EVE Search - 500 au ss..

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

500 au ss..

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 :: [one page]
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 1 post(s)
Emeline Cabernet	Posted - 2006.07.04 17:30:00 - [1] Are these allowed?
EaglesFire	Posted - 2006.07.04 17:52:00 - [2] No. If your caught using it by a GM, you can be banned. "Knowledge is power, and the uninformed SHALL be punished!"
Eskona Runningstar	Posted - 2006.07.04 17:52:00 - [3] Originally by: Emeline Cabernet Are these allowed? They are a legacy from times when ships could be fitted with double MWDs. Are they allowed? I guess, since they were made with completely legal in-game means. I hope they will be going away when the devs get rid of the insta-bookmark problem and redo the bookmark system.
Emeline Cabernet	Posted - 2006.07.04 17:53:00 - [4] no you'd make them by bm system in people and places, at least how i got them. ccp removed the option to make them so i was sure they werent allowed to be used.
Dark Shikari	Posted - 2006.07.04 17:54:00 - [5] You can make them quite easily with Deep Space Observator probes today... its only the ones made using the old bug that aren't allowed. --Proud member of the [23]-- -WTB Platinum Technite, WTS Nanotransistors, Heavy Electron II, 100mn AB II-
Emeline Cabernet	Posted - 2006.07.04 17:57:00 - [6] and how do you know the difference?
Sadayiel	Posted - 2006.07.04 17:58:00 - [7] get thorax 1 mwd 3 eutectic 1 or 2 cap rechargers in low and nanos turn somewhere and mwd for month voila SS done -------------------Sig----------------------- The True Pirate secret
Sarmaul	Posted - 2006.07.04 17:58:00 - [8] Originally by: Emeline Cabernet and how do you know the difference? exactly TEAM MINMATAR FORUMS - In Rust We Trust - Suvetar, care to confirm these rumours about you being an unstoppable sex machine? LOL -Suvetar
Rolly Polly	Posted - 2006.07.04 17:59:00 - [9] Edited by: Rolly Polly on 04/07/2006 18:00:26 The old method produced a bookmark that wasn't so much a specific place as a vector you could keep on warping to, they all went in a specific direction within a system though so if you wanted to prove it that would be the best bet. Edit: must remember to use sentance structure.
Dark Shikari	Posted - 2006.07.04 17:59:00 - [10] Originally by: Emeline Cabernet and how do you know the difference? Innocent until proven guilty, to be honest. --Proud member of the [23]-- -WTB Platinum Technite, WTS Nanotransistors, Heavy Electron II, 100mn AB II-
Emeline Cabernet	Posted - 2006.07.04 18:02:00 - [11] thanks for the quick answers
Hllaxiu	Posted - 2006.07.04 18:05:00 - [12] Originally by: Sadayiel get thorax 1 mwd 3 eutectic 1 or 2 cap rechargers in low and nanos turn somewhere and mwd for month voila SS done 1.5km/s for a month only covers 3,888,000 kilometers. One AU is about 150,000,000kilometers --- Our greatest glory is not in never failing, but in rising up every time we fail. - Emerson
Tachy	Posted - 2006.07.04 18:30:00 - [13] Originally by: Dark Shikari Originally by: Emeline Cabernet and how do you know the difference? Innocent until proven guilty, to be honest. There have been alt-posts about that not being the case sometimes ... --==*-- Even with nougat, you can have a perfect moment.
Kaaii	Posted - 2006.07.04 19:14:00 - [14] Just fire one of those gawd aweful crappy deep space observer probes and try to localte anything with them. They are so "course" in resolution, that you are bound to find yourself 150AU off grid, with just a few scans.. Hardly a bannable offence when the modules tell you to go there.... "..Id rather fall beside 10 lions, than stand with One thousand sheep.." Trading 101
Monkphish	Posted - 2006.07.04 19:22:00 - [15] Originally by: Sadayiel get thorax 1 mwd 3 eutectic 1 or 2 cap rechargers in low and nanos turn somewhere and mwd for month voila SS done lol, no sence of scale. If you want a bookmark that close just log in and out bookmarking the emergancy warp spots, an emergancy warp is about a million km i think?
Deja Thoris	Posted - 2006.07.04 19:23:00 - [16] Originally by: EaglesFire No. If your caught using it by a GM, you can be banned. err, rubbish
Epsilon 1	Posted - 2006.07.04 20:36:00 - [17] Originally by: EaglesFire No. If your caught using it by a GM, you can be banned. Rite now, you people should stop with this bull** - 'if you do that you will be banned by a GM' this is not CS ffs. Stopping people from using exploits - fixing bugs and exploits BEFORE (highly unlikely, ccp leaves the bug testing to us ) or AFTER they were used and reported but not *** banning for it. Originally by:** Steven Gerrard Why do those minmatarians throw their ships together from toilet paper and junk?
Xelios	Posted - 2006.07.04 20:51:00 - [18] One of my alts has a 17,000 au safe, hooray for system bookmarks and pod warping! =D _________________________________
Gungankllr	Posted - 2006.07.04 20:52:00 - [19] If you would rather spend an entire month MWDing somewhere to make a safespot in ONE system, then by all means. You're paying for your account. I just have other things I'd rather be doing, to be honest... Like packing my eye sockets with rock salt or something. Hidden in this signature is a secret message. I like pie.
Ozzie Asrail	Posted - 2006.07.04 21:00:00 - [20] Originally by: Epsilon 1 Originally by: EaglesFire No. If your caught using it by a GM, you can be banned. Rite now, you people should stop with this bull** - 'if you do that you will be banned by a GM' this is not CS ffs. Stopping people from using exploits - fixing bugs and exploits BEFORE (highly unlikely, ccp leaves the bug testing to us ) or AFTER they were used and reported but not ***** banning for it. -----
HippoKing	Posted - 2006.07.04 21:26:00 - [21] Just for my own knowledge (never trained to use them), how do you make deep safes with observators? How much differently to normal probes do they work?
Emeline Cabernet	Posted - 2006.07.04 21:39:00 - [22] only thing ***er than these ss are italy and portugal's football teams sry... you suck and need to die
Sensor Error	Posted - 2006.07.04 21:43:00 - [23] Originally by: Eskona Runningstar Originally by: Emeline Cabernet Are these allowed? They are a legacy from times when ships could be fitted with double MWDs. Are they allowed? I guess, since they were made with completely legal in-game means. I hope they will be going away when the devs get rid of the insta-bookmark problem and redo the bookmark system. LOL, not at all... even assuming 20km/sec with the dual warp, it'd take almost 120 years to fly 500AU... RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE!!! ------------------------------------------ Dev Responses to common questions
Sensor Error	Posted - 2006.07.04 21:46:00 - [24] Originally by: Emeline Cabernet only thing ***er than these ss are italy and portugal's football teams sry... you suck and need to die LOL RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE!!! ------------------------------------------ Dev Responses to common questions
Emeline Cabernet	Posted - 2006.07.04 21:49:00 - [25] Originally by: Sensor Error Originally by: Emeline Cabernet only thing *er than these ss are italy and portugal's football teams sry... you suck and need to die LOL eat me ** head
Aversin	Posted - 2006.07.04 21:50:00 - [26] Originally by: Sensor Error Originally by: Eskona Runningstar Originally by: Emeline Cabernet Are these allowed? They are a legacy from times when ships could be fitted with double MWDs. Are they allowed? I guess, since they were made with completely legal in-game means. I hope they will be going away when the devs get rid of the insta-bookmark problem and redo the bookmark system. LOL, not at all... even assuming 20km/sec with the dual warp, it'd take almost 120 years to fly 500AU... Now forgive me since I wasn't around in the old days, however couldn't people get ships going something like .1 AU/S? Originally by: Razner Cerizo They will never quit. The beatings will continue until morale improves.
mazzilliu	Posted - 2006.07.04 21:58:00 - [27] Edited by: mazzilliu on 04/07/2006 22:00:05 Originally by: Aversin Originally by: Sensor Error Originally by: Eskona Runningstar Originally by: Emeline Cabernet Are these allowed? They are a legacy from times when ships could be fitted with double MWDs. Are they allowed? I guess, since they were made with completely legal in-game means. I hope they will be going away when the devs get rid of the insta-bookmark problem and redo the bookmark system. LOL, not at all... even assuming 20km/sec with the dual warp, it'd take almost 120 years to fly 500AU... Now forgive me since I wasn't around in the old days, however couldn't people get ships going something like .1 AU/S? maybe a scorp with 8 faction MWD and how would a GM catch you 500au out of system anyways, even if you were so far out 99% of the time people would assume you were cloaked. what are the odds someone would report it. at least from what i hear and have experienced ---------
Plutoinum	Posted - 2006.07.04 22:00:00 - [28] Edited by: Plutoinum on 04/07/2006 22:03:08 Edited by: Plutoinum on 04/07/2006 22:01:08 Originally by: EaglesFire No. If your caught using it by a GM, you can be banned. Reason ? If that happens I demand a response from a senior GM or from a dev. You can bust these 500 AU safespots with observer probes and 192 AU probes and it's not more difficult than busting a safespot within 192 AU, so they can't be an exploit. (edit: It just takes time, but only a minute more or so on average than finding a good 150 AU safe.) The exploit talk has come from people, who have no clue how to use observers and 192 AU probes imho.

