## Passive Targeting Modules: The Anamoly

Forum rules
This forum can be viewed by the public.

Member

### Passive Targeting Modules: The Anamoly

Greetings all,

At some point in time I had noticed the Passive Targeting Systems, and bought one back when I was a trial to simply figure what it was. Cheap enough, anyways.

Recently I became interested in the principle difference between the Passive Targeting System(s) I and the Tech II variant. It does appear that I am not the only one that has been curious about this difference: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.as ... ts&t=24734

Accordingly, the only difference between the Tech I variants (all Meta levels) and the Tech II are the following: CPU requirements; price; and the Duration. Let's list all of them:

Code:
NAME______________________________TECH LEVEL____VOLUME________ACTIV.__HP_______CPU_____DURATION____META LEVEL___PG41F Veiled Targeting Unit         Tech I        5.00 m3       5 GJ    40 HP    17 tf   5.00 s      Level 3      1 MWIndirect Target Acquisition I     Tech I        5.00 m3       5 GJ    40 HP    18 tf   5.00 s      Level 2      1 MWPassive Targeter I                Tech I        25.00 m3      5 GJ    40 HP    20 tf   5.00 s      Level 0      1 MWPassive Targeting Array I         Tech I        5.00 m3       5 GJ    40 HP    16 tf   5.00 s      Level 4      1 MWSuppressed Targeting System I     Tech I        5.00 m3       5 GJ    40 HP    19 tf   5.00 s      Level 1      1 MWPassive Targeter II               Tech II       5.00 m3       7 GJ    40 HP    25 tf   10.00 s     Level 5      1 MW

I looked around in Pyfa and EFT for "hidden" information such as heat stats or anything like that (these modules cannot be overheated) but there weren't any visible.

Clearly, this kind of question requires in-game testing. To facilitate this, I equipped a Heron with a set of each, namely the Suppressed Targeting System I and the Passive Targeter II. To help make a redbox on my testing companion, I used a 5W Infectious Power System Malfunction energy neutralizer, as it is relatively harmless, and a J5 Prototype Warp Disrupter.

These modules are easy to use. Assuming you have no targets locked at all, click on the passive targeting module. It will start flashing. Then click on the object in space or the entry on your overview, and then the module will cycle for a lock.

Let's list the questions I have about these modules:

1) What is the primary difference between the Passive Targeter II and the Meta modules?
2) Are these modules affected by cloaking devices? A Prototype Cloaking Device I and the Improved Cloaking Device II reduce your scan resolution, but the Covert Ops Cloaking Device II does not.
3) Are these modules affected by Sensor Boosters?
4) Will the target see a yellow box after the end of the cycle duration, or ever?
5) If the target does see a yellow box eventually, is there enough time to run a cargo and ship scanner check and unlock the target fast enough to avoid alerting the target?
6) If I started a normal target lock on someone, then activated the passive targeting system afterwards, would the yellow box go away?
7) If I had two or more passive targeting modules, can I target lock another target on top of the one I've already passively locked?

For normal ship operations, I must confess I have very little experience in EVE total, but I strongly suspect that passive targeting systems are only used for scouts or special ships fitted for extremely high intial barrage DPS (usually with artillary, I believe) to get the first shot off. As for scouts, I have reason to believe that they would be scouting possible targets OR for watching passerbys for gank* targets. The high-alpha strike I reckon would be more of something you would see in low sec rather than null or wormhole space (often called w-space), as the module itself if it is not used specifically for the tactic that is desired, is a waste of mid slot (especially with ships with few midslots, like the Gankshi---I mean Catalyst).

I solicited the help of Ahmet Miras and Coronzon Crowe to pursue this great and noble quest.

Now it's time to get to our results:

1) What is the primary difference between the Passive Targeter II and the Meta modules?
A: First, price. Prices are approximate Jita 4-4 (also known as the Land of Many Wrecks, or perhaps Just Increase Tactical Awareness) at the time I released this write-up.

Code:
NAME______________________________TECH LEVEL_______PRICE41F Veiled Targeting Unit         Level 3          1500 ISKIndirect Target Acquisition I     Level 2          760 ISKPassive Targeter I                Level 0          47000 ISKPassive Targeting Array I         Level 4          4900 ISKSuppressed Targeting System I     Level 1          620 ISKPassive Targeter II               Level 5          700000 ISK (gee I bought mine in Jita 4-4 for 548999 ISK)

The Meta 0 module will have a higher price because it is used to make the Tech II variant.

