These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Ships & Modules

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Gravity Capacitor I, II and Probe Sensor Strength Calculation
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Sir Mattsimus
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#1 - 2014-10-09 07:10:29 UTC
I fit some Buzzards in EFT and on Sisi and ran into some results that I don’t understand. I fit two Buzzards with the following…

Expanded Probe Launcher II (Sisters Combat Scanner Probes)
Covert Ops Cloaking Device II

… but on one ship I fit two Small Gravity Capacitor Upgrade I’s and on the other I fit one Small Gravity Capacitor Upgrade II. These are the probe sensor strengths I saw shown on the charge info for both Sisi and EFT…

2x Small Gravity Capacitor Upgrade I = 63.4 (Sisi) 64.7 (EFT)
1x Small Gravity Capacitor Upgrade II = 61.9 (Sisi) 62.2(EFT)

Not really sure why the probe sensor strengths differ for Sisi and EFT but that’s not what bothers me.

Aside from the discrepancy between Sisi and EFT, these are about the results I would expect given that two Small Gravity Capacitor Upgrade I’s should give a total bonus of +20% (+10% each) probe sensor strength and a single Small Gravity Capacitor Upgrade II gives a bonus of +15% probe sensor strength.

But then I changed the fit on both the Buzzards so that they both had…

Expanded Probe Launcher II (Sisters Combat Scanner Probes)
Covert Ops Cloaking Device II
Scan Acquisition Array II
4x Scan Rangefinding Array II

… and again on one ship I still had fit two Small Gravity Capacitor Upgrade I’s and on the other I still had fit one Small Gravity Capacitor Upgrade II. These are the probe sensor strengths I saw shown on the charge info for both Sisi and EFT…

2x Small Gravity Capacitor Upgrade I = 67.9 (Sisi) 71.3(EFT)
1x Small Gravity Capacitor Upgrade II = 70.9(Sisi) 74.3(EFT)

Notice now that the ship fit with a rig that gives a +15% bonus has a higher probe sensor strength than the ship with two rigs that give a +20% bonus. This is counter to what I would expect.

I would appreciate an explanation for these unusual results.
I would also appreciate a detailed explanation of how to accurately calculate probe sensor strength, preferably with a formula and an example, as I find the entry in the evelopdia on the matter (https://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Signal_Strength) to be poorly/vaguely written and difficult to understand.
Janeway84
Insane's Asylum
#2 - 2014-10-09 07:18:16 UTC
im no expert but sounds like its got to do with stacking penalties.
Like when you had several mods of same type and get lesser high % boost / extra module of that type.

Im no maths guy but i googled this for ya that explains it somewhat http://www.eve-wiki.net/index.php?title=Stacking_penalty
Barton Breau
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#3 - 2014-10-09 08:18:03 UTC
Yes, stacking penalty, with 2 rigs its 6 mods total, with one rig its 5 mods.

Also poor rangefinding arrays, the 6th one contributes ~0.3%

Also way too low strength overall, dont look at stuff on the "Without skills" character, it can be decieving, for example a setup giving 64 strength without skills gives 136 with all5 :)
Syrias Bizniz
some random local shitlords
#4 - 2014-10-09 08:24:22 UTC
Sir Mattsimus wrote:
I fit some Buzzards in EFT and on Sisi and ran into some results that I don’t understand. I fit two Buzzards with the following…

Expanded Probe Launcher II (Sisters Combat Scanner Probes)
Covert Ops Cloaking Device II

… but on one ship I fit two Small Gravity Capacitor Upgrade I’s and on the other I fit one Small Gravity Capacitor Upgrade II. These are the probe sensor strengths I saw shown on the charge info for both Sisi and EFT…

2x Small Gravity Capacitor Upgrade I = 63.4 (Sisi) 64.7 (EFT)
1x Small Gravity Capacitor Upgrade II = 61.9 (Sisi) 62.2(EFT)

Not really sure why the probe sensor strengths differ for Sisi and EFT but that’s not what bothers me.

Aside from the discrepancy between Sisi and EFT, these are about the results I would expect given that two Small Gravity Capacitor Upgrade I’s should give a total bonus of +20% (+10% each) probe sensor strength and a single Small Gravity Capacitor Upgrade II gives a bonus of +15% probe sensor strength.

