How to make efficient scanners?

[Boba_Fett]

As to the OP's question, this is my scanner module, and a link to Crimson Artitist's is on that same page, take it apart and find out how it works, or slap it onto your own ship! Hope that helps!

 

[EricBlank]

Anyone clear on whether or not the "there is a jamming/cloaking ship in the sector but out signal isnt strong enough to reveal it" message ever goes away? I've tried a 1000+ block scanner array on a ship that should only need ~100, and ensured the scanner was the longest axis of that ship (165m), but this message still shows up. Is it just a bug? I am working in singleplayer and the only jamming ship in the sector is unoccupied.

 

[Nauvran]

Anyone clear on whether or not the "there is a jamming/cloaking ship in the sector but out signal isnt strong enough to reveal it" message ever goes away? I've tried a 1000+ block scanner array on a ship that should only need ~100, and ensured the scanner was the longest axis of that ship (165m), but this message still shows up. Is it just a bug? I am working in singleplayer and the only jamming ship in the sector is unoccupied.

the range of the sensors depend on what kind of sector you are in.
neutral sector: normal range
Enemy sector: decreased range
Friendly sector: improved range

Could be you were in a neutral or enemy sector?

as they mentioned somewhere above, scanners only work on ships with players in.

 

[Winterhome]

Anyone clear on whether or not the "there is a jamming/cloaking ship in the sector but out signal isnt strong enough to reveal it" message ever goes away? I've tried a 1000+ block scanner array on a ship that should only need ~100, and ensured the scanner was the longest axis of that ship (165m), but this message still shows up. Is it just a bug? I am working in singleplayer and the only jamming ship in the sector is unoccupied.

That message is currently bugged.

Even in a totally empty system it'll show up.

 

[Ithirahad]

That message is currently bugged.

Even in a totally empty system it'll show up.

Yep. If memory serves, it even comes up alongside the message you get when you successfully decloak an entity. Generally speaking, just disregard it... If there's a diamond in your nav that doesn't come up in your HUD when you select it, that's the only reliable way to tell you're dealing with someone who's radar-jammed.

 

[MacThule]

Yeah that cloaked entity message... lol - built a giant scanner-array ship and couldn't get rid of it. Whatever is done to balance cloak/jam-vs-scan contests, scan needs to be fixed to identify unknown stations and reveal shops in its range.

Efficient scanning, IMO, is all about array linear XYZ size. Scanners are system where the kind of efficiency bonus we see in the generator system actually sort of reflects real world dynamics - larger antenna arrays are going to be able to detect a broader spectrum of radiations. I think scanner efficiency should probably benefit from the same kind of fast scaling efficiency bonus that power generators do, rather than something based on percentage of ship mass. Either way works though - the scanning array on an AWAC is probably close to 10% of the jet's total mass. I just think mass is already being pulled in too many directions, and until multiplayer server performance can better support fleet operations, one more 10% system is not helpful.

I see the ECM/EW contest as a separate issue from scanner efficiency; it's about how efficient scanners and efficient jammers/cloakers interact.

First we need to ECM (jam/cloak) to have a cooldown timer like every other tech in the game. Make its recharge speed based on some function of ship mass and/or available power, whether or not power draw is actually increased during recharge/cooldown, because both ECM systems are currently single-block systems it seems like the best indicator of how efficient and committed the build is to ECM would be its mass-to-power ratio. Also - effective jamming reduces the need for armor/shields, therefore it might be nice to see a measure of added realism where the mass of any hull or armor specifically increases the power draw required to cloak/jam, because these dense, solid, reflective components are much harder to hide than lighter, less dense materials. And I don't think scanning should de-activate the target's cloak/jammer - it should just reveal the target to the scanner and allies. Then the vessel using the ECM wouldn't always know how effectively it was hiding.

ECM/EW contest:
Way I see this, there are a few ways to create a countering system that will balance out Electronic Counter Measures & Electronic Warfare.

• Time-based: Both ECM and EW systems would have recharge times based on the builder's level of commitment to that system, and the contest would be about time - the ship with the fastest recharge time will dominate the EW contest. This is honestly a pretty unrealistic system to me, even though it's standard video game fare. Electronic warfare is pretty much constant, IRL, and more about power and range. Radar doesn't "recharge," it just goes and goes.
  
• Range-based: It would be possible to eliminate the cooldown of scan so it can match current ECM systems, and instead make its efficiency about mass and range. I think this would actually be a more realistic system than "timed scanning." Essentially the efficiency of the scanner array would compete against the efficiency of the ECM ship with the scanner array gaining traction as range in meters is reduced. So like under 1Km the scanner would not suffer any penalty to its detection power, but at 5Km it might be competing against jammers at 80% or something, and at 20Km it might only be detecting at 30%.
  
• Power-based: Another fairly realistic contest would be to make the contest about whoever pours more power into their system.

There are other dynamics that could be used to resolve the ECM/EW contest. Personally I like Range-based, because I think that most scanning is about electromagnetic radiation, and this falls off in a squared curve making range a very big issue in electronic warfare. Plus the scanner cooldown thing is a bit silly - current instruments don't take time to recharge between "sweeps." Making the contest about range and efficiency would feel more authentic to me. Especially because a no-cooldown scanner matching no-cooldown jammers/cloakers require a lot of ACTIVE clicking. Much like the active process of charging a jump drive, this seems like it would effectively simulate the efforts required during an ongoing electronic warfare contest.