Secondly, CPU requirements. Those have been listed earlier.
Thirdly, lock time. Observe the chart below of the two modules I tested:

Code:
NAME______________________________TECH LEVEL_______STANDARD LOCK TIME________LOCK TIME BOOSTED________LOCK TIME W/CLOAKSuppressed Targeting System I     Level 1          5.2sec                    4.2sec                   7.9secPassive Targeter II               Level 5          4.7sec                    3.6sec                   8.8sec

I used a Heron. I have Long Range Targeting III and Target Management IV, neither of which changed much in this test as they don't reduce my scan time or increase my scan resolution. The booster was a Prototype Sensor Booster I with a Scan Resolution Script. The cloak was an Improved Cloaking Device II. I used a stop watch which started the moment I clicked on the target (activated module first, then clicked on the target) and stopped it the second the target showed up in my target list box. The target was a Catalyst without a Microwarpdrive active. I'm not sure if he had any modules to increase his signature radius: considering a Catalyst has only two midslots, I highly doubt he had a shield tank. Either way, the figures are for comparative purposes anyways.

You'll notice that the Tech II module acquired a target lock about 0.5 seconds faster than the Tech I module, except when the cloak was equipped. The Prototype Cloaking Device I and the Improved Cloaking Device II reduce your scan resolution, meaning it takes longer for your ship to target lock something, but the Covert Ops Cloaking Device II does not. This penalty applies if the module is equipped, whether or not it is online or not.

As for the Module Duration time listed in the Attributes, I cannot discern what that actually means, other than it takes longer for the module to cycle, which as my testing indicated, means practically nothing.

2) Are these modules affected by cloaking devices?
A: Yes they are. See the results listed above. A Prototype Cloaking Device I and the Improved Cloaking Device II reduce your scan resolution, but the Covert Ops Cloaking Device II does not.

3) Are these modules affected by Sensor Boosters?
A: Absolutely. See the results above for a comparison.

4) Will the target see a yellow box after the end of the cycle duration, or ever?
A: Never. For part of the test I waited with a lock for about 90 seconds, and my companion did not indicate to me that a yellow box ever occured. For a hostile module, the target will see from his side, nothing, nothing, then suddenly a red box. After the module which aggresses the target is removed or deactivated, the red box disappears, and there won't be a yellow box in its place.

5) If the target does see a yellow box eventually, is there enough time to run a cargo and ship scanner check and unlock the target fast enough to avoid alerting the target?
A: Not applicable, as per the previous answer.

6) If I started a normal target lock on someone, then activated the passive targeting system afterwards, would the yellow box go away?
A: No. But see the next question for something interesting.

7) If I had two or more passive targeting modules, can I target lock another target on top of the one I've already passively locked?
A: If you start them all at the same time, which can be difficult, then yes you can passively lock multiple targets at once, as long as you work very quickly. I suggest using the keyboard to help.

Otherwise, if you passively lock one target, you cannot passively lock another new one. In the same context, if you already have a target lock on something or someone, you cannot use the passive targeting module to acquire a new target: rather, the passive targeting module will apply its "effect" for one cycle to the target you have locked already, which is effectively wasted. Therefore, you must unlock all your targets, then use the passive targeting system module to acquire a target "passively".

Yes. That is wierd.

So I hope this helped some questions people might have had about these modules. I did notice this forum usually has a heavy injection of pictures or GIFs. Here is my contribution of my cat:

Oh wait. I don't have a cat. Carry on.

*Definition of gank: I consider the definition of ganking to be that of attacking high-value targets in high security space who are not war targets, criminals, suspects or other normal legally engagable targets. Principally employed as a practice of using specialized fit destroyers for maximum alpha damage knowing that CONCORD won't respond immedately, and having another ship scoop up any loot and make off with it. A lot of people call a regular ambush a gank, which I consider a stretch of wordplay. A stealth bomber ambushing a ice mining Exhumer isn't really "gank" in my eyes unless it's in high security space AND the target has considerable value to it (100m+ ISK pod or the like).

Director of Education

### Re: Passive Targeting Modules: The Anamoly

Nice work, very impressive.
Scientia potentia est.
If a statement I made seems offensive to you, please be assured that this was not my intent.

Campus Manager

### Re: Passