tracking stations coverage

[andrea69 (OP)]

I've made some tests, and it looks like the coverage of tracking stations grows exponentially increasing the number of stations. With just a few stations on a body the coverage is ok, but putting 20 or 30 stations on the inner planet of a system gives you a coverage of the whole system (I made the test with strength 50 targets). Just to make an example, with 10 stations I had a coverage of 100m km, with 20 stations it grew to 1b km, with 30 10b km.
So it looks far more convenient to concentrate everything on one body, rather than distribute the stations across the system, as it should be, I think.

[Nathan_]

Each DSTS is not just the dish, but also its associated signal processing, and having more dishes lets not only each dish face a smaller slice of the sky, but also lets the signal processing capability focus on that as well, so that does make logical sense that 10 dishes brought together would have a greater range than 10 dishes spread out.

[Sloshmonger]

DSTS have a similar detection method to Thermal/EM sensors, where 1 installation with tech Planetary Sensor Strength 400 would detect a Strenght 100 thermal contact at 20M km, but 4 installations will detect at 80M km, and 20 installations at 400M km.

So the layout of your planet-based sensor network with 20 installations could be based off of one inner planet.  If, however, you have colonies at planets that can be up to 300M km apart, at times you may have only 100M km of overlap, so in some cases it'd be adventageous to split those DSTS up to give all installations adequate coverage.

[Bgreman]

I've made some tests, and it looks like the coverage of tracking stations grows exponentially increasing the number of stations. With just a few stations on a body the coverage is ok, but putting 20 or 30 stations on the inner planet of a system gives you a coverage of the whole system (I made the test with strength 50 targets). Just to make an example, with 10 stations I had a coverage of 100m km, with 20 stations it grew to 1b km, with 30 10b km.
So it looks far more convenient to concentrate everything on one body, rather than distribute the stations across the system, as it should be, I think.

If this is how it is actually working for you, then it is a bug.  Doubling the number of sensors should just double the range.

[andrea69 (OP)]

If this is how it is actually working for you, then it is a bug.  Doubling the number of sensors should just double the range.

Yes, it is working like that. If it is a bug, it makes sense 

[andrea69 (OP)]

DSTS have a similar detection method to Thermal/EM sensors, where 1 installation with tech Planetary Sensor Strength 400 would detect a Strenght 100 thermal contact at 20M km, but 4 installations will detect at 80M km, and 20 installations at 400M km.

It is not working like that

So the layout of your planet-based sensor network with 20 installations could be based off of one inner planet.  If, however, you have colonies at planets that can be up to 300M km apart, at times you may have only 100M km of overlap, so in some cases it'd be adventageous to split those DSTS up to give all installations adequate coverage.

I agree, it should be as you say, but it is never adventageous to split the sensors among different planets. If I put my 20 installations on one planet I can cover a radius of 1000m km, while if I split it on two planets, each one covers just 100m km.

[sloanjh]

I have a vague memory from a year or so ago that a bug in DSTS was found.  I think the bug had something to do with the range growing faster than linearly with the number of stations, but I don't remember the details.  IIRC, it was found when somebody put a large number  (e.g. 100x) of DSTS on Earth and started getting overflows.  I don't remember if it was fixed.  You might try dumpster diving in The Academy and/or in Bugs....

John

[Steve Walmsley]

I've made some tests, and it looks like the coverage of tracking stations grows exponentially increasing the number of stations. With just a few stations on a body the coverage is ok, but putting 20 or 30 stations on the inner planet of a system gives you a coverage of the whole system (I made the test with strength 50 targets). Just to make an example, with 10 stations I had a coverage of 100m km, with 20 stations it grew to 1b km, with 30 10b km.
So it looks far more convenient to concentrate everything on one body, rather than distribute the stations across the system, as it should be, I think.

Could you check the version number for your game (look on the Game window)? The game used to work as described above but I changed it a couple of years ago so that the planetary sensor strength increases linearly. To make absolutely sure, you could check the sensor strength for the population on the top right of the summary tab on the F2 window. It should be equal to number of deep space tracking stations x planetary sensor strength tech.

Steve

[Person012345]

Hmm, a question on this - I have "strength 20,000" planetary sensors. 50 installations, I guess they are strength 400, either way the economy screen tells me they are strength 20,000. As I understand how passive mechanics should work, this should mean that I detect a strength 1000 object at 20,000,000,000 km right? Well, I find that when I "show passive sensor ranges", it shows that it will detect a strength 980 object at around 3 light years. Is this working as intended and I've misunderstood something?

[Bgreman]

Which of the three multiplier radio buttons in the "passive sensors" block do you have ticked?

[Person012345]

x10, but under x1 it's at 98 (IE. the x10 is displaying strength 980).

[andrea69 (OP)]

Could you check the version number for your game (look on the Game window)? The game used to work as described above but I changed it a couple of years ago so that the planetary sensor strength increases linearly. To make absolutely sure, you could check the sensor strength for the population on the top right of the summary tab on the F2 window. It should be equal to number of deep space tracking stations x planetary sensor strength tech.

Steve

I'm playing with 5.60. And the sensor strenght indicated on the F2 window is correct, I mean it grows proportionally. But in the F3 window it does not.

[Bgreman]

Could you check the version number for your game (look on the Game window)? The game used to work as described above but I changed it a couple of years ago so that the planetary sensor strength increases linearly. To make absolutely sure, you could check the sensor strength for the population on the top right of the summary tab on the F2 window. It should be equal to number of deep space tracking stations x planetary sensor strength tech.

Steve

Steve, I think I might have some insight into this, in case it's still a problem.  While you may have changed the actual detection routines (and thus, in game terms, ships will be detected at the proper distances), it would seem the display of the sensor range rings still uses the old calculation.

I am still using 5.6, so perhaps it has been fixed since, but I made a test with a single DSTS up to 30 DSTS, with Planetary Sensor Strength 250.


(Click for larger)

Edit: I just ran some more tests that convince me the detection routine itself is working properly (detection range = planetary_sensor_strength * num_DSTS * 1000 * target_thermal_signature).  I took a hostile TG, figured out how far it was from the location of the DSTS, and then adjusted its speed until it disappeared / reappeared on sensors, which happened at the range given by the above formula.  It looks like only the display of the range rings is wrong.  Which is annoying, but less annoying than if the detection routine was bugged.

[Steve Walmsley]

I was fairly sure I had already fixed this so I checked the code and confirmed it. It must have happened after v5.60

Steve

[Zatsuza]

I can agree with having strong sensory installations on a major planet or colony, but I think DSTS should be... exactly that. Deep space tracking stations. I want my listening posts on the moons of saturn to pick up stuff coming in from deep space. (of course mostly for RP reasons only, and in other very spread out systems listening posts on asteroids or comets in the interstellar gulf could still give you an acceptable early warning system.)