| Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Shin Ra
   |
Posted - 2006.03.09 06:04:00 -
[1]
Edited by: Shin Ra on 09/03/2006 06:04:35
Which method do you prefer to use?
I much prefer range as it takes to long to line your camera up correctly for directional scanning.
|
Soren
|
Posted - 2006.03.09 06:08:00 -
[2]
I've always used range, it's real quick, no guess work.
________________________________________________
|
Hamatitio
|
Posted - 2006.03.09 06:47:00 -
[3]
I use range to narrow it down when I know they are near the planet.
However, to find out which planet to start scanning around I use directional.
I am a god tbh.
---
I Post on the forums for Fate. Im cool.
Industrialists wanted |
Beringe
|
Posted - 2006.03.09 07:00:00 -
[4]
Range first, then directional.
If pressed for time, just range. You need directional to check out gates and stations most of the time, though.
-------------------------------------------
"Never underestimate the power of language."
--Daitan Beringe, honorary director in charge of bottles-- |
Skipsta
|
Posted - 2006.03.09 07:43:00 -
[5]
I use range.
|
Herko Kerghans
|
Posted - 2006.03.09 07:49:00 -
[6]
Edited by: Herko Kerghans on 09/03/2006 07:50:01
If we are talking about belthunting, depends on belt quantity:
If 'few' belts (less than four of five, able to narrow the belt down with a 60 or maybe 30 degrees scan), then direction.
If 'many' belts (above 6 or such), then in general I use direction until 90 degrees, and then use range (if belts are too close and need 5 degrees to tell one from the other, range is much faster)
Barriers - an EVE novel |
Berak FalCheran
|
Posted - 2006.03.09 07:55:00 -
[7]
 Originally by: Hamatitio
I use range to narrow it down when I know they are near the planet.
However, to find out which planet to start scanning around I use directional.
Same here...
...but let it be noted I'm about as bad at scanning as I am at making instas (I've never made one that worked *ever*).
YMMV
In short: Cry me a river, build a bridge, and get over it.
|
Lienzo
|
Posted - 2006.03.09 08:05:00 -
[8]
I use directional because I can never remember how much 0.1au is.
Assault Missile Launcher Improvement
|
Malka Badi'a
|
Posted - 2006.03.09 08:14:00 -
[9]
I use both as certain situation requires the need for one type while another system may require a completely different method. Range scanning is good for places where the belts are spread very far out and do not overlay closely. Direction scanning is much better for those overlapping areas.
Using a combination of both I can generally pinpoint someone down in system in under 20 seconds. People who say it takes too long to line things up is spending too much time trying to perfect the angel versus get a third-eye understanding of where the pinpoint is. Those who say range scanning takes too long simply doesn't have a calculator handy for AU calculations.
Use both, don't limit yourself.
--------------
|
Dollen
|
Posted - 2006.03.09 08:34:00 -
[10]
I no longer have asteroid belts as a in space icon, scratches head, help..
|
Malka Badi'a
|
Posted - 2006.03.09 08:36:00 -
[11]
Pressing alt in space will bring up visual icons for everything in your overview. If you have belts, moons, and planets on your overview, then pressing alt will display the appropriate icons for all three.
--------------
|
Dollen
|
Posted - 2006.03.09 08:38:00 -
[12]
Thanks quick to
|
Herko Kerghans
|
Posted - 2006.03.09 08:39:00 -
[13]
Edited by: Herko Kerghans on 09/03/2006 08:39:54
Originally by: Lienzo
I use directional because I can never remember how much 0.1au is.
Rule of thumb:
1)Type 150.000.000km in your scanner (that is 1au, btw)
2)Forget about all those zeroes, only the '15' is what matters.
3)Think the number of au you want.
4)Multiply by 3
5)Divide by 2
6)Multiply by 10
7)Replace the '15' in step (2) with that number.
Example:
You want 2 au:
2x3 = 6
6/2 = 3
3x10 = 30
Replace the '15' in step (2) by '30' (keeping all the other pesky zeroes unmolested), voila, you will scan for 2au
You want 7 au:
7x3 = 21
21/2 = 10.5
10.5x10 = 105
Replace the '15' in step (2) by '105' (or replace the '30', if you were scanning for 2 au), voila, now you are scanning for 7 au.
Replace the '15' in step (2) by '210', you are now scanning for 14au (almost max range)
And don't you even DARE say "uh, too much numbers!" I bet you know by heart the RoF of every weapon you use in all the named and t2 variants, so 3 simple calcs aint gonna kill you! 
Barriers - an EVE novel |
Sun Ra
|
Posted - 2006.03.09 08:45:00 -
[14]
Er both really, its easy to do 2x 180* scans to work out the direction then work on range from there, if theres ony a few planets int hat direction then just quickly scan each
Arcane Frankologies - 'plz stop guys it's xmas' |
ParMizaN
|
Posted - 2006.03.09 09:04:00 -
[15]
Depends on the system but i would normally use drectional and a bit of range to pinpoint exactly where they are. In general i find directional more useful though, but maybe thats just me.
Phenomena of ironies, cast the litany aside
How intelligible, blessed be the forgetful
I Luv Teh Parm!!1 - Imaran |
LUKEC
|
Posted - 2006.03.09 09:08:00 -
[16]
combination of both. But really depends on system, number of roid belts, how belts are placed...
Originally by: Commander Nikolas
People like Lukec are the problem and they know it. Shin Ra's Raven has 4x WCS, Lukec's Dominix has 5x WCS & Ishtar has 2x WCS.
Antipiracy is causing brain damage |
Shamis Orzoz
|
Posted - 2006.03.09 14:56:00 -
[17]
I use both, but I usually use directional scans these days.
Back when the scanner used to work in a timely fashion (before CCP ruined everything to do with scanning and dumbed it down so that morons can find safespots) I used to use range scans at a planet to find ships in belt quickly, but scans can take too long sometimes now, so I go for direction instead. With direction I seem to be able to find somebody with less total scans than with range, even though it takes more skill to point the scanner where I want.
With no lag I think range would be better. Although I often don't have all planets and moons etc on my scanner so when I scan by direction I have an idea of where the guy is at even if there are no objects on the scan with him.
Shamis
|
Twilight Moon
|
Posted - 2006.03.09 15:09:00 -
[18]
Originally by: Herko Kerghans
Edited by: Herko Kerghans on 09/03/2006 08:39:54
Originally by: Lienzo
I use directional because I can never remember how much 0.1au is.
Rule of thumb:
1)Type 150.000.000km in your scanner (that is 1au, btw)
2)Forget about all those zeroes, only the '15' is what matters.
3)Think the number of au you want.
4)Multiply by 3
5)Divide by 2
6)Multiply by 10
7)Replace the '15' in step (2) with that number.
Example:
You want 2 au:
2x3 = 6
6/2 = 3
3x10 = 30
Replace the '15' in step (2) by '30' (keeping all the other pesky zeroes unmolested), voila, you will scan for 2au
You want 7 au:
7x3 = 21
21/2 = 10.5
10.5x10 = 105
Replace the '15' in step (2) by '105' (or replace the '30', if you were scanning for 2 au), voila, now you are scanning for 7 au.
Replace the '15' in step (2) by '210', you are now scanning for 14au (almost max range)
And don't you even DARE say "uh, too much numbers!" I bet you know by heart the RoF of every weapon you use in all the named and t2 variants, so 3 simple calcs aint gonna kill you!
Hmm....that makes range scanning relatively easy, and I think I'll be using it in future. Sounds much better than futzing about with 30* angles.
Thanks for the info.
|
Havelcek
|
Posted - 2006.03.09 16:18:00 -
[19]
Thanks Herko...that's one of the more helpful posts I've ever read on these forums.
|
Ghargon
|
Posted - 2006.03.09 16:30:00 -
[20]
Directional always ... its a hell of alot easier and also less time consuming. I generally always leave my scan range at max as well unless the system is increadibly small.