Xorus	Posted - 2006.07.04 22:04:00 - [29] I have been informed that using these safespots is not an exploit as any safespot can be found given enough time and determination, i hope thisclears things up for you ---

sidthesexist	Posted - 2006.07.04 23:07:00 - [30] Originally by: Eskona Runningstar Originally by: Emeline Cabernet Are these allowed? They are a legacy from times when ships could be fitted with double MWDs. Are they allowed? I guess, since they were made with completely legal in-game means. I hope they will be going away when the devs get rid of the insta-bookmark problem and redo the bookmark system. It was actually F11 - right click the system your in - 'bookmark location' and you'd warp to some silly distance, nothing to do with double MWD. ________ Euphoria Released
Tas Devil	Posted - 2006.07.05 00:17:00 - [31] Originally by: Aversin Originally by: Sensor Error Originally by: Eskona Runningstar Originally by: Emeline Cabernet Are these allowed? They are a legacy from times when ships could be fitted with double MWDs. Are they allowed? I guess, since they were made with completely legal in-game means. I hope they will be going away when the devs get rid of the insta-bookmark problem and redo the bookmark system. LOL, not at all... even assuming 20km/sec with the dual warp, it'd take almost 120 years to fly 500AU... Now forgive me since I wasn't around in the old days, however couldn't people get ships going something like .1 AU/S? No... and BTW man did they accept your application quickly... The best Laugh ever ... Credit goes to Killer8 for this ! Oh and apparently the mods tell me there is bad language on his site so beware kids :)
Tas Devil	Posted - 2006.07.05 00:20:00 - [32] Originally by: Xorus I have been informed that using these safespots is not an exploit as any safespot can be found given enough time and determination, i hope thisclears things up for you What he means is CCP doesn't mind if you pay 10 years worth of subscription to look in X7O-MU for that ASCN safespot we have all been looking for which is somewhere around 750 AU from the sanctuary And mods put on your humour implant before moding this its a joke :) The best Laugh ever ... Credit goes to Killer8 for this ! Oh and apparently the mods tell me there is bad language on his site so beware kids :)
Dupac	Posted - 2006.07.05 00:58:00 - [33] Originally by: HippoKing Just for my own knowledge (never trained to use them), how do you make deep safes with observators? How much differently to normal probes do they work? Nobody seemed to answer you, so........ They are the same - but their resolution (i.e. object within x AU) is so coarse that you can make a very deep safe spot by probing for shuttle (or whatever) and then warping to where it tells you to go. Do this once or twice and you can be way off any objects in system.
Xendie	Posted - 2006.07.05 01:21:00 - [34] Originally by: EaglesFire No. If your caught using it by a GM, you can be banned. all are allowed as you will be found by a deep observatory probe anywhere. Originally by: F'nog This would be great, because lag is not at all a problem currently.
Coasterbrian	Posted - 2006.07.05 01:48:00 - [35] When CCP added probing in Exodus, they put all the solar safes on grid. Every safespot in eve can be found with a vigil, a probe launcher, and astrometrics 5. ---------- Originally by: riker to thebold first post w/ your main. Soft and Crunchy 4tw! \o/
Mnengli Noiliffe	Posted - 2006.07.05 03:38:00 - [36] Edited by: Mnengli Noiliffe on 05/07/2006 03:45:16 when you get to about 350 au from objects in system, Observators tend to give way less results even farther away from the sun. I've tried that with a mate who was >1au behind me all the time, scanning for his ship type with a new Observator each time (though probably I could use tha same observator).
