open All Channels
seplocked Assembly Hall
blankseplocked DScan ( D-scan / Directional scanner )
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Author Topic

GeeShizzle MacCloud
Caldari
Posted - 2011.07.31 16:41:00 - [1]
 

What i believe to be wrong with dscan currently:
  • uniform short scan duration regarless of range.

  • Identification of names of ships as well as the ship model (the actual ship and not ship type eg bestower and not industrial).



DScans role in Eve Online & points to take into consideration.
  • A lot of people use dcan religiously.

  • Its an integral tool for gang and fleet strategy.

  • Any changes or fixes to it would need to be fair and reflect the current dscans abilities and shortcomings, at a tactical level.


Proposed Changes:
  • Scan duration should tie in with its current scan range.

  • Scan results should not include shipnames or discreet ship model names, but ship class names.

  • Scan results should show distance to target but without a numerical indication of scan range deviation of 25% (based on user defined scan range)




>>> Explainations <<<


The longer the range the longer the scan duration and therefore the less server requests for max range dscans in busy contested systems. its totally logical.

Dscan should not be able to identify shipnames or shiptypes like Rhea or capsule or vagabond, but be able to identify hull size or approximate ship type from sig radius and categorise them as say freighter, capsule or cruiser. there should be no way such a short scan on items within a 14AU range should return such detailed information so quickly. because of this its immersion breaking, even if youd hate that both a vagabond and a celestis would come back as a cruiser, it makes much more sense than the current system.

This form of returned result would have tactical advantages if tied into ships signature radius, as active mwds could skew results into a larger shiptype (eg a Battlecruiser with an active mwd could be erroneously categorised as a battleship). this would depend on tests to check whether this has any increased server overheads otherwise it could just return the ship class.

its an outlet for racist, sexist, inflamatory and profanic messages, though hardened to this from years of fleet chat links, in retrospect itll probably help with game promotion if kiddies starting out in eve in hisec arent asking their mothers what a blue waffle is when they see it as a ship name on dscan.

What this sort of ship identification nerf should be rebalanced with is the dscans ability to pinpoint distances. but with a varying degree of accuracy. accuracy thats not based on levels in astrometrics but fixed across all shiptypes and all Skill levels.

Using the dscan should be a skill that pilots learn by practice and not grinding SP.

Much like probes, distance approximations should carry a level of deviation. so for example the max dscan distance of approx 14AU should have a sufficient deviation derrived from its range, in percent. i put this figure at 25%

hence a 14AU scan with a result of 1 contact at 12AU would mean that that contact can reside in a space anywhere within 9AU and 15AU due to the deviation of 12AUs at 25% = 3AUs. The shorter the range thats scanned the smaller the deviation, even though the percentage stays fixed.

An explanation of this deviation for game immersion can be that scanning to a longer ranger requires a boost to signal strength, and that this boost negatively affects scan resolution.

How i arrived at this percentage was to approximate a contact that would lay close to the maximum scan range and push the deviation out to a point that it would likely encompass not just a single planet and its moons but likely a few planets. this form would still require pilots to range-find contacts.

this is an approximation of the way many pro pilots use the current dscan to calculate contacts distance by constant re-scanning and range finding using approximate km equivalents of AUs, then ranging smaller values until the contact can only reside in a few specific areas.

TBC..

GeeShizzle MacCloud
Caldari
Posted - 2011.07.31 16:48:00 - [2]
 

Edited by: GeeShizzle MacCloud on 31/07/2011 16:48:10
continued...

the only downfall is that to scan at a tighter deviation you need to be closer to the contact. to me thats logical as scanning at larger distances should distort sensor resolution.


\o/ MacCloud

Lady Spank
Amarr
In Praise Of Shadows
Posted - 2011.07.31 18:27:00 - [3]
 

Edited by: Lady Spank on 31/07/2011 18:29:56
These proposed changes support and further encourage blob warfare while making intel gathering (tactical assessment) for small gang and solo pilots impossible.

Blobs don't need the intel while it is critical to guerilla fleets/soloers.

EDIT: Also, you haven't actually stated WHY this change is needed other than a single statement about wanting to protect kids from reading naughty words in an online game Rolling Eyes

GeeShizzle MacCloud
Caldari
Posted - 2011.07.31 19:26:00 - [4]
 

Edited by: GeeShizzle MacCloud on 31/07/2011 20:10:06
Originally by: Lady Spank

These proposed changes support and further encourage blob warfare while making intel gathering (tactical assessment) for small gang and solo pilots impossible.



how in holy hell did you get to that assumption from the changes proposed?? my guess is you actually couldnt be arsed to read what i wrote and dont understand whats being changed and how it relates to combat and solo/gang/fleet strategies.

Originally by: Lady Spank

Blobs don't need the intel while it is critical to guerilla fleets/soloers.


blobs need intel as much as gangs and solo'ers. whats ridiculous is the fact somehow u think blobs will get more information than gangs or solo'ers... you're completely totally and utterly wrong in this.

GeeShizzle MacCloud
Caldari
Posted - 2011.07.31 20:03:00 - [5]
 

Originally by: Lady Spank

EDIT: Also, you haven't actually stated WHY this change is needed other than a single statement about wanting to protect kids from reading naughty words in an online game Rolling Eyes


the current dscan mechanic is:
particularly illogical in physical terms
is a conduit for unnecessary antisocial profanities
an easy button for intel gathering.
the UI is horrible

Ranka Mei
Caldari
Posted - 2011.07.31 20:07:00 - [6]
 

" Scan duration should tie in with its current scan range."

Don't like it. Makes it harder for people to scan you down perhaps; but they have essentially all the time in the world (as I don't know they're doing it). So, what remains is just the negative effect that this proposal makes it harder for me to see combat probes in system coming.

GeeShizzle MacCloud
Caldari
Posted - 2011.07.31 20:25:00 - [7]
 

well i wasnt going to put any actual numbers down on the max 14AU distance scan duration bt was thinking aound 10 seconds... so unless you know sum1 who can scan u down from start to finish in 10 seconds flat id be amazed.

but the typical 4AU scan duration would be along the lines of 1 second.

tbh im envisioning the scan duration vs range graph to be exponential or relatively exponential in shape. so small and medium range scan duration are actually shorter than current scan speeds with the recal warning.

Jekyl Eraser
Posted - 2011.07.31 21:10:00 - [8]
 

Dscan should be passive instead of the clickfest it is now.

Have it use capacitor depending on the settings. Setting could be:
-angle
-range
-result type: ship, probe, wreck...
-frequency: how often you get result

Higher values would cost more cap.

there could be limit to frquency to prevent lag. if you had max range, 360 degree scan with all result types you could be limited to one scan every 20sec

Scanner would have to be reactivated manually every 5 minutes to prevent people forgetting it on and lagging server.

Examples:
Belt ratter could use 2AU range, 360 degree, ship and probe result types and he'd get a result every 2 seconds and it would cost 0.1% of max cap with every result.

Scout could use 7AU range, 10 degree, ship result type and get result every second and would cost 0.05% of max cap.

Noob would use 14AU range, 180 degree, ship, drone and wreck results but would be limited to a scan every 12sec and it would drain 25% of max cap with every result

Wizlawz
Posted - 2011.08.01 02:47:00 - [9]
 

it should also include the ID#s and correlate to scanners who are within fleet/ corp etc

this would be a tactical asset.

Ya Huei
Imperial Collective
Posted - 2011.08.01 09:05:00 - [10]
 

Originally by: GeeShizzle MacCloud
well i wasnt going to put any actual numbers down on the max 14AU distance scan duration bt was thinking aound 10 seconds... so unless you know sum1 who can scan u down from start to finish in 10 seconds flat id be amazed.



Welcome to W-space.


 

This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only