This generally enable me to find a target who is in the belts pretty damn easily and in a decent time as well.
I never think of the future - it comes soon enough.
Albert Einstein |
0ss0
|
Posted - 2006.03.09 16:31:00 -
[21]
erm....thats alot of math when all you need to do is move the decimal one more place to 1.5 and take the au and divide it by 2 and and it to itself.
7au = 7 + 3.5 = 10 then add the zeros
|
Psycarne
|
Posted - 2006.03.09 16:51:00 -
[22]
Both. Depends on how many celestial objects are in a particular direction, how far they are spread apart on the screen etc.
-------------
Order of the Wombles: Recycling those untidy modules on your ship.
|
Liu Kaskakka
|
Posted - 2006.03.09 17:03:00 -
[23]
Originally by: Malka Badi'a
Using a combination of both I can generally pinpoint someone down in system in under 20 seconds.
Z0MG YOU ARE A GOD YOU WIN EVE
King Liu is RIGHT!!
|
Kaleeb
|
Posted - 2006.03.09 17:22:00 -
[24]
I suck at scanning 
 |
Zafriel
|
Posted - 2006.03.09 17:31:00 -
[25]
Originally by: Kaleeb
I suck at scanning
me an all bud, but my other alt is facking amazing
Range -> Direction -> Probes
always seems to go that way with so many damm people doing missions
ofc I have scanned a bs, thought he was at ss, launched probes and then realised he was at a moon with an indy warping in full of pos parts. waste of 120k, both were stabbed up to the eyes
|
Wild Fox
|
Posted - 2006.03.09 18:37:00 -
[26]
Originally by: Herko Kerghans
Rule of thumb:
1)Type 150.000.000km in your scanner (that is 1au, btw)
2)Forget about all those zeroes, only the '15' is what matters.
3)Think the number of au you want.
4)Multiply by 3
5)Divide by 2
6)Multiply by 10
7)Replace the '15' in step (2) with that number.
OMG, people, why do you invent complexity where none is needed...
Make a table in Excel with AU <-> km conversion e.g.
AU .....KM
-----------
1.0.....150m
1.1.....165m
1.2.....180m
etc.
Actually, make two -- one for AU > 1, one for AU < 1.
Print them out and keep them by your keyboard. Table lookup is *much* faster than trying to multiply large numbers...
|
Garreck
|
Posted - 2006.03.09 19:15:00 -
[27]
Yeah, definitely use both, depending on the situation. Figure most folks would.
And Herko, thanks for spelling it out for everyone, asshat. 
|
Herko Kerghans
|
Posted - 2006.03.10 01:43:00 -
[28]
Originally by: Havelcek
Thanks Herko...that's one of the more helpful posts I've ever read on these forums.
He he he... You wouldn't believe how many people do not find that helpful at all... 
Originally by: Wild Fox
Originally by: Herko Kerghans
Rule of thumb
OMG, people, why do you invent complexity where none is needed...
Chill out, mate. To each his/her own. Old farts like me have no problem multiplying two-digit numbers, we wouldn't call them 'large'; in that case, a mental calculation is faster than looking up at a table (plus you keep your eyes on the screen: since I use both range and directional, I'm usually aligning the camera at the same time)
Originally by: Garreck
And Herko, thanks for spelling it out for everyone, asshat.
Heh... somebody gotta give them poor rookie pirates some survival tools. I mean, they jump into low sec thinking there are only miners and NPCers there, and that they have all the time in the world to sit at 15km from a warpable, scanning for targets...
Barriers - an EVE novel |
Tekka
|
Posted - 2006.03.10 02:21:00 -
[29]
Both.
»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»
|
Rasitiln
|
Posted - 2006.03.10 02:29:00 -
[30]
direction most the time
That 1% was enough - Wrangler |
| |
|
| Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |