Ships & Modules

Is this for combat scanning or just looking for sites?

Also, update EFT.

Here's a good thread recently with some discussion on the covops frigs: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=250221

My opinion is that they are all very close to each other in terms of performance, your ship choice and fit depends on what you value most.

Since you do not have any analyzers in your fit and use Expanded Probe launcher, I believe you are trying to scan for ships, not for signatures. In that case it really does not matter what to put in low slots and 4 middle slots of Anathema is enough, since you would get nasty penalty for using two rangefinding arrays. But if I am wrong and you plan top scan signatures, then your "Optimal Scanning Cov Ops Frigate" is ... a Helios. It gives you one more middle slot and is much faster.

[Helios, Helios]
Overdrive Injector System II
Nanofiber Internal Structure II
Nanofiber Internal Structure II

1MN Afterburner II
Relic Analyzer II
Data Analyzer II
Scan Acquisition Array I
Scan Rangefinding Array I

Covert Ops Cloaking Device II
Sisters Core Probe Launcher

Small Gravity Capacitor Upgrade I
Small Gravity Capacitor Upgrade I

Salvage Drone

I'm assuming since you called it a "PVE" scanner that you're setting it up for running data and relic sites.... right?

For that purpose your optimal fit will look something like this:

[Anathema, Exploration]
Warp Core Stabilizer I
Expanded Cargohold II
Expanded Cargohold II

Scan Rangefinding Array II
Limited 1MN Microwarpdrive I
Cargo Scanner I
Data Analyzer II

Core Probe Launcher II, Sisters Core Scanner Probe
Covert Ops Cloaking Device II
[empty high slot]

Small Emission Scope Sharpener I
Small Emission Scope Sharpener I

reasons:

1) you will need a data or relic scanner
2) a cargo scanner will help you pick up the right cans
3) the mwd is a must, imo for both getting around in null sec and for moving around in the anoms
4) you don't need an expanded probe launcher for exploration, the core one will do
5) if you hve to choose one of the new scanning modules then pick the range one. On a buzzard you have an extra mid slot so you should put the deviation one on there
6) Expanded cargo holds because ... well.... you don't want to leave stuff behind
7) warp core stab because one way or the other you'll end up sitting still uncloaked in anomoiles for long periods of time. this is your insurance policy.
8) The rigs give your ship better chances at hacking.

For PVP (looking for ships) you need a different fitting.

[Anathema, PVP]
Nanofiber Internal Structure II
Nanofiber Internal Structure II
Overdrive Injector System II

Fleeting Warp Disruptor I
Limited 1MN Microwarpdrive I
Scan Pinpointing Array II
Scan Rangefinding Array II

Sisters Expanded Probe Launcher, Sisters Combat Scanner Probe
Covert Ops Cloaking Device II
Salvager I

Small Gravity Capacitor Upgrade I
Small Gravity Capacitor Upgrade I

reasons:
1) you need an expanded probe launcher
2) the mwd, nanofiber and overdrive are your ticket to getting out of most bubbles
3) the scan modules and gravity capacitors are for improved scanning efficiency
4) the salvager isn't necessary but can be nice
5) the point isn't necessary but can be nice

Huh. If you're doing prof site scanning there's no reason you wouldn't want to hack the sites in the covops you use to find them. You even get a bonus to doing so.

Of course, all bets are off if you're doing combat scanning or looking for combat sites for another ship. Those are other fits with other purposes, of course. Which is why I asked my question way up at the top....

He's got 2 grav rigs already, so if he fits a scan strength array that'll go into about -47% stacking penalty. That's why I opted for a scan deviation array on my T2 covert ops frig, so that I can enjoy the full benefit of it along with my 2 scan strength rigs.

I agree about scan time, that's a really odd statistic to be able to get a bonus to. I have the vague and very indirect impresion that many, many, many years ago, probe scanning used to be a lot slower, with each scan cycle taking something like a minute and a half, and so under those circumstances it was valuable to be able to reduce scan time. But then - again, thisis my impression, I wasn't scanning myself until after any such change - CCP went and sped up probe scanning, and ended up making the time factor irrelevant.