| Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 3 post(s) |
Maeste Madeveda
The Spawning Pool
Team Liquid
2
   |
Posted - 2012.02.01 21:19:00 -
[61] - Quote
With the new version of the evelopedia, almost all exploration sites are documented. Thus the HTML version of the guide could be updated with the links as it is partially now. |
Roime
UNFRL Fleet Operations
CONSORTIUM UNIVERSALIS
157
|
Posted - 2012.02.03 08:54:00 -
[62] - Quote
This is far beyond awesome <3
Huge thanks to St Mio and everyone else who has contributed. I moved back to wspace where I belong, and this technique is a game changer when finding routes thru wormholes.
|
Michael Foreman
Enlightened Industries
Test Alliance Please Ignore
0
|
Posted - 2012.02.22 00:01:00 -
[63] - Quote
So am I right?
When I scan the system with my deep scanner probe at 256au with Probe Sensor Strength at 11 points in Fountain, and when i get a result with signal strenght 0.21, I'm still not certain I have a wormhole or a Magnetometric site or a Gravemetric site or an "unknown site"?
Greetings,
Michael |
Mnemosyne Gloob
Teshnology Inc.
Stealth Wear Inc.
40
|
Posted - 2012.02.22 09:08:00 -
[64] - Quote
Yes you need to scan it down to see what it actually is. However it will only be sites that can be found within this particular band.
The example is a bad one tho. You do not want look for this band, as it contains all the k162s. |
St Mio
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
471
|
Posted - 2012.02.22 09:30:00 -
[65] - Quote
As Mnemo said, the sheet works better if you look at from the other way 'round and say "I want to find DED 4/10s, what strength signals do I look for and which can I ignore?" as opposed to "I have 0.21, which site is it going to be?" |
Bent Barrel
30
|
Posted - 2012.02.22 09:52:00 -
[66] - Quote
St Mio wrote:As Mnemo said, the sheet works better if you look at from the other way 'round and say "I want to find DED 4/10s, what strength signals do I look for and which can I ignore?" as opposed to "I have 0.21, which site is it going to be?"
and this is about the only example where it is usefull ... if you look for radar sites, you have to scan all except the first band. similar for grav sites.
finding the DED sites is the only example where the guide is usefull ... |
Roime
UNFRL Fleet Operations
CONSORTIUM UNIVERSALIS
225
|
Posted - 2012.02.23 11:14:00 -
[67] - Quote
It is extremely useful in wormholes, where you can be facing dozens of signatures and know the static, and want to quickly filter a mass of bands where the static isn't.
There speed can also have real meaning, not just isk/hour :)
|
Torijace
Industrial Anarchy
0
|
Posted - 2012.02.23 18:12:00 -
[68] - Quote
I have yet to test it out but props on the concept the deep space probe is useful again \o/ |
James J Hill
Great Northern Sales
0
|
Posted - 2012.03.13 23:06:00 -
[69] - Quote
I finally did the Astro V, started using this and realized that I been stupid not to do it immediately upon reading these ideas a year ago. Made a billion following it in the first 3 days, course that means I'll get nothing for a month now (1 week down of that).
For Hi-Sec there must be one sig missing. When I look at LowSec, there is clearly a wh going from low-sec to hi-sec. So either there is something missing from the guide, or the game is broken and there can never be a wormhole that runs from hi-sec to low-sec, there are only K162 in hi-sec that represent the exit from low-sec space.
Over in Black Rise, there is a COSMOS site that is a little stronger than the Vigil, so there are some sigs missing from the guide. The ellatha list show a lot of "Leads into low-sec system" whs.
Oh, and for those that claim the guide is only good for DED sites, nope, I find it helpful for pulling up that wh I want.
|
St Mio
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
519
|
Posted - 2012.03.14 05:34:00 -
[70] - Quote
Thanks James :)
I'll try and have a look again to see if the high -> low WH might have slipped between the cracks somewhere. |
Rubinia Valeska
Todespropheten
T0DESPR0PHETEN
9
|
Posted - 2012.03.14 23:45:00 -
[71] - Quote
I have very rarely found an R051 WH sig in the same band as the pirate watch and the X702 C3 WH.
Theres another signature missing if you look at the best grav sites for high sec.
Large Hemorphite, Jaspet and Kernite Deposit is probably between the average Hemorphite, Jaspet and Kernite Deposit band and the lowest band. |
Michael Foreman
Enlightened Industries
Test Alliance Please Ignore
0
|
Posted - 2012.03.19 09:27:00 -
[72] - Quote
Will the new DED plexes, who came with one of the latest patches, be submitted? |
St Mio
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
542
|
Posted - 2012.03.19 11:15:00 -
[73] - Quote
Hello!
I have added the 3 new DED 2/10s that CCP added last week, as well as the missing HS->LS wormhole and gravimetric site. I've also checked most of the links to the EVE wiki, and done some fiddling behind the scenes, so maybe the JavaScript will be slightly less terrible now.
Happy exploring, and may you have get lots of loot! (But not more than me) |
Eternum Praetorian
JSR1 AND GOLDEN GUARDIAN PRODUCTIONS
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
508
|
Posted - 2012.03.19 14:59:00 -
[74] - Quote
May I add your link to the library of informative links and guides that I am compiling here?
|
St Mio
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
544
|
Posted - 2012.03.19 17:15:00 -
[75] - Quote
You are most welcome to  |
Eternum Praetorian
JSR1 AND GOLDEN GUARDIAN PRODUCTIONS
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
508
|
Posted - 2012.03.19 18:05:00 -
[76] - Quote
Cool thx
|
Michael Foreman
Enlightened Industries
Test Alliance Please Ignore
0
|
Posted - 2012.03.26 09:42:00 -
[77] - Quote
St Mio wrote:Hello!
I have added the 3 new DED 2/10s that CCP added last week, as well as the missing HS->LS wormhole and gravimetric site. I've also checked most of the links to the EVE wiki, and done some fiddling behind the scenes, so maybe the JavaScript will be slightly less terrible now.
Happy exploring, and may you have get lots of loot! (But not more than me)
Cool thanx!
|
Sir John Halsey
0
|
Posted - 2012.05.12 03:50:00 -
[78] - Quote
I was doing some high sec exporation today and i found a 0.9 signature (based on my 9.4 probe strenght).
I scanned the sig to 100% and found : Local Guristas Shattered Life-Support Unit
Here i see is a radar site:
http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Local_Guristas_Shattered_Life-Support_Unit
But in the table at:
http://swiftandbitter.com/eve/dsp/highsec.html
Is in the Magnetrometic section as: Local (pirate) Shatted Life-Support Unit
|
St Mio
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
773
|
Posted - 2012.05.12 15:47:00 -
[79] - Quote
Thanks John, was a formatting problem on my side, all the sites in that row were shifted one column to the right by accident. All fixed! |
St Mio
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
811
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 06:39:00 -
[80] - Quote
Hello!
I spent some time yesterday on SiSi scanning down my alt.
tl;dr scan results for ships are
(Target Signature Radius / Target Sensor Strength) * (Your Probe Strength / Diameter of Scan Probe)
not taking into account deviation.
For my test I used:
- my amazing exploration Nidhoggur with Expanded Probe Launcher II, vanilla T1 Deep Space Probes and 2x Large Gravity Capacitor Upgrade I
- All three 10% Poteque implants (AP-610, AQ-710, AR-810)
- Astrometric Acquisition and Astrometric Pinpointing 3
- Astrometric Rangefinding 4 and Astrometrics 5
My alt then proceeded to swap ships in and out of the carrier, I'd scan them, activate modules, check fitting window, scan, etc etc. I also warped the alt to the furthest planet (22.8 AU away) and then scanned again. In hindsight I should have just moved the probes instead and toggled multiple DSPs on and off.
The rounding off is annoying (in game fitting tool shows sensor strength rounded to the nearest integer, signal results round off after two decimal places, I should have used LogServ to get the untrunctuated probe strength) so I had to try and recalculate more accurate signal strength results using the MWD-active values (highest value per ship, so the smallest error value from rounding off). Just like sites, they play to the (x * probe str / 512) rule, where 512 is your diameter (in game scanner shows radius, probe strength is http://www.swiftandbitter.com/eve/misc/Probe_Strength.jpg ) and x is the cosmic signature/ship's special little number.
The bad news is that there's a lot more deviation than with sites (+0.06 difference with the ship moving 22.8 AU in one case).
On an interesting note, when jumping my Carrier in, the ships my alt popped into had the following locus IDs:
- Merlin JUY-613
- Cormorant OVY-472
- Caracal LWY-819
- Drake KXY-544
- Raven SXY-056
Also, his capsule's ID (SFC-600) before he boarded a ship and after I blew up said ship changed (AZF-300). Might be worth looking into how locus IDs work and what the patterns are.
The numbers can be found here:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AgyYH4Hyu_cZdFNhWnlIMjdfMnpCRjJ6UzY2NzNkV3c
I hope you all have a lovely day. Take care. |
Mia Lang
Department of Planetary Services
Star Council
1
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 08:27:00 -
[81] - Quote
St Mio wrote:Hello! I spent some time yesterday on SiSi scanning down my alt. tl;dr scan results for ships are (Target Signature Radius / Target Sensor Strength) * (Your Probe Strength / Diameter of Scan Probe) not taking into account deviation. For my test I used:
- my amazing exploration Nidhoggur with Expanded Probe Launcher II, vanilla T1 Deep Space Probes and 2x Large Gravity Capacitor Upgrade I
- All three 10% Poteque implants (AP-610, AQ-710, AR-810)
- Astrometric Acquisition and Astrometric Pinpointing 3
- Astrometric Rangefinding 4 and Astrometrics 5
My alt then proceeded to swap ships in and out of the carrier, I'd scan them, activate modules, check fitting window, scan, etc etc. I also warped the alt to the furthest planet (22.8 AU away) and then scanned again. In hindsight I should have just moved the probes instead and toggled multiple DSPs on and off. The rounding off is annoying (in game fitting tool shows sensor strength rounded to the nearest integer, signal results round off after two decimal places, I should have used LogServ to get the untrunctuated probe strength) so I had to try and recalculate more accurate signal strength results using the MWD-active values (highest value per ship, so the smallest error value from rounding off). Just like sites, they play to the (x * probe str / 512) rule, where 512 is your diameter (in game scanner shows radius, probe strength is http://www.swiftandbitter.com/eve/misc/Probe_Strength.jpg ) and x is the cosmic signature/ship's special little number. The bad news is that there's a lot more deviation than with sites (+0.06 difference with the ship moving 22.8 AU in one case). On an interesting note, when jumping my Carrier in, the ships my alt popped into had the following locus IDs:
- Merlin JUY-613
- Cormorant OVY-472
- Caracal LWY-819
- Drake KXY-544
- Raven SXY-056
Also, his capsule's ID (SFC-600) before he boarded a ship and after I blew up said ship changed (AZF-300). Might be worth looking into how locus IDs work and what the patterns are. The numbers can be found here: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AgyYH4Hyu_cZdFNhWnlIMjdfMnpCRjJ6UzY2NzNkV3cI hope you all have a lovely day. Take care.
Verah gj My-O |
St Mio
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
815
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 09:03:00 -
[82] - Quote
GÖÑ |
Elisa Fir
Luminoctis
11
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 17:21:00 -
[83] - Quote
St Mio wrote:Hello! I spent some time yesterday on SiSi scanning down my alt. tl;dr scan results for ships are (Target Signature Radius / Target Sensor Strength) * (Your Probe Strength / Diameter of Scan Probe) not taking into account deviation. (... snip ...) I hope you all have a lovely day. Take care.
Your missing variable is the so called probe multiplier. For 1 probe, this multiplier is 0.25.
This might look a bit odd, but it actually made sense back when only your 4 highest ranking probes were included in determining the outcome. At that time, 4 probes combined had a probe multiplier of 1. With the changes to include all probes in the calculation for the reported signal strength, this is no longer the case.
Good luck with your experiments ;-) |
St Mio
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
819
|
Posted - 2012.05.30 08:41:00 -
[84] - Quote
Of interest: *** Scan strength formula in new scan system *** by SpaceWanderer, 11/03/2009 |
Suntzu88
Taggart Transdimensional
Virtue of Selfishness
0
|
Posted - 2012.06.25 06:14:00 -
[85] - Quote
nvm |
Liliana Rahl
Remote Soviet Industries
Test Alliance Please Ignore
104
|
Posted - 2012.06.25 17:54:00 -
[86] - Quote
The excel sheet Moonwych posted in that thread is what got me started with my work.
The downloads are broken though and they were when I started working on it, hence the "reinventing" of the wheel."
Nice moment of nostalgia though Mio, doing all that stuff was a ton of fun. |
John Rainwater
In Praise Of Bacchus
0
|
Posted - 2012.06.26 02:50:00 -
[87] - Quote
This is awesome! Thanks so much. |
Space Wanderer
Lupi di Wotan
Intrepid Crossing
4
|
Posted - 2012.06.26 12:45:00 -
[88] - Quote
Glad to see that people managed to make use of that data. Unfortunately now that information is outdated.
With Incarna the scan strength formula has changed quite a lot (even though part of it is still valid). I have a decent grasp on the new system, but there are some odd formulas involved which I haven't been able to nail down yet. |
space gator
Adhocracy Incorporated
Adhocracy
32
|
Posted - 2012.07.21 21:53:00 -
[89] - Quote
Thank you St Mio for this excellent guide and tool.
A question/request: would it be possible to update the sig strength table into a printer-friendly version?
Thanks again for your hard work. o/ |
Melina Lin
Universal Frog
40
|
Posted - 2012.10.17 16:16:00 -
[90] - Quote
Some would call it a miserable pile of secrets. *bump* |
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |