Pages: [1] 2 3 4 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Kazuo Ishiguro
House of Marbles
|
Posted - 2009.07.15 12:55:00 -
[1]
Other people have covered this topic from the point of view of the hunter, but as fas as I know, the point of view of the prey hasn't been explored in any great amount of detail, so here goes.
0. The easy way
Fit and activate a cloaking device. For virtually everyone, nearly all of the time, this is much simpler and is the recommended method. However, in certain circumstances you might want to be able to active modules at a distance while remaining hidden, e.g. gang links.
1. The hard way
First, we need the idea of target size. This, together with range, determines what strength of hit a probe will get on your ship. Target size is calculated as sig radius / sensor strength. The smaller your ship's target size, the harder it is for people to probe you down.
What many people do not realise, however, is that there is a certain minimum target size below which it is impossible for anyone to get a 100% warpable hit on your ship. Without a 100% hit, people can't warp to you, and you're safe from being probed.
Multiple probes get up to double the % strength of hit of a single probe, so the limiting case is when the strongest hit a single combat probe can get (operating at the shortest 0.5 au range) is exactly 50%. Working backwards through the formulas set out by others gives the following formula:
Min. scannable target size = 5 / str_factor,
where str_factor is the effective scan strength of the prober pilot after taking all bonuses into account (i.e. 10% per level of covert ops, rigs, sisters launcher, etc). For a covert ops prober with perfect skills, a full virtue set and Sisters equipment, this value is 1.08012498.
This may seem an ambitious goal for something as large as a battlecruiser, with a base target size of about 256/16 = 16, but there are quite a lot of effects that you can deploy to your advantage. Enter the lowly ECCM II, which almost doubles your ship's sensor strength, and the ECCM Projector II, which gives the target a 120% bonus.
2. Example
A warfare-linked Claymore with max leadership skills & mindlink implant becomes totally immune to probes when fitting 2x ECCM II and targeted with 3x ECCM projector II. If the prober doesn't have an expensive Virtue set, or the pilot has Halo implants, it can drop one module and still be impossible to find.
So far, I've been very paranoid about potential probers. If your ship is only just above the prober's minimum scannable target size, you will still be extremely difficult to find. They will need near-perfect probe placement and hardly any scan deviation to get a 100% hit.
It will be interesting to see what happens to the recently announced +75% sensor strength implant set, which, assuming that the bonus is not subject to a stacking penalty, will make it much easier to do this.
3. Further reading - spreadsheet
For now, here's a spreadsheet I put together which lets you play around with different setups, as the various gang & implant effects get a bit complicated:
http://dl.eve-files.com/media/corp/KzIg/probe_immunity.zip
--- 20:1 mineral compression ISRC Racing, Season 7 - schedule |
Gold Rogers
Maiden England
|
Posted - 2009.07.15 13:19:00 -
[2]
Nice guide but isn't the Claymore example a bit redudent since they would be three other ships nearby projecting ECCM, what's to stop them being probed out?
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
|
Posted - 2009.07.15 13:20:00 -
[3]
Originally by: Gold Rogers Nice guide but isn't the Claymore example a bit redudent since they would be three other ships nearby projecting ECCM, what's to stop them being probed out?
Incidentally, CS - especially the claymore - can run a gang warfare link that reduces sig radius a fair bit.
|
Kazuo Ishiguro
House of Marbles
|
Posted - 2009.07.15 13:22:00 -
[4]
Edited by: Kazuo Ishiguro on 15/07/2009 13:26:26 You could put multiple projectors on another ship which would itself only need 1 or 2 ECCM active to become immune. Falcons are particularly good at this, as they have a really high sensor strength for their size, and lots of mid slots.
With the Falcon + Claymore combo, the Falcon benefits from the Claymore's gang bonus and only needs 2x ECCM II + 1x Backup array II (less fitting / cap) and has up to 5 mid slots free for ECCM projectors. --- 20:1 mineral compression ISRC Racing, Season 7 - schedule |
Kazuo Ishiguro
House of Marbles
|
Posted - 2009.07.15 13:31:00 -
[5]
Also, Falcon + Claymore + mothership = invulnerable fighter deployment. This time, the Claymore pilot uses a few mid slots for ECCM, so the Falcon can target the mothership, which is free to use a conventional fit. --- 20:1 mineral compression ISRC Racing, Season 7 - schedule |
Davinel Lulinvega
|
Posted - 2009.07.15 13:38:00 -
[6]
Originally by: Kazuo Ishiguro where str_factor is the effective scan strength of the prober pilot after taking all bonuses into account (i.e. 10% per level of covert ops, rigs, sisters launcher, etc). For a covert ops prober with perfect skills, a full virtue set and Sisters equipment, this value is 1.08012498.
You may want to clarify this paragraph. The claymore you gave has a signal strength of 240 / 170 = 1.41176471. If you mean the str_factor = 1.08 this is massive overkill. If you meant that 5 / str_factor = 1.08, then it's actually not enough. Either that or eft is calculating multiple stacking eccms differently from you.
Originally by: CCP Tuxford Now the op looks like a weirdo that can't read kekekeke!
inb4 stealth edit |
Mystical Dawn
|
Posted - 2009.07.15 14:12:00 -
[7]
Originally by: Davinel Lulinvega
Originally by: Kazuo Ishiguro where str_factor is the effective scan strength of the prober pilot after taking all bonuses into account (i.e. 10% per level of covert ops, rigs, sisters launcher, etc). For a covert ops prober with perfect skills, a full virtue set and Sisters equipment, this value is 1.08012498.
You may want to clarify this paragraph. The claymore you gave has a signal strength of 240 / 170 = 1.41176471. If you mean the str_factor = 1.08 this is massive overkill. If you meant that 5 / str_factor = 1.08, then it's actually not enough. Either that or eft is calculating multiple stacking eccms differently from you.
It's funny how to some people the EFT is like a bible.
|
Kazuo Ishiguro
House of Marbles
|
Posted - 2009.07.15 14:15:00 -
[8]
The Claymore sensor strength I get is 169.73; close enough, I think. This combined with gang bonuses that multiply its sig radius by 0.74125 gives it a target size of 240 * 0.74125 / 170 = 1.046. This is less than the value of 5 / str_factor for a perfect prober, who cannot pinpoint it.
--- 20:1 mineral compression ISRC Racing, Season 7 - schedule |
Lubomir Penev
Dark Nexxus
|
Posted - 2009.07.15 14:19:00 -
[9]
Originally by: Gold Rogers Nice guide but isn't the Claymore example a bit redudent since they would be three other ships nearby projecting ECCM, what's to stop them being probed out?
It's easy to make a unprobable Merlin with 3 med slots free for projected ECCM. So your 3 probable ships become one unprobable one. -- 081014 : emoragequit, char transfered to a friend, 090317 : back to original owner blog |
Davinel Lulinvega
|
Posted - 2009.07.15 14:23:00 -
[10]
Originally by: Kazuo Ishiguro The Claymore sensor strength I get is 169.73; close enough, I think. This combined with gang bonuses that multiply its sig radius by 0.74125 gives it a target size of 240 * 0.74125 / 170 = 1.046. This is less than the value of 5 / str_factor for a perfect prober, who cannot pinpoint it.
Whoops, I forgot the gang bonus. Apparently eft no longer adds it in automatically.
Originally by: CCP Tuxford Now the op looks like a weirdo that can't read kekekeke!
inb4 stealth edit |
|
rodensteiner
Amarr
|
Posted - 2009.07.15 15:12:00 -
[11]
Interesting calculations, but honestly, what's the point?
I can understand the part about "hiding" a carrier so that it can assign fighters without having to worry about being found.
But for the rest of ships, just keep warping. It takes a bit of time to scan someone down, so don't sit at a certain spot for long enough to find you.
Personally, when flying an Interceptor and I feel like laying low for a while, I'll warp to a safespot and burn in a random direction at 4,000+ m/s. I'm not terribly worried about being scan downed when doing that. Say someone scanned me, and it takes them 30 seconds to warp to me, I'll already be over 120km away from where I was scanned from by the time they get there.
I'll readily admit to doing that and walking away from the computer for a while on numerous occasions :)
|
Davinel Lulinvega
|
Posted - 2009.07.15 15:17:00 -
[12]
Originally by: rodensteiner Interesting calculations, but honestly, what's the point?
I can understand the part about "hiding" a carrier so that it can assign fighters without having to worry about being found.
But for the rest of ships, just keep warping. It takes a bit of time to scan someone down, so don't sit at a certain spot for long enough to find you.
Personally, when flying an Interceptor and I feel like laying low for a while, I'll warp to a safespot and burn in a random direction at 4,000+ m/s. I'm not terribly worried about being scan downed when doing that. Say someone scanned me, and it takes them 30 seconds to warp to me, I'll already be over 120km away from where I was scanned from by the time they get there.
I'll readily admit to doing that and walking away from the computer for a while on numerous occasions :)
Covert cyno is one use.
Originally by: CCP Tuxford Now the op looks like a weirdo that can't read kekekeke!
inb4 stealth edit |
Wolke 7
|
Posted - 2009.07.15 15:21:00 -
[13]
The hiding a mothership/ carrier does not hold water, a pober with wit will probe for fighters too and if the timing is right, bingo.
But thank You for the insights.
Does anyone know how DEadspace fits into the calculations? Noone seems to have a problem probing me there recently..
|
Davinel Lulinvega
|
Posted - 2009.07.15 15:27:00 -
[14]
Originally by: Wolke 7 The hiding a mothership/ carrier does not hold water, a pober with wit will probe for fighters too and if the timing is right, bingo.
But thank You for the insights.
Does anyone know how DEadspace fits into the calculations? Noone seems to have a problem probing me there recently..
It doesn't. Deadspace no longer gives any protection from probing.
Originally by: CCP Tuxford Now the op looks like a weirdo that can't read kekekeke!
inb4 stealth edit |
Wolke 7
|
Posted - 2009.07.15 15:33:00 -
[15]
Originally by: Davinel Lulinvega
Originally by: Wolke 7 The hiding a mothership/ carrier does not hold water, a pober with wit will probe for fighters too and if the timing is right, bingo.
But thank You for the insights.
Does anyone know how DEadspace fits into the calculations? Noone seems to have a problem probing me there recently..
It doesn't. Deadspace no longer gives any protection from probing.
Whoops That explains it. Grim
|
Bladen Kerst
Caldari Perkone
|
Posted - 2009.07.15 15:37:00 -
[16]
Very interesting stuff, thank you!
If 1.08 is an absoulute theoretical minimum, I suppose a practical minimum is a little bit higher? I mean you need those probes sitting directly on top of target to get that 100% hit and it would take quite sometime to achieve it
|
Lubomir Penev
Dark Nexxus
|
Posted - 2009.07.15 16:38:00 -
[17]
Originally by: rodensteiner Interesting calculations, but honestly, what's the point?
I can understand the part about "hiding" a carrier so that it can assign fighters without having to worry about being found.
But for the rest of ships, just keep warping. It takes a bit of time to scan someone down, so don't sit at a certain spot for long enough to find you.
Gang links don't work in warp, so probe proofing a command ship is actually very useful. -- 081014 : emoragequit, char transfered to a friend, 090317 : back to original owner blog |
Kazuo Ishiguro
House of Marbles
|
Posted - 2009.07.15 16:57:00 -
[18]
Slight improvement on earlier: Rook + mothership = unscannable fighter deployment. Ok, so it's not the most practical of fits if you don't have a carrier around to swap it out:
[Rook, MS ECCM cloak] Gravimetric Backup Array II Gravimetric Backup Array II Capacitor Power Relay II
ECCM Projector II ECCM Projector II ECCM Projector II ECCM Projector II ECCM Projector II ECCM - Gravimetric II ECCM - Gravimetric II
Rigs/highs of choice. Cap stable, good to hide 1 mothership of choice, while itself being impossible to probe down.
I dare someone to try this out in Rancer and see how many people they get looking for them.
--- 34.4:1 mineral compression ISRC Racing, Season 7 - schedule |
Marcus Gideon
Gallente The NightClub
|
Posted - 2009.07.15 18:15:00 -
[19]
Originally by: Kazuo Ishiguro It's still an interesting way of hiding a covert cyno ship.
It would be... if a Rook could cloak and follow the Covert Cyno ship in its way to the destination.
Why not throw the same fit into a Falcon, tagging along with a CovCyno fitted Falcon... then both set up in a deep safe and play Hide and Go Gank. |
Davinel Lulinvega
|
Posted - 2009.07.15 18:30:00 -
[20]
Edited by: Davinel Lulinvega on 15/07/2009 18:30:50
Originally by: Marcus Gideon
Originally by: Kazuo Ishiguro It's still an interesting way of hiding a covert cyno ship.
It would be... if a Rook could cloak and follow the Covert Cyno ship in its way to the destination.
Why not throw the same fit into a Falcon, tagging along with a CovCyno fitted Falcon... then both set up in a deep safe and play Hide and Go Gank.
