will tell you.
look, you can learn the basics of applying DPS in PVP by knowing the tracking formula off by heart but it's not going to make you good at PVP. |
Jack Miton
Aperture Harmonics
K162
1588
|
Posted - 2013.04.08 17:57:00 -
[4] - Quote
Daniel Plain wrote:Jack Miton wrote:Suit yourself.
For the record: If you think that a covops is overkill for probing then you are doing it wrong.
wow, that's gonna be groundbreaking news to ishtar/gila explorers.
exploring and looking for specific sigs to run is not the same as just probing a system.
for that you want to be using the DSP probing guide in any case. (or ideally, an alt in a covops... ;) ) |
| |
|