These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Missions & Complexes

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Deep Space Probe Exploration Guide

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Mia Lang
Department of Planetary Services
Intergalatic Complex Specialist
#81 - 2012-05-29 08:27:16 UTC
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_cZdFNhWnlIMjdfMnpCRjJ6UzY2NzNkV3c

I hope you all have a lovely day. Take care.



Verah gj My-O
St Mio
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#82 - 2012-05-29 09:03:02 UTC
Mia Lang wrote:
St Mio wrote:
(snip)



Verah gj My-O

♥
Elisa Fir
Luminoctis
#83 - 2012-05-29 17:21:26 UTC  |  Edited by: Elisa Fir
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 (maximum).

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 maximum 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, but the value for one probe remained unchanged.

Good luck with your experiments ;-)
St Mio
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#84 - 2012-05-30 08:41:59 UTC
Of interest: *** Scan strength formula in new scan system *** by SpaceWanderer, 11/03/2009
Suntzu88
Mr. Clean Corp..
#85 - 2012-06-25 06:14:23 UTC  |  Edited by: Suntzu88
nvm
Liliana Rahl
Remote Soviet Industries
Insidious Empire
#86 - 2012-06-25 17:54:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Liliana Rahl
St Mio wrote:
Of interest: *** Scan strength formula in new scan system *** by SpaceWanderer, 11/03/2009


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
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#87 - 2012-06-26 02:50:54 UTC
This is awesome! Thanks so much.
Space Wanderer
#88 - 2012-06-26 12:45:52 UTC  |  Edited by: Space Wanderer
St Mio wrote:
Of interest: *** Scan strength formula in new scan system *** by SpaceWanderer, 11/03/2009


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
#89 - 2012-07-21 21:53:43 UTC
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
#90 - 2012-10-17 16:16:00 UTC
Some would call it a miserable pile of secrets. *bump*
Bathsalts FaceEater
Burning Metal Foundries Inc.
#91 - 2012-11-16 17:56:14 UTC  |  Edited by: Bathsalts FaceEater
Couldn't help but notice that the highsec radar site "Local (pirate) Shattered Life-Support Unit" on the web based signature guide is misspelled in a... dirty minded way. Shocked

Otherwise GREAT guide!!!!! I am very impressed and most appreciative.




Fava Beans..... -Hannibal
Kenneth O'Hara
Sebiestor Tribe
#92 - 2012-12-03 19:33:23 UTC
bump

Bring Saede Riordan back!! Never Forget! _"__Operation Godzilla Smacks Zeus"  ~__Graygor _
DeMichael Crimson
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#93 - 2013-02-24 03:38:39 UTC  |  Edited by: DeMichael Crimson
Giving this thread some well deserved recognition with a friendly little bump and +1 like for the OP.



By the way, thanks for the special mention.

Big smile



DMC

'The Plan' | California Eve Players | Proposal - The Endless Battle
Orlacc
#94 - 2013-02-24 05:01:01 UTC  |  Edited by: Orlacc
Since you necroed...

I agree. Been a big help! swiftandbitter on my bookmarks bar!

"Measure Twice, Cut Once."
St Mio
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#95 - 2013-05-08 18:17:21 UTC
This is a public service announcement to let you know that all Deep Space Probes will be removed from game with the Odyssey expansion on Tuesday 4 June 2013.

Please direct any comments on this matter to the following thread: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=233600
blink alt
Doomheim
#96 - 2013-05-08 22:01:51 UTC
Well it turns out for site probing the death to the DSP is actually a good thing. With the new scanner you get to know which planet the sig is at and the band that sig is part of without having to use a DSP at all. So in essence everyone got the DSP mechanic for free and automatically
Tauranon
Weeesearch
CAStabouts
#97 - 2013-05-10 01:46:58 UTC
blink alt wrote:
Well it turns out for site probing the death to the DSP is actually a good thing. With the new scanner you get to know which planet the sig is at and the band that sig is part of without having to use a DSP at all. So in essence everyone got the DSP mechanic for free and automatically


Except that the default pattern has huge holes where it will miss sigs, and resizing the probes stuffs up the UI, and rescaling the formation doesn't fix the pattern gaps, and now instead of having to adjust my probe box once per system, I now have to adjust my sweep which usually takes LONGER because its not the same for each system, and gives me comparitively poor and innaccurate results compared to a DSP. I trained DSPs to not have to do this!
blink alt
Doomheim
#98 - 2013-05-13 02:06:55 UTC
Tauranon wrote:

Except that the default pattern has huge holes where it will miss sigs, and resizing the probes stuffs up the UI, and rescaling the formation doesn't fix the pattern gaps, and now instead of having to adjust my probe box once per system, I now have to adjust my sweep which usually takes LONGER because its not the same for each system, and gives me comparitively poor and innaccurate results compared to a DSP. I trained DSPs to not have to do this!


You sound confused, you seem to imply that I was refering to the poopy spread formation of probes which will not be used by anyone because of the new sensor overlay. Here have a picture, http://gyazo.com/79ad48214c985c93c8a62337303414d4
Derath Ellecon
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#99 - 2013-05-13 02:42:54 UTC
blink alt wrote:
Tauranon wrote:

Except that the default pattern has huge holes where it will miss sigs, and resizing the probes stuffs up the UI, and rescaling the formation doesn't fix the pattern gaps, and now instead of having to adjust my probe box once per system, I now have to adjust my sweep which usually takes LONGER because its not the same for each system, and gives me comparitively poor and innaccurate results compared to a DSP. I trained DSPs to not have to do this!


You sound confused, you seem to imply that I was refering to the poopy spread formation of probes which will not be used by anyone because of the new sensor overlay. Here have a picture, http://gyazo.com/79ad48214c985c93c8a62337303414d4


Yes which is an extremely poor substitute for the DSP, which gives me a list, that I can take a screenshot of, or sort by signal strength.

Instead now its spin, mouse over, jot down number, spin, mouse over, jot down number o crap did i miss one, spin some more...
Tauranon
Weeesearch
CAStabouts
#100 - 2013-05-13 10:09:19 UTC
blink alt wrote:
Tauranon wrote:

Except that the default pattern has huge holes where it will miss sigs, and resizing the probes stuffs up the UI, and rescaling the formation doesn't fix the pattern gaps, and now instead of having to adjust my probe box once per system, I now have to adjust my sweep which usually takes LONGER because its not the same for each system, and gives me comparitively poor and innaccurate results compared to a DSP. I trained DSPs to not have to do this!


You sound confused, you seem to imply that I was refering to the poopy spread formation of probes which will not be used by anyone because of the new sensor overlay. Here have a picture, http://gyazo.com/79ad48214c985c93c8a62337303414d4


DSP is a combat probe. ie the overlay only does half what a DSP does, doesn't put the info into the probing window, its not even on the map screen where probing is done, and tells me stuff in the wrong order, and requires me to spin my viewpoint around to find everything. I'm not interested in it till my ship is off the WH or gate and thus safe enough to consider PVE, so its initial scan and sticking stuff up is all visual clutter to me. Its also -effort- to get it to tell me there is nothing in system, and its -effort- to get it to tell me how many things are in system, and it doesn't tell me if there are other active hulls in system.

If I was to take an information design perspective on it, I would have to say that the designer got the timing and location of all the information almost entirely wrong with this. Even from a hunters perspective, if you came in to find someone in an anom, your scan will be filled with clutter from anoms that are out of d-scan range. Roll