You don't need 2 falcons to do that. 4 eccms + covops + covert cyno is enough. Or even better, just a covops with 1 or 2 eccms.
Originally by: CCP Tuxford Now the op looks like a weirdo that can't read kekekeke!
inb4 stealth edit |
|
Seishi Maru
Ministry of War
|
Posted - 2009.07.15 19:07:00 -
[21]
Logistic ships with ECCM... nothing better to stay hidden without a cloak :)
|
Omara Otawan
|
Posted - 2009.07.15 19:24:00 -
[22]
Hmm, should maybe change topic to "[Guide] How to make your ship generally useless but impossible to probe".
|
Wannabehero
Absolutely No Retreat
|
Posted - 2009.07.15 20:19:00 -
[23]
So any covert ops with an ECCM II and a single backup array should be pretty much an unprobe-able covert cynoer.
Interesting... ---
≡√≡ Don't harsh my mellow |
Iece Quaan
Caldari Aperture Harmonics
|
Posted - 2009.07.15 20:41:00 -
[24]
You could probably make a t3 warfare module ship probe proof without a second ship.
Someone run those numbers, please =)
|
Davinel Lulinvega
|
Posted - 2009.07.15 20:51:00 -
[25]
Originally by: Iece Quaan You could probably make a t3 warfare module ship probe proof without a second ship.
Someone run those numbers, please =)
[Loki, gaymore] Co-Processor II Damage Control II Co-Processor II Nanofiber Internal Structure II Nanofiber Internal Structure II
Command Processor I Command Processor I Conjunctive Ladar ECCM Scanning Array I Conjunctive Ladar ECCM Scanning Array I
Skirmish Warfare Link - Evasive Maneuvers Skirmish Warfare Link - Interdiction Maneuvers Skirmish Warfare Link - Rapid Deployment Covert Ops Cloaking Device II [empty high slot] [empty high slot]
[empty rig slot] [empty rig slot] [empty rig slot]
Loki Defensive - Warfare Processor Loki Electronics - Dissolution Sequencer Loki Engineering - Supplemental Coolant Injector Loki Propulsion - Interdiction Nullifier Loki Offensive - Covert Reconfiguration
Originally by: CCP Tuxford Now the op looks like a weirdo that can't read kekekeke!
inb4 stealth edit |
Kazuo Ishiguro
House of Marbles
|
Posted - 2009.07.15 21:00:00 -
[26]
Originally by: Omara Otawan Hmm, should maybe change topic to "[Guide] How to make your ship generally useless but impossible to probe".
Noted, but I only take self-deprecation so far --- 34.4:1 mineral compression ISRC Racing, Season 7 - schedule |
Viktor Fyretracker
Caldari Fyretracker Heavy Industries
|
Posted - 2009.07.15 21:35:00 -
[27]
i wonder has anyone used this to bait in a "probe ganker" in low sec? hide a bunch of badass ships and just have a raven with them(since in say a .4 system a lone raven is bound to scream mission runner). unless they also probe for the rats and notice none.
|
Davinel Lulinvega
|
Posted - 2009.07.16 02:35:00 -
[28]
Originally by: Viktor Fyretracker i wonder has anyone used this to bait in a "probe ganker" in low sec? hide a bunch of badass ships and just have a raven with them(since in say a .4 system a lone raven is bound to scream mission runner). unless they also probe for the rats and notice none.
That would be pretty awesome if it worked.
Originally by: CCP Tuxford Now the op looks like a weirdo that can't read kekekeke!
inb4 stealth edit |
Sera Ryskin
|
Posted - 2009.07.16 02:59:00 -
[29]
Originally by: Viktor Fyretracker i wonder has anyone used this to bait in a "probe ganker" in low sec? hide a bunch of badass ships and just have a raven with them(since in say a .4 system a lone raven is bound to scream mission runner). unless they also probe for the rats and notice none.
Which would work wonderfully, until you spot the two fatal flaws:
1) Your "hidden" ships have hilariously useless fits on them thanks to filling all their slots with ECCM, which means they are little more than free kills.
2) This doesn't hide anything from the directional scan, and most people will notice the extra ships on scan and people in local. ==========
Merin is currently enjoying a 14 day vacation from the forums. Until she returns, you've got me to entertain you!
|
Bladen Kerst
Caldari Perkone
|
Posted - 2009.07.16 07:13:00 -
[30]
Carrier can assign fighters to other ships so one way or the other it is still called unprobeble fighter deployment :)
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |