DUST Search - Passive Scanning: The Test Results

hydraSlav's wrote:

Haerr wrote:

hydraSlav's wrote:

Oh, just noticed that DFT has Scan Profile as a non-stacking attribute (i guess it didn't mention stacking in the description). Your results suggest that it is stacking. Is this pretty much the consensus of the community? Also what about Scan Radius (it is also currently marked as non-stacking in DFT)

Me and a corpmate did a bunch of testing with active and passive scanning and yes 'Precision Enhancers', 'Profile Dampeners' and 'Range Amplifiers' all suffer from stacking penalties.

Edit 1: I do not know if anyone got a confirmation that this is a bug from a dev, to be fair I do not remember anyone saying that they heard back from any dev regarding this. I am certain, how ever, that it was reported back when ferroscales were introduced.

Edit 2: It was confirmed as a defect by 'CCP Cmdr Wang' back in july. Link to weekly bug reports: https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1057188#post1057188 - '[BUG] Ferroscale speed bonus?'

'xxwhitedevilxx M' reported the bug on the forums in the begining of july: https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1009079#post1009079

Thank you Haerr

I've released DFT 3.4.2 which enables stacking penalty on those modules, thanks to your evidence.

It also replicates the "armor bug" by giving it a minuscule negative penalty. I should have caught that one sooner
If you find more such issues, please post them in the DFT thread so i can take care of it.

Cheers


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Haerr Molon Labe. RISE of LEGION 39	Posted - 2013.09.19 09:36:00 - [1] - Quote Hey Bojo I'm intrested in helping out with scanning and such, I've sent you an in-game mail with a bit of information. I also created the channel '#bloody_scanning' so that anyone intrested in helping out can easily get in contact.
Haerr Molon Labe. RISE of LEGION 39	Posted - 2013.09.20 08:55:00 - [2] - Quote Since it seems like we are in different parts of the world I'll just share my data and the experiments I was going to ask you to help me with. First off is the hit-miss charts I made ( I have already made them availible on the forums but I'll put the link in here aswell ) The first chart is no stacking penalty at all ( I'm leaving it in there ) The second is with stacking penalty. Link: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AvYSJ6FRJlihdDI1NVpNdk5BQUh0bFphNktjLTU3R1E&usp=sharing And here is a link to the complete data ( which I haven't shared before and only uploaded to google docs yesterday ) Link: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AvYSJ6FRJlihdFVJeWI5NVFUcmYwZERDQWhUSXZac2c&usp=sharing The data is separated into a lot of sheets: Heavy - Profile Dampening Medium - Profile Dampening Light - Profile Dampening Scout - Profile Dampening Heavy - Precision Enhancement Medium - Precision Enhancement Logistics - Precision Enhancement Light - Precision Enhancement Almost Everyone - Range Amplification Gallente Scout - Range Amplification All functions are intact in this spreadsheet so you can clearly see how stacking penalty is calculated. Link to Aenigma's guide on stacking penalties in EVE: http://eve.battleclinic.com/guide/9196-Aenigma-s-Stacking-Penalty-Guide.html Just a heads up; as most of you know DUST 514 is currently not calculating movement penalties on armor modules in the right order. Exampel: Put 2 armor plates on a suit and mark your movement, then put a ferroscale ( 3:rd module ) on and you will see that your movement just increased. This is because the ferroscale is incorrectly calculated as being first in line for stacking penalty - meaning that stacking penalties are applied to the armor modules but not the ferroscale. ( since it is first in line. ) Now if DUST 514 incorrectly calculates 'negative precentages' in the wrong order it would be fair to assume that it could very well do the same while dealing with other modules. Such as 'Profile Dampeners' and 'Precision Enhancers'. If the stacking penalties are calculated in the right order a medium suit with 1 ' complex profile dampener' and 1 'advanced profile dampener' would have a scan profile of 27.88 dB how ever if it is calculated in the wrong order it would end up being 28.18 dB. Since a prototype scanner has a scan precision of 28 dB it should be easy to verify if the bug exists while dealing with these modules. Feel free to send me in-game mails if you have any questions and / or want me to help out in any way. ( Oh and btw you can see that DUST 514 has stacking penalties on percentages by stacking 'cardiac regulators' or 'kinetic catalyzers' they'll experience the standard EVE pattern of stacking penalties. )
Haerr Molon Labe. RISE of LEGION 40	Posted - 2013.10.04 22:12:00 - [3] - Quote Thanks go out to AAA Hellcab for being a good sport and helping me out with these tests! (1) Gallente Scout with 4 complex Range Amplifiers has a range of: --- 64.3m --- ( If there would have been no stacking penalties it would have been 99.46m ) (2) Medium Frame with 1 complex and 1 basic Profile Dampener is: --- Detected by a PRO Active Scanner --- ( This was expected. ) (3) Medium Frame with 1 complex and 1 enhanced Profile Dampener is: --- Detected by a PRO Active Scanner --- ( Calculations say that it should _NOT_ have been detected, which confirms that the bug affecting movement penalties on armour plates affects Profile Dampeners. ) (4) Medium Frame with 2 complex Profile Dampeners is: --- _NOT_ Detected by a PRO Active Scanner --- ( This was expected. ) (5) Scout with 2 complex and 2 enhanced Profile Dampeners is: --- Detected by a PRO Focused Active Scanner --- ( Calculations say that it should _NOT_ have been detected, which yet again confirms the bug. ) (6) Scout with 3 complex Profile Dampeners is: --- Detected by a PRO Focused Active Scanner --- ( This was expected. ) (7) Scout with 4 complex Profile Dampeners is: --- _NOT_ Detected by a PRO Focused Active Scanner --- ( This was expected. ) (8) Scout with 1 militia Profile Dampener is: --- _NOT_ Detected by a PRO Active Scanner --- ( This was expected. ) Conclusions: * Sadly the tests we did confirms that the bug is rearing it's ugly head here as well. * Scouts with level 5 in their suit and 5 in Profile Dampening only needs a militia Profile Dampener to hide from PRO Active Scanners. * Medium suits with level 5 in Profile Dampening currently need 2 complex Profile Dampeners to hide from PRO Active Scanners. ( Once they fix the bug they should only need 1 complex and 1 enhanced. ) * You can hide a Gallente Scout from the PRO Focused Active Scanner, but it requires you to fit all 4 of your low slots with complex Profile Dampeners. * The PRO Focused Active Scanner is tedious to use due to it's fitting requirements and the fact that you are stuck scanning for the full 5 secs unable to switch to a weapon if/when you get jumped.
Haerr Molon Labe. RISE of LEGION 40	Posted - 2013.10.04 23:02:00 - [4] - Quote Bojo The Mighty wrote: Damn. Also, I assume that the scout-MLT Dampener is a Level 5 scout, nes pas? Also, the stacking penalties to Range Amplifiers sort of institutes a passive scan range buff IMO. Oh yes, I forgot to mention that the tests were done with a Gallente Scout with level 5 in 'Gallente Scout', 'Precision Enhancement', 'Profile Dampening' and 'Range Amplification'.
Haerr Molon Labe. RISE of LEGION 43	Posted - 2013.10.06 19:52:00 - [5] - Quote The way stacking penalties work in EVE ( and Dust, you can check the stacking penalties against Cardiac and Kinetics and they will follow this pattern. ) is like this: For positive modifiers: Base * Skill Modifier * Skill Modifier * (1+Module_Modifier) * (1+Module_ModifierStacking Penalty) (1+Module_ModifierStacking Penalty)GÇª For negative ( reductions ) modifiers: Base Skill Modifier * Skill Modifier * (1-Module_Modifier) * (1-Module_ModifierStacking Penalty) (1-Module_ModifierStacking Penalty)GÇª The stacking penalty increasing for each additional module. The stacking penalty can be approximated by = 0.5^(((n-1)/2.22292081)^2) where n is the number of the module. This makes the modules work with the following efficacy. 1st module = 100% 2nd Gëê 86.91% 3rd Gëê 57.06% 4th Gëê 28.30% 5th Gëê 10.60% If we apply this to a medium suit, which has a base scan profile of 50 dB, we get the following: Base = 50 dB Skill Modifier = 2% reduction in scan profile per level of 'Profile Dampening' (10% reduction at level 5) Complex Profile Dampener = 25% reduction in scan profile Enhanced Profile Dampener = 20% reduction in scan profile Standard Profile Dampener = 15% reduction in scan profile So a medium suit with level 5 in profile dampening and 2 complex profile dampeners will have: 50 0.9 * (1-0.25) * (1-0.250.8691) Gëê 26.42 dB scan profile This is clearly lower than the 28 dB scan precision of a prototype active scanner and the suit will not be detected. However if you have a medium suit with level 5 in profile dampening and 1 complex profile dampener and 1 enhanced profile dampener you will get the following: 50 0.9 * (1-0.25) * (1-0.200.8691) Gëê 27.88 dB scan profile This is also clearly lower than the 28 dB scan precision of a prototype active scanner and the suit should not have been detected, how ever it is detected. ( we tried a few different prototype scanners and all of them detect this suit. ) Now we assume the reason for it being detected is because of the "armour bug". In game: Complex armour plate has a movement penalty of 5%. Complex ferroscale plate has NO movement penalty how ever we assume it actually has one that is set to 0%. ( The calculation will show why we think this. ) Medium suit: 5.00 m/s 1st module, complex armour plate: 4.75 m/s 2nd module, complex armour plate: 4.54 m/s Now the weird bit, we put on a ferroscale plate. 3rd module, complex ferroscale plate: 4.64 m/s A few quick calculations to show stacking penalties: 5.00 (1-0.05) = 4.75 5.00 * (1-0.05) * (1-0.050.8691) Gëê 4.54 Now for the weird bit: 5.00 (1-0) * (1-0.050.8691) (1-0.050.5706) Gëê 4.64 As you can see here both the assumption that the ferroscale actually has a movement penalty of 0% and that it is calculated 'first in line' in the stack is confirmed. Now supposedly EVE ( and Dust ) are to apply the largest modifiers first and then the smaller ones. This leads us back to the example of a medium suit with 1 complex- & 1 enhanced profile dampener being detected by a prototype active scanner. You see if you apply the stacking penalty in the "wrong" order you will get: 50 0.9 * (1-0.20) * (1-0.25*0.8691) Gëê 28.18 dB scan profile Which would explain why the suit is, currently, being detected by a prototype active scanner.
Haerr Molon Labe. RISE of LEGION 49	Posted - 2013.10.11 17:31:00 - [6] - Quote hydraSlav's wrote: Oh, just noticed that DFT has Scan Profile as a non-stacking attribute (i guess it didn't mention stacking in the description). Your results suggest that it is stacking. Is this pretty much the consensus of the community? Also what about Scan Radius (it is also currently marked as non-stacking in DFT) Me and a corpmate did a bunch of testing with active and passive scanning and yes 'Precision Enhancers', 'Profile Dampeners' and 'Range Amplifiers' all suffer from stacking penalties.
Haerr Molon Labe. RISE of LEGION 62	Posted - 2013.10.23 15:05:00 - [7] - Quote hydraSlav's wrote: Haerr wrote: hydraSlav's wrote: Oh, just noticed that DFT has Scan Profile as a non-stacking attribute (i guess it didn't mention stacking in the description). Your results suggest that it is stacking. Is this pretty much the consensus of the community? Also what about Scan Radius (it is also currently marked as non-stacking in DFT) Me and a corpmate did a bunch of testing with active and passive scanning and yes 'Precision Enhancers', 'Profile Dampeners' and 'Range Amplifiers' all suffer from stacking penalties. Edit 1: I do not know if anyone got a confirmation that this is a bug from a dev, to be fair I do not remember anyone saying that they heard back from any dev regarding this. I am certain, how ever, that it was reported back when ferroscales were introduced. Edit 2: It was confirmed as a defect by 'CCP Cmdr Wang' back in july. Link to weekly bug reports: https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1057188#post1057188 - '[BUG] Ferroscale speed bonus?' 'xxwhitedevilxx M' reported the bug on the forums in the begining of july: https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1009079#post1009079 Thank you Haerr I've released DFT 3.4.2 which enables stacking penalty on those modules, thanks to your evidence. It also replicates the "armor bug" by giving it a minuscule negative penalty. I should have caught that one sooner If you find more such issues, please post them in the DFT thread so i can take care of it. Cheers Will do!
Haerr Molon Labe. RISE of LEGION 66	Posted - 2013.10.29 11:16:00 - [8] - Quote Base range on all Light and Scout suits change from 10 -> 16 Gallente Scout Base: 16 m +Suit L5: 24 m +Range L5: 36 m +1Complex: 52.2 m +2Complex: 72.62 m +3Complex: 91.26 m +4Complex: 102.88 m Light Frames and the other Scouts Base: 16 m +Range L5: 24 m +1Complex: 34.8 m +2Complex: 48.41 m +3Complex: 60.84 m +4Complex: 68.59 m Google Docs - documents is updated as well.
Haerr Molon Labe. RISE of LEGION 75	Posted - 2013.10.30 15:49:00 - [9] - Quote Bojo The Mighty wrote: I assume those are implicating the stacking penalty? But hot dang that's a hot scout buff (Unrelated: Looks like heavies are getting a buff as well, I think that bringing the heavy and light closer to par is a step in right direction) Sadly yes when me and Hellcab did those tests I had a gallente scout with 4 comlex range amplifiers and he turned up around 63~64 m out a bit difficult to tell exactly when since there is the fading effect on the mini map though close enough to 64.3m to tell that it has stacking penalties. If there had been no stacking penalties he would have tunred up around 99.46 m out.