| Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Annie Cruz
GoonFleet
GoonSwarm
   |
Posted - 2007.11.23 04:17:00 -
[1]
Seriously, what is this **** you are peddling, CCP?
_____________________________________________________________
fire 59 > your a ******* moron, define nerd, do they kickbox, weight train, go running, do the marathon, work hard, socialise, you **** |
Helen Hunts
Gallente
Red Dragon Mining inc
|
Posted - 2007.11.23 04:27:00 -
[2]
Gee...what kind of sift probes, what kind of range were you trying for, what type of site were you trying to nail down? So many details left unsaid.
1/10
_______________________________
Mine da rocks, make more ships.
Pop da rats, make more rigs.
Sell da gear, make more money.
Any Questions? |
Merrick Solipsus
D00M.
Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2007.11.23 08:55:00 -
[3]
Edited by: Merrick Solipsus on 23/11/2007 08:56:06
I would assume youre using the right tye of probe, within the .5 au range. I have also had to use up to 16 sift probes before I got a final hit. This is with skills and implant allowing me 3 scans per probe. Im not sure if its a bug or not but definatly a huge pain in the ass.
|
ElCoCo
KIA Corp
KIA Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.11.23 09:39:00 -
[4]
If the hit with the previous probe is very close to the 0.5au mark use a comb probe to get a closer result.
It has always worked for me even to find very difficult sites.
Makes me wonder if the actual scanrange of probes has partly a falloff range.
Please resize image to a maximum of 400 x 120, not exceeding 24000 bytes, ty. ... - Cortes
honestly now... the sig is 25k :S |
Sabahl
Minmatar
Reikoku
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2007.11.23 09:56:00 -
[5]
I am sure I remember seeing that probes DO have an accuracy and efficiency falloff. From experience, if you are within 5% of a probe's maximum distance it usually pays to use the next one up instead. |
Space Wanderer
|
Posted - 2007.11.23 10:04:00 -
[6]
As the second poster said, there so many details left unsaid that really makes your post totally useless. But assuming that:
1) You were using the right kind of probe;
2) You were using the sift to find something inside its range;
3) The site you were trying to find had a signal strength on comb a bit higher than 0.001;
4) The site you were trying to find hadn't despawned while you started to use sifts (pretty unlucky, but much less than using 59 sifts correctly and not getting signal);
Given all this I have sometime observed that sometime a site will exhibit a bug for which the correct type of probe of a _specific_ range will behave opposite to its normal behavior.
For instance, a radar sift is supposed to return a sign strength about double than that observed from combs (barring the distance modifiers). Rarely I have observed that a radar site reacted to a radar comb or sift like the it were a probe of a different kind (such as magnetometric). The odd thing is that the site still reacted correctly to the other range probes (quest, pursuit and comb; or quest pursuit and sift), only it exhibited abnormally low sig strength only with a specific range radar probe. Tried several probes, which means that it likely was a bug in the site, and not in the probe.
If you think that is the case you might want to try with a comb, or several combs overalpping in the area where you believe the site to be.
|
Annie Cruz
GoonFleet
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2007.11.23 12:29:00 -
[7]
Having found encryption skillbooks, and ship data interface bpcs, and enough parts to build those bpc's, believe me I know what I'm doing. Before I brought the sifts out my combs had got one of the sites to within 57km and the other to within 0.4 AU. Even if the latter was affected my falloff, there is no way the former should be.
The signal strengths of both sites, from the combs, came back as 0.142 and 0.223. Yeah, there's no way those should take anything more than three or four sift scans.
_____________________________________________________________
fire 59 > your a ******* moron, define nerd, do they kickbox, weight train, go running, do the marathon, work hard, socialise, you **** |
Greenwing
SuX ltd.
Rare Faction
|
Posted - 2007.11.23 13:55:00 -
[8]
 Originally by: Annie Cruz
The signal strengths of both sites, from the combs, came back as 0.142 and 0.223. Yeah, there's no way those should take anything more than three or four sift scans.
Well as scanning is chance based there's an infinite small chance you will even never find it. So yes mostly you will find the site in 3 or 4 scans but it is also possible you will need 100 scans or even more.
|
Iracham
Gallente
|
Posted - 2007.11.23 13:59:00 -
[9]
At 57km deviance you should be able to warp into the site, anything under 500km or so will usually spawn the site itself (rather than just the signature), allowing you to bm, and warp out and back and end up at the entrance to the site.
|
Annie Cruz
GoonFleet
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2007.11.23 14:30:00 -
[10]
Sorry, I meant 57K km. I dropped a comb on the 0.4 AU site, and now I'm within 24K km of it. It has a 0.5 signal strength, which strongly indicates it's an encounter. I'm not after the encounter, I'm after the Radar site, but I'm scanning both just to be sure. These are the only two signals in system.
_____________________________________________________________
fire 59 > your a ******* moron, define nerd, do they kickbox, weight train, go running, do the marathon, work hard, socialise, you **** |
|
|
Space Wanderer
|
Posted - 2007.11.23 15:32:00 -
[11]
Originally by: Greenwing
Well as scanning is chance based there's an infinite small chance you will even never find it. So yes mostly you will find the site in 3 or 4 scans but it is also possible you will need 100 scans or even more.
That's a fair statement as far as it goes, but it doesn't go very far. Have you calculated HOW small is the "infinite small" chance that after 30 attempts you won't find a site with 0.5 sig strength? It's 0.5^30, a little less than one in a billion...
|
Space Wanderer
|
Posted - 2007.11.23 15:37:00 -
[12]
Edited by: Space Wanderer on 23/11/2007 15:42:04
Originally by: Annie Cruz
Sorry, I meant 57K km. I dropped a comb on the 0.4 AU site, and now I'm within 24K km of it. It has a 0.5 signal strength, which strongly indicates it's an encounter. I'm not after the encounter, I'm after the Radar site, but I'm scanning both just to be sure. These are the only two signals in system.
Mmmhh... I have two things to say:
1) 0.5 sig strength with a comb at 0.4 may very easily be a Base 1 site, possibly a base 2.
2) If I understand correctly, you have deployed both sifts together and are scanning with both at the same time. If I remember correctly, scanning with more than one probe, even though they do not overlap, may lead to strange interference phenomena, not necessarily in your favor. Try scanning only for one signature, instead than for both.
EDIT: Addendun. Have you checked with a multispectral that the site you are looking for is still there, right?
|
Annie Cruz
GoonFleet
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2007.11.23 15:45:00 -
[13]
Yeah, I tried scanning for just one at a time, and I got the Radar site on the first hit, signal strength of 1.2
What an absolute dumb mother************sucker of a programmer the guy in charge of exploration is that not only does he not specify as much, but he hasn't even been bothered to create a guide.
Hey programmer who desined this system and then couldn't be bothered to tell us how it works, you suck monkey balls. I hope you die in a fire.
_____________________________________________________________
fire 59 > your a ******* moron, define nerd, do they kickbox, weight train, go running, do the marathon, work hard, socialise, you **** |
|
ISD Santiago Cortes
Caldari
ISD Interstellar Correspondents
|
Posted - 2007.11.23 20:18:00 -
[14]
*Locked*
Ranting.
forum rules | mailto:[email protected] |
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |