• -77-
  • Agent
  • Offline

Topic: Do geo scanning caches scan on the z axis (elevation)

Forgot to Screen shot this, using a geoscanner with related skills that make it 90% accurate. For cache hunting

Shot a few R50s got my bearing head in that "correct direction switched to R30s when closer.. Continued my bearing got just inside of 1000m switched to R10s and noticed the artifact should be near a hill top. Headed up the hill top and started scanning again and noticed a 300-400 meter variance of where the scans were reporting item vs where cashe was on the back side of hill.. All of the original spots that I had Waypointed were with in 10m difference except the 3 I had shot while on the hill side.

Is the Geoscanning on the X-Y axis only?
If it does include Z axis I don't think its properly equating the drop or gain distance.
If its not including the Z axis I belive this to be a bug as it results in "overly" inaccurate data displayed in the scanner data while on a elevated or defiled position.

I understand that with out 100% accuracy on the scanner its possible to receive varriances but this was the biggest and noticable inaccuracy I've had since modding/training my skills up to 90%. 300m variance in 3 shots is not a 10% variation.

FFS please keep your IMBA posts in the proper forum
  • CIR
  • Agent
  • Offline

Re: Do geo scanning caches scan on the z axis (elevation)

In my experience, with 109% accuracy, caches are about where I would expect. Recently I had a scan show 114 meters away. down an impassable slope, clicking on the tile where I expected it to be showed 113 m in the targeting window. After I drove around and down, it was 23 m left of my selection; which was parallel to the selection.

I know if I try to lock something that has a large z varience, I get an error. It could be that z is just generally ignored, and they have that in there so they don't have to calculate it for anything including combat. If that's the case, then no jump jets sad

  • *
  • Agent
  • Offline

Re: Do geo scanning caches scan on the z axis (elevation)

Khadia Khan wrote:

Forgot to Screen shot this, using a geoscanner with related skills that make it 90% accurate. For cache hunting

Shot a few R50s got my bearing head in that "correct direction switched to R30s when closer.. Continued my bearing got just inside of 1000m switched to R10s and noticed the artifact should be near a hill top. Headed up the hill top and started scanning again and noticed a 300-400 meter variance of where the scans were reporting item vs where cashe was on the back side of hill.. All of the original spots that I had Waypointed were with in 10m difference except the 3 I had shot while on the hill side.

Is the Geoscanning on the X-Y axis only?
If it does include Z axis I don't think its properly equating the drop or gain distance.
If its not including the Z axis I belive this to be a bug as it results in "overly" inaccurate data displayed in the scanner data while on a elevated or defiled position.

I understand that with out 100% accuracy on the scanner its possible to receive varriances but this was the biggest and noticable inaccuracy I've had since modding/training my skills up to 90%. 300m variance in 3 shots is not a 10% variation.

As far as I can determine distances are always measured in the X/Y plane and do not include deviation along the Z axis.

  • TM-WW
  • Agent
  • Offline

Re: Do geo scanning caches scan on the z axis (elevation)

Alatari wrote:

As far as I can determine distances are always measured in the X/Y plane and do not include deviation along the Z axis.

I dont think this is true since you do get an error "Target out of range" when you are in range on your landmarks but up on a hill.

If you are talking about the distances that are displayed, then yeah that's true.

  • CIR
  • Agent
  • Offline

Re: Do geo scanning caches scan on the z axis (elevation)

I found a Cache at location 1260,917

From 1059,1073 distance was 2609.03m (I have 100+ % Accuracy); This location is relatively higher than the cache.

Computed 2D distance between 1059,1073 and 1260,917 is 2544.35 m a 64m Delta

From 1197,849 distance was 927m

Computed distance between 1197,849 and 1260,917 is 925.52m a 1.48m Delta

This scan was obviously close, and made from a relavtive position 'below' the cache.

The other difference is scans were made with 5k and 1k loads.

Just to mix it up, a third scan was taken at 'about' the same vertical height;

969,1146 Distance given 3764.91m Calculated distance: 3704.24m 60.67m Delta

From above: 64 m 5% Difference between calculated and displayed
From ~same: 60.67 m 2% Difference between calculated and displayed
From below: 1.47 m .2% Difference between calculated and displayed

Each Tile is 10m from center to center. When measuring from tile 1,1 to tile 1,2, you'll get 10m, but from 1,1 to 2,2 you get 14m.

The further away, and the greater the 'angle', the higher the error.

This is proven out with one last scan, done at

976,915 (which is almost directly along the 'y' axis at the same elevation as the 927 m scan)
Displayed distance: 2834.66 m Calc. distance 2840.06 m which is only a 5.34 m delta and again a .2%

So two scans from the same elevation have the same % difference...

The conclusion... 'Z' may play a role in determining the Displayed distance, as the % difference did change with changes in elevation, but remained the same when repeated from the same elevation.

Why I say 'may' is that the 60ish m from the same level should'nt have any % difference if the ONLY thing was Z.

I think the 'angle' of incidence also adds error, as the 'same level' scan was done at about a 45 degree angle the grid. If you stand in one spot, and click around you, you'll see that you get a 9-10m reading from tiles 90 degress to the grid, while at 45 degree's you get 14-15m; which is correct as it's displaying the hypotenuse from center-center.

In the end, even with 100% accuracy, you need to seperate your scans by at least 10% (20% would be better) off the originally displayed value if you are trying to triangluate.

  • JOKE
  • Champion
  • Offline

Re: Do geo scanning caches scan on the z axis (elevation)

Bring back the cubes...please

One man army
http://www.perp-kill.net/related/239910
  • CIR
  • Agent
  • Offline

Re: Do geo scanning caches scan on the z axis (elevation)

Khadia Khan wrote:

Is the Geoscanning on the X-Y axis only?
If it does include Z axis I don't think its properly equating the drop or gain distance.
If its not including the Z axis I belive this to be a bug as it results in "overly" inaccurate data displayed in the scanner data while on a elevated or defiled position.

I agree, visually the height differences don't match with the deltas I found through experimentation. I think the 'error' is introduced in the way it computes distance based center-center on tiles.

Using straight cartesian math

d=sqrt ( a^2 + b^2) where a = (x1-x0) and b = (y1-y0)

Not sure how the game is computing it.

  • -77-
  • Agent
  • Offline

Re: Do geo scanning caches scan on the z axis (elevation)

Yea Flat map straight line center to center I believe is the answer.... Nice math work tho

FFS please keep your IMBA posts in the proper forum
  • IG
  • Agent
  • Offline

Re: Do geo scanning caches scan on the z axis (elevation)

Arga wrote:

I found a Cache at location 1260,917

From 1059,1073 distance was 2609.03m (I have 100+ % Accuracy); This location is relatively higher than the cache.

Computed 2D distance between 1059,1073 and 1260,917 is 2544.35 m a 64m Delta

From 1197,849 distance was 927m

Computed distance between 1197,849 and 1260,917 is 925.52m a 1.48m Delta

This scan was obviously close, and made from a relavtive position 'below' the cache.

The other difference is scans were made with 5k and 1k loads.

Just to mix it up, a third scan was taken at 'about' the same vertical height;

969,1146 Distance given 3764.91m Calculated distance: 3704.24m 60.67m Delta

From above: 64 m 5% Difference between calculated and displayed
From ~same: 60.67 m 2% Difference between calculated and displayed
From below: 1.47 m .2% Difference between calculated and displayed

Each Tile is 10m from center to center. When measuring from tile 1,1 to tile 1,2, you'll get 10m, but from 1,1 to 2,2 you get 14m.

The further away, and the greater the 'angle', the higher the error.

This is proven out with one last scan, done at

976,915 (which is almost directly along the 'y' axis at the same elevation as the 927 m scan)
Displayed distance: 2834.66 m Calc. distance 2840.06 m which is only a 5.34 m delta and again a .2%

So two scans from the same elevation have the same % difference...

The conclusion... 'Z' may play a role in determining the Displayed distance, as the % difference did change with changes in elevation, but remained the same when repeated from the same elevation.

Why I say 'may' is that the 60ish m from the same level should'nt have any % difference if the ONLY thing was Z.

I think the 'angle' of incidence also adds error, as the 'same level' scan was done at about a 45 degree angle the grid. If you stand in one spot, and click around you, you'll see that you get a 9-10m reading from tiles 90 degress to the grid, while at 45 degree's you get 14-15m; which is correct as it's displaying the hypotenuse from center-center.

In the end, even with 100% accuracy, you need to seperate your scans by at least 10% (20% would be better) off the originally displayed value if you are trying to triangluate.


You should be able to compensate for the "angle of incidence". With the difference in distance between side-by-side tiles and diagonal tiles being approx. 4m, determining the angle of the hypotenuse should allow you to add the variance to the distance.

d=sqrt ( a^2 + b^2) where a = (x1-x0) and b = (y1-y0)

For this example, assume a is greater than b.
You would obtain the angle by determining what percentage b is of a.
(100% would indicate a 45 degree angle)

Angle = (a/(b*100))
meters per square = 10 + (4 * .Angle)
Distance = (d * meters per square)

I have not tested this yet, just a thought.

  • CIR
  • Agent
  • Offline

Re: Do geo scanning caches scan on the z axis (elevation)

The targeting does for sure include the full 3d vector distance, so if you click on a tile then move, you'll need to be alert to the elevation difference.

  • BKK
  • Agent
  • Offline

Re: Do geo scanning caches scan on the z axis (elevation)

i like it actually - i take my alt account place it at the first 5km scan of the artifact im going after, set the radar marking range to the displayed distance

then i find out the direction to go, and walk/drive until i see my yellow dot on the circle line - and yesterday i did my last scan standing exactly on the artifact. the distance on landmark list was exactly the one of the first scan.

because that circle doesnt take Z coordinates into account

*Disclaimer: This post can contain strong sarcasm or cynical remarks. keep that in mind!
Whining - It's amazing how fast your trivial concerns will disappear

12 Reply by Alexander (edited by Alexander 2011-06-02 23:21:47)

  • *
  • Agent
  • Offline

Re: Do geo scanning caches scan on the z axis (elevation)

I use a program to give me the location of the artifact with the results of two+ scans.

3 scans can find all artifacts in the area. It's rather nice to have 6 locations pin pointed in less than 3 minutes. smile

  • CIR
  • Agent
  • Offline

Re: Do geo scanning caches scan on the z axis (elevation)

Nice smile

  • CIR
  • Agent
  • Offline

Re: Do geo scanning caches scan on the z axis (elevation)

Alex,

That's where this started for me, was when I tried to create an excel sheet to do this, and got errors in the computed and true locations, not much as you see, but enough so I couldn't just walk up to each cache sad

  • BKK
  • Agent
  • Offline

Re: Do geo scanning caches scan on the z axis (elevation)

Alexander wrote:

I use a program to give me the location of the artifact with the results of two+ scans.

3 scans can find all artifacts in the area. It's rather nice to have 6 locations pin pointed in less than 3 minutes. smile

ah, alexander - you seem to miss the fun of that system.

thats like typing "spawn x observer mechs" in console.

but its not unexpected for you to use and external software/script/macro to gain an advantage ingame.

*Disclaimer: This post can contain strong sarcasm or cynical remarks. keep that in mind!
Whining - It's amazing how fast your trivial concerns will disappear
  • IG
  • Agent
  • Offline

Re: Do geo scanning caches scan on the z axis (elevation)

Annihilator wrote:

i like it actually - i take my alt account place it at the first 5km scan of the artifact im going after, set the radar marking range to the displayed distance

then i find out the direction to go, and walk/drive until i see my yellow dot on the circle line - and yesterday i did my last scan standing exactly on the artifact. the distance on landmark list was exactly the one of the first scan.

because that circle doesnt take Z coordinates into account

If you triangulate, and you set each of your three charges off at a different altitude, the Z axis will be averaged into your distance calculations. I'm guessing that is how Alexander (or rather his program) does it.

  • *
  • Agent
  • Offline

Re: Do geo scanning caches scan on the z axis (elevation)

Arga wrote:

The targeting does for sure include the full 3d vector distance, so if you click on a tile then move, you'll need to be alert to the elevation difference.

Targeting does take Z distance into account; but I've yet to see any evidence that artifact scanning takes Z distance into account.

  • BKK
  • Agent
  • Offline

Re: Do geo scanning caches scan on the z axis (elevation)

Der Feind wrote:

If you triangulate, and you set each of your three charges off at a different altitude, the Z axis will be averaged into your distance calculations. I'm guessing that is how Alexander (or rather his program) does it.

no need too

two scans give you two circles on the map - the artifact is exaclty where they intersect.
The distance delta between the two scans can be used to determine which of the two intersection points is the right one.

because you do those scans from up to 5km away, and the Z-difference is most times not more then a few hundred meters -> thats not enough to affect target coordinates.

Triangulation -> you put in two coordinates with two distances and a deleta, and get the coordinates of the artifact.

Arga - for you have set the zero for your sheet right - coordinate 0,0 is top left

*Disclaimer: This post can contain strong sarcasm or cynical remarks. keep that in mind!
Whining - It's amazing how fast your trivial concerns will disappear
  • CIR
  • Agent
  • Offline

Re: Do geo scanning caches scan on the z axis (elevation)

The more I think about it, the more likely it is that I copied the numbers down wrong. I was describing my rig setup to someone, explaining how the TV is great for graphics but reading text is difficult; so I'm going to repeat my testing.

On that note, PLEASE please please do what EVE can't, and allow me to change the text size of GUI windows! Trying to read 6pt type from 3 meters away is impossible after your over age 40 big_smile

  • *
  • Agent
  • Offline

Re: Do geo scanning caches scan on the z axis (elevation)

Alatari wrote:
Arga wrote:

The targeting does for sure include the full 3d vector distance, so if you click on a tile then move, you'll need to be alert to the elevation difference.

Targeting does take Z distance into account; but I've yet to see any evidence that artifact scanning takes Z distance into account.

Thought I'd double check to make sure; results are here.

The altitutes were obtained from the raw altitude data obtained from the game data, the various 3D distances are for different Z resolutions. Finally the last line is the calculated Z resolution from the scan data. All scans were done with my Termis, geoscanner accuracy of 93.10% (which gives a scan accuracy of 1.73%)). The site itself was a salvage III, which resulted in a Level 7 decoder as well a number of other goodies. smile

Conclusion is that the elevation has no effect on the distances reported for artifacts.