But then I changed the fit on both the Buzzards so that they both had…

Expanded Probe Launcher II (Sisters Combat Scanner Probes)
Covert Ops Cloaking Device II
Scan Acquisition Array II
4x Scan Rangefinding Array II

… and again on one ship I still had fit two Small Gravity Capacitor Upgrade I’s and on the other I still had fit one Small Gravity Capacitor Upgrade II. These are the probe sensor strengths I saw shown on the charge info for both Sisi and EFT…

2x Small Gravity Capacitor Upgrade I = 67.9 (Sisi) 71.3(EFT)
1x Small Gravity Capacitor Upgrade II = 70.9(Sisi) 74.3(EFT)

Notice now that the ship fit with a rig that gives a +15% bonus has a higher probe sensor strength than the ship with two rigs that give a +20% bonus. This is counter to what I would expect.

I would appreciate an explanation for these unusual results.
I would also appreciate a detailed explanation of how to accurately calculate probe sensor strength, preferably with a formula and an example, as I find the entry in the evelopdia on the matter (https://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Signal_Strength) to be poorly/vaguely written and difficult to understand.


stacking penalty.

The 2 Tech 1 rigs are so hard stacking penalized - especially the second one - that it adds pretty much nothing.
The Tech 2 rig however is not as penalized and will thus grant a greater benefit as the first tech 1 rig (as you'd assume), PLUS the second Tech 1 rig (which adds pretty much nothing).


ALso, don't worry, you can't fit 4 rangefinding arrays anyways.
Sir Mattsimus
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#5 - 2014-10-09 09:38:50 UTC  |  Edited by: Sir Mattsimus
Barton Breau wrote:
Yes, stacking penalty, with 2 rigs its 6 mods total, with one rig its 5 mods.

Also poor rangefinding arrays, the 6th one contributes ~0.3%

Also way too low strength overall, dont look at stuff on the "Without skills" character, it can be decieving, for example a setup giving 64 strength without skills gives 136 with all5 :)


I’m not sure what you’re talking about. I am not using a “without” skills character in EFT and in this example I am using combat probes. As of writing I am sitting in my buzzard on Tranquility with…

Sisters of Eve Expanded Launcher (Sisters Combat Probes)
Scan Acquisition Array II
4x Scan Rangefinding Array II
2x Limited Hyperspatial Accelerator
2x Small Gravity Capacitor I

I have no implants and I have a probe sensor strength of 68.0

Syrias Bizniz wrote:
stacking penalty.

The 2 Tech 1 rigs are so hard stacking penalized - especially the second one - that it adds pretty much nothing.
The Tech 2 rig however is not as penalized and will thus grant a greater benefit as the first tech 1 rig (as you'd assume), PLUS the second Tech 1 rig (which adds pretty much nothing).


ALso, don't worry, you can't fit 4 rangefinding arrays anyways.


“Don’t worry, you can’t fit 4 rangefinding arrays anyways” What? See above.

Look, I’ve just come to realize now that while the Gravity Capacitor rigs don’t have stacking penalties, the Scan Rangefinding Arrays DO have stacking penalties with both module AND RIGS. This I did not know before and that’s fine.

HOWEVER I’ve done some more messing around in EFT and have found that it appears you get a better probe sensor strength using two Small Gravity Capacitor I’s while you have ONE Scan Rangefinidng Array II, but once you have two or more Scan Rangefinding Array II’s then you get a better probe strength using a single Small Gravity Capacitor II. What I don’t understand is why this is so.
If someone could break down how you arrive at the probe strength value in relations to skills, ships bonuses, modules, rigs and implants I would be grateful.

EDIT
That last paragraph might not be quite right.
I just did some more experimenting in Sisi using Buzzard with…

Expanded Probe Launcher II (Sisters Combat Scanner Probes)
Covert Ops Cloaking Device II
Scan Acquisition Array II
… adding Scan Rangefinding and alternating rigs.

Results… (EDIT made a mistake with the rig names)

0x Scan Rangefinding Array II
2x Small Gravity Capacitor I = 63.4
1x Small Gravity Capacitor II = 61.9

1x Scan Rangefinding Array II
2x Small Gravity Capacitor I = 66.1
1x Small Gravity Capacitor II = 66.3

2x Scan Rangefinding Array II
2x Small Gravity Capacitor I = 67.4
1x Small Gravity Capacitor II = 69.1

So a reversal occurs once you start adding the Rangefinding Arrays and I believe it is because of stacking penalties but I still don't understand how this is happening. I don't understand how I would arrive at these numbers given the details.
Syrias Bizniz
some random local shitlords
#6 - 2014-10-09 10:09:40 UTC
Sir Mattsimus wrote:
Barton Breau wrote:
Yes, stacking penalty, with 2 rigs its 6 mods total, with one rig its 5 mods.

Also poor rangefinding arrays, the 6th one contributes ~0.3%

Also way too low strength overall, dont look at stuff on the "Without skills" character, it can be decieving, for example a setup giving 64 strength without skills gives 136 with all5 :)


I’m not sure what you’re talking about. I am not using a “without” skills character in EFT and in this example I am using combat probes. As of writing I am sitting in my buzzard on Tranquility with…

Sisters of Eve Expanded Launcher (Sisters Combat Probes)
Scan Acquisition Array II
4x Scan Rangefinding Array II
2x Limited Hyperspatial Accelerator
2x Small Gravity Capacitor I

I have no implants and I have a probe sensor strength of 68.0

Syrias Bizniz wrote:
stacking penalty.

The 2 Tech 1 rigs are so hard stacking penalized - especially the second one - that it adds pretty much nothing.
The Tech 2 rig however is not as penalized and will thus grant a greater benefit as the first tech 1 rig (as you'd assume), PLUS the second Tech 1 rig (which adds pretty much nothing).


ALso, don't worry, you can't fit 4 rangefinding arrays anyways.


“Don’t worry, you can’t fit 4 rangefinding arrays anyways” What? See above.

Look, I’ve just come to realize now that while the Gravity Capacitor rigs don’t have stacking penalties, the Scan Rangefinding Arrays DO have stacking penalties with both module AND RIGS. This I did not know before and that’s fine.

HOWEVER I’ve done some more messing around in EFT and have found that it appears you get a better probe sensor strength using two Small Gravity Capacitor I’s while you have ONE Scan Rangefinidng Array II, but once you have two or more Scan Rangefinding Array II’s then you get a better probe strength using a single Small Gravity Capacitor II. What I don’t understand is why this is so.
If someone could break down how you arrive at the probe strength value in relations to skills, ships bonuses, modules, rigs and implants I would be grateful.



Okay, first: When did they change the Scan-Modules Onlinelimits? When i played for the last time (granted, it's a few weeks), you could only have ONE of EACH fitted. One Pinpointing, One Rangefinding, One Acquisition.

Second: It's STACKING PENALTIES.
The STRONGEST module starts as the first module.
This is usually the Ragefinding Array.
Then, in descending order, the next strongest modules are handled as the next modules to be calculated with stacking penalty.

So when you only have ONE Rangefinding array in usage, your second Tech 1 rig will have a stacking penalty of roughly 50%. The first one will be at ~80%.

If you have a Tech 2 Rig, the Tech 2 Rig will be somewhere at ~80% efficiency due to stacking penalty. There is no 3rd stacking penalized item in this case.

However, IF YOU FIT FOUR (which should, according to my information, be impossible - or at least impractible) Rangefinding arrays, they ALL are getting handled as the strongest module, and the rigs will come in last!
So when the very first rig get's calculated, it's already the fifth item in the stacking penalty chart you can find via google or whatever.
As someone pointed out earlier, the sixth (the SECOND RIG!!!1) has a factor of 0.03 or whatever. 0.03 of 10% is ... pretty much nothing.

Here's the chart, LOOK; I EVEN GOOGLED IT FOR YOU.

1st mod: 100.0% effectiveness / Rangefinding Array #1
2nd mod: 86.9% effectiveness / Rangefinding Array #2
3rd mod: 57.1% effectiveness / Rangefinding Array #3
4th mod: 28.3% effectiveness / Rangefinding Array #4
5th mod: 10.6% effectiveness / Scan Rig #1
6th mod: 3.0% effectiveness / Scan Rig #2


So when you put in the values, you will see that your second Tech 1 scan rig doesn't do ****. The First one will ... give you a bit. If you have a Tech 2 Rig on the 5th position, it will, of course, give you a bigger bonus than a T1 rig would.

And THIS is why your 4 rangefinding arrays suck balls.
Sir Mattsimus
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#7 - 2014-10-09 11:58:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Sir Mattsimus
Syrias Bizniz wrote:


Second: It's STACKING PENALTIES.
The STRONGEST module starts as the first module.



THIS. This is what I didn't know. Now it makes sense. The penalties don't kick in when you're using rigs alone but once you put on the scanning array modules the strongest value is first. And in the case of having a Small Gravity Capacitor Upgrade II the 15% bonus is at the top instead of the 10% of the Small Gravity Capacitor Upgrade I which is then followed by a penalized second rig.

For a long time I had been using two Small Gravity Capacitor Upgrade I rigs as the one stop solution for all my probe scanning needs. I was surprised to find the Small Gravity Capacitor II giving better results for some fits.

Syrias Bizniz wrote:

Here's the chart, LOOK; I EVEN GOOGLED IT FOR YOU.

And THIS is why your 4 rangefinding arrays suck balls.


Thanks very much for the info, but I could do without the snark.