DigitalCommunist	Posted - 2006.07.05 03:56:00 - [37] Edited by: DigitalCommunist on 05/07/2006 03:57:41 Thats only been true for a short while, Coasterbrain. For the longest time, there did exist such things as an unprobable safespot. When EXODUS came out, all they did was bring the old F11 bookmarks and all their grid contents (ships, cans) within the system bounds (i.e. within 192au of the star). Some of the people (myself included) that logged off 500au away before the servers went down found themselves logging on 500au away when they came back up and simply bookmarked this spot. Unfortunately, it didn't matter because the original concept of probing was and still is faulty. They only scanned in a triangular pattern whose bounds were a direct line between the probes. That means if you dropped them at a planet, and the safespot was created from one of its moons which was off to the side a little bit you wouldn't get a result. This was fixed when they added one extra AU to the scan range border. The next problem came when people found that Observators were broken completely, so even though safespots were moved within system bounds, there was no way to place the 192au probe on the opposite end. The fix didn't make it on TQ for a very long time. When it did, people found another problem which was even worse. The triangulation system was limited to a 1au buffer in the Z-axis (vertical) which meant that any safespot created more than 1au above the system plane was completely unfindable. This is also where all agent deadspace missions were located. In combination with instadock, and most missions being located in the same system, this meant that even if you declared war on somebody it was literally impossible to kill them. This was reported, and the devs said probes would be changed to scan in a spherical pattern to compensate for any vertical deviation. This never happened. To the best of my knowledge, any safespot more than 1au off the plane or out of system bounds requires an observator probe to find.. even if its within spitting distance on the scanner. But thats not where the problems end.. Observator probes were found to give results in a spherical pattern, which meant you needed many many attempts and sheer statistical probability to brute force your way into obtaining three scan points all on the same 1au "pizza slice" plane as the object. The scan results usually being very far away, and your max scan range being 15au, with little to no planetary reference.. this made it nearly impossible to even tell if you had a good spot. Thus requiring you to warp between the various spots like a maniac, trying to see if you can pick something up on scan. The solution was to have all observator probe scan results on the same 1au plane as the object being scanned, unfortunately I have no freaking clue who started this, or even if its true. The fact that it takes ages to scan down system safespots means it probably isn't. On the whole, its more effective to use a spy. The only probes worth using are 3aus, because you can get a result seconds after deploying them all in the same spot (thank you, 1au buffer!). Even then you need pure luck and hope your target a) doesn't see them b) doesn't warp away c) doesn't cloak and d) isn't aligned. All these problems, and months of uselessness combined with the sheer difficulty of even fitting probe launchers to standard setups means that most people gave up before they even began. I will be glad when the all-new system is in place, even if it takes no skill to operate. At least it will work. And as far as I know, using any safespot is not an exploit. Its just metagaming at its best/worst. Purchasing Complex Fullerene Shards, contact me ingame.
Lorth	Posted - 2006.07.05 04:29:00 - [38] Ihave to again agree with didgi. As of right now, the only safe spots that are worth finding, and that are easy to do are the in system ones. If someone has a deep safe, they are far far to hard to find, to be wortht the effort, not to mention that they are ushally watching for probes. And anyhwere in the system plain can be found by someone, who knows what they are doing faster then with probes. The end result being, I only ever carry 3au probes, as I can get within 1 au faster with the scanner and my own BM's then with probes. Deep safe spots are only found it the guy is offline, afk, or just dumb ------------- Recruit me
Jane Vladmir	Posted - 2006.07.05 04:53:00 - [39] Originally by: DigitalCommunist In combination with instadock, and most missions being located in the same system, this meant that even if you declared war on somebody it was literally impossible to kill them. Please, oh god, please fix this as soon as possible.
Plutoinum	Posted - 2006.07.05 05:51:00 - [40] The question was, if it's an exploit and the official answer is, that 500 AU safes aren't an exploit, which is right, because: 1) you are able to create 500 AU safes with observator probes now So it's not that people with old safespots have an advantage. Deep safe spots are nothing special, because you can still create them. 2) Although it takes a lot of time and dedication to bust a 500 AU spot, it doesn't need more effort, than to bust any other safespot that require the use of observators. Originally by: Mnengli Noiliffe when you get to about 350 au from objects in system, Observators tend to give way less results even farther away from the sun. I've tried that with a mate who was >1au behind me all the time, scanning for his ship type with a new Observator each time (though probably I could use tha same observator). An observator at the sun gives you closer spots to a far away object, than to close objects, which is a bit strange. It's happens quite often, that you already land in system scanner range, if you scan something that's like 450 AU out. But I'm not sure if these results are 'good' aka distributed well around the target, that's something that I didn't test so far. If they are it would be even easier to scan far out safe spots ! But the main purpose of observators isn't to get you close, but to give you spots to place 192 AU probes around the target object. So I tried a procedure that gives similar distributed spots, no matter how far the object is away: 1) place observator A 2) scan for object with observer A 3) warp to result 4) place observator B 5) do multiple scans with observator B to generate spots for the 192 AU probes The scan results with the two-observator-approach are distributed exactly in the same way around the object afaik, like if you use only one observators to find a close object e.g. near the sun. => A 1000 AU safe isn't any more secure, than any other spot that requires the use of observators. Like I said, if the close results from the first observers are already distributed well, then should be even easier to bust a 1000 AU safe, because you can probably forget the 192 AU probes and right away start with 48 AU or 12 AU probes. (Btw. the bookmark function is your friend, because it shows you the x,y,z coordinate. If you have a bunch of observer scan results and check their coordinates, you can check how they are distributed, get an idea where the object is in space and where to put some 192 AU probes to get a scan result) So yes, probes are almost unusable to catch a fleeing pilot, but there it doesn't matter, if he's 50, 100 or 500 AU out. But you can find an abandoned on a 500AU safe. Always afaik. Just takes time, but it's not more difficult than on a closer safe like 150 AU. P.S.: If there are really abandoned ships on that 750AU space that someone mentioned, I come along. I'm 100 percent sure that I find them although it might take a bit.
Dahin	Posted - 2006.07.05 07:13:00 - [41] Here we go again: It is a common misconception that those olde F11 supersafespots are somehow "safer" than other supersafes. AU's from system is in no way an indication of their safeness. On the contrary actually. The longer you are from the sol, the easier it is for the prober to find you. You see, observator probes spit results for just about anything in the system. In order for the prober to find will have to execute 3 consecutive scans and out of all the results (which can be many due to local traffic/noise) pick the correct one. If he picks one wrong in the whole process he's no-go. If you sit something like 200+au off the sol, then suddenly he doesn't have to guess which result is the correct one. When the results come in and you have one that is 110-290au off the sol, you know this can't be local traffic. It has to be the target. Now, observator-made safespots are by far the best ones, as long as you don't show on the scanner from anywhere. Ther max distance from the sol should be like 96au which means 50% of the times or more the results the prober will get will be virtually indistinguishable from local noise. Believe me, probing such spots can be a pain in the ass and next to unprobable if you have something like 30-50 local noise (hello fleet). Quote: The solution was to have all observator probe scan results on the same 1au plane as the object being scanned, unfortunately I have no freaking clue who started this, or even if its true. The fact that it takes ages to scan down system safespots means it probably isn't. I was suspecting that something like this may be true, I'm keeping an eye out for it for validation. I think I saw a result contrasting this statement lately, but I can't be sure. Shouldn't be tough to check though. make yourself an observator s-ss, dump a HAC there for 10 mins (or something with minimal local noise), probe it and check results. Time to go to work, might check it myself on the afternoon (waiting for goons to log on aggro is not funnieh, I need a distraction).
Mnengli Noiliffe	Posted - 2006.07.05 07:15:00 - [42] Originally by: DigitalCommunist Observator probes were found to give results in a spherical pattern, which meant you needed many many attempts and sheer statistical probability to brute force your way into obtaining three scan points all on the same 1au "pizza slice" plane as the object. The scan results usually being very far away, and your max scan range being 15au, with little to no planetary reference.. this made it nearly impossible to even tell if you had a good spot. Thus requiring you to warp between the various spots like a maniac, trying to see if you can pick something up on scan. The solution was to have all observator probe scan results on the same 1au plane as the object being scanned, unfortunately I have no freaking clue who started this, or even if its true. The fact that it takes ages to scan down system safespots means it probably isn't. On the whole, its more effective to use a spy. The only probes worth using are 3aus, because you can get a result seconds after deploying them all in the same spot (thank you, 1au buffer!). Even then you need pure luck and hope your target a) doesn't see them b) doesn't warp away c) doesn't cloak and d) isn't aligned. All these problems, and months of uselessness combined with the sheer difficulty of even fitting probe launchers to standard setups means that most people gave up before they even began. I will be glad when the all-new system is in place, even if it takes no skill to operate. At least it will work. And as far as I know, using any safespot is not an exploit. Its just metagaming at its best/worst. so what? it's a space, not your backyard. space is HUGE, therefore it should be hard to find something in it. If you want to play a space-based game, learn to live with it. Oh and if da great DC does'nt know how to scan I ok will teach ya tho you're right, no sane spy will sit on a safe not moving while you scan for him, so this is only useful to find abandoned ships. but it works for any scannable stationary objects. If there's not too much of them. here's my method. . launch Obs somewhere making sure that you target is not within 1 au from it (using the scanner) . make a scan . warp to result, launch 192au probe . warp back to observator . make a scan . launch obs 192au near obs . warp to last scan, launch 192au . scan with 192aus . if nothing, go back to obs and make another scan, etc . if you got 192au result, go there and launch 48au (rule of thumb, launch probe that just covers the "accuracy" colon in scan result table) . scan with lesser probe you launched and with 2 192aus until you get result then rinse and repeat - warp, launch, scan .. if you dont' get results, try another combo with prior probes that did give result. if nothing works, return to last worked step and try to obtain another result, launch there and try with new result... as I said it's not fast and requires skill, but eventually it gives 3au result... Oh and another important thing, you should BM every point you launch probe at. Make a table in text editor with them so that if some probe expired you could return thare and launch correct one. Same table can be used to determine next thing to scan with and to do... example. I name 192aus as aX, 48au bX etc. so a1 a2 a3 -> b1 a2 a3 b1 -> none a1 a2 b1 -> none a1 a3 b1 -> b2 a1 b1 b2 -> c1 ... and so on a3 b1 b2 a1 b1 b2 -- these 2 we will try if nothing works with a1 b1 b2 thread. I hope that makes sense .. they'll change it soon so no reason to keep it to myself anymore :) oh and don't get me started on the situation with more than one scan results, it is too obscure it might take days.
Plutoinum	Posted - 2006.07.05 08:23:00 - [43] Edited by: Plutoinum on 05/07/2006 08:24:34 Observator scan results aren't usually on the same plane. Maybe (!) for far-out safes due to a numerical problem, but you can always solve it with a 2nd observator that you place on the scan result point from the 1st observator. Then this observator is guaranteed to be with-in 98 AU or so of the target and works perfectly and distributes results in all directions around the target. Now you only need 192 AU probes on spots that are far away of eachother, especially from my experience one probe should be placed above the target and one below and then they are able to scan the area between the probes and avoid the problem that most probes are known/said not to scan their full range vertically.
HippoKing	Posted - 2006.07.05 08:34:00 - [44] Originally by: **c Originally by:** HippoKing Just for my own knowledge (never trained to use them), how do you make deep safes with observators? How much differently to normal probes do they work? Nobody seemed to answer you, so........ They are the same - but their resolution (i.e. object within x AU) is so coarse that you can make a very deep safe spot by probing for shuttle (or whatever) and then warping to where it tells you to go. Do this once or twice and you can be way off any objects in system. thanks
Dahin	Posted - 2006.07.05 09:46:00 - [45] Mnegli: I do not understand why you launch an 192au on the observator. Why should such a placement be valid? doesn't it give a random scanning plane which most likely doesn't include your target? The chance of this placement defining the correct plane with the other 192 au's is when the target is in the same plane with the sol. This ofc means (99%) that it's not a supersafe, it's a normal safespot and you're wasting both time and probes. Unless ofc you're talking about huge sols like 9-2 where an observator could be justified even for scanning in-sol safespots. It is my understanding that this approach wouldn't even work with normal safespots that are created with gates off the z-axis (god I hate these sols).
Iyanah	Posted - 2006.07.05 19:26:00 - [46] Originally by: Sadayiel get thorax 1 mwd 3 eutectic 1 or 2 cap rechargers in low and nanos turn somewhere and mwd for month voila SS done okay, i'm new (playing for 3 days), so how exactly do you create these safe warp points in deep space? i can't warp to anything without having a location to warp to... i assume this has something to do with one of the modules you mentioned?
Xelios	Posted - 2006.07.05 19:57:00 - [47] Originally by: Xorus I have been informed that using these safespots is not an exploit as any safespot can be found given enough time and determination, i hope thisclears things up for you Even a 17,000 au safe spot? Damn! My alt is not safe after all _________________________________
Valea Silpha	Posted - 2006.07.05 20:19:00 - [48] ooo .. run a competition to see who can find him :) <Hammerhead> TomB is doing the nerfing <Hammerhead> I just stand behind him, look at his monitor and shake my head
Haks'he Lirky	Posted - 2006.07.05 22:19:00 - [49] out of all the safe spots the 500 au ones used to be easiest to *****, I remember digi going through a period in m0o of scanning down ships at these spots. You made the bookmark then just warped to it scanning all the way till you located the ships at a certain au, then just made bms on either side, making the gap smaller and smaller until it was in range of a mwd. Then it was just a matter of pinching the ships This was before probes and stuff btw
Dahin	Posted - 2006.07.07 17:51:00 - [50] Originally by: Dahin Quote: The solution was to have all observator probe scan results on the same 1au plane as the object being scanned, unfortunately I have no freaking clue who started this, or even if its true. The fact that it takes ages to scan down system safespots means it probably isn't. I was suspecting that something like this may be true, I'm keeping an eye out for it for validation. I think I saw a result contrasting this statement lately, but I can't be sure. Shouldn't be tough to check though. make yourself an observator s-ss, dump a HAC there for 10 mins (or something with minimal local noise), probe it and check results. Time to go to work, might check it myself on the afternoon (waiting for goons to log on aggro is not funnieh, I need a distraction). Just checked it with a single result in a sol. doesn't work that way. Which enforces my belief that if you **** up on the first 3 probes, you gotta clean up and start again (relog or dock/jump in-out)
Rigsta	Posted - 2006.07.07 18:53:00 - [51] Originally by: HippoKing Just for my own knowledge (never trained to use them), how do you make deep safes with observators? How much differently to normal probes do they work? You just launch one, scan for something you know is nearby (usually your own ship or someone else currently next to you), and it will give you a result or three. This result is going to be miles off-target. Warp to it - chances are it'll be off the scanning plane. Ideally the SS would be 100AU+ from the nearest object with the sun directly above or below your ship. ----------------------------------------------- My Ideas: Drones wish list <-- 2 years old. I always knew the voice w
Too Kind	Posted - 2006.07.07 19:00:00 - [52] Observators probes find everything from 1 AU to infinite range and bring you always close enough to use 192 AU probes. Doesn't matter, if 100,200,500 or 17.000 AU, as long as the game supports such safespots. You just need to know, how to use observators and 192 AU probes and then it has nothing to do with luck, only with patience and experience. If I had to find an abandoned industrial ship in Jita, I'd prefer that it's more than 200 AU out. No noise from the usual traffic there. -------------------------- Post with your main !!!111
Dahin	Posted - 2006.07.10 14:04:00 - [53] Originally by: Too Kind Observators probes find everything from 1 AU to infinite range and bring you always close enough to use 192 AU probes. Doesn't matter, if 100,200,500 or 17.000 AU, as long as the game supports such safespots. You just need to know, how to use observators and 192 AU probes and then it has nothing to do with luck, only with patience and experience. If I had to find an abandoned industrial ship in Jita, I'd prefer that it's more than 200 AU out. No noise from the usual traffic there. From past experience the min-range of the observator is something closer to a grid's size. I tried shooting the observator 50k km off the bs blob and they still kept coming up on the results. Could be something like 10k km, dunno.
Betonela Caldari School of Applied Knowledge	Posted - 2007.01.25 20:03:00 - [54] sry if necro can the 500 AU safe be detected ? and now are the scan probe fixed or still like before ? --------- join on New Movement of Market Traders
Aceoil Direct Intent	Posted - 2007.01.25 20:22:00 - [55] Originally by: Betonela sry if necro can the 500 AU safe be detected ? and now are the scan probe fixed or still like before ? Holy necro. Yes a 500 AU ss can be found now with the new scan probes. Small ships are harder to find, larger ships are easier to find.
Hoshi Blackguard Brigade	Posted - 2007.01.25 22:28:00 - [56] The problem is the 1000+ au safes which I know some people have. They can not be detected as probe range is now limited to 1000 au. ---------------------------------------- A Guide to Scan Probing in Revelations

Pages: 1 2 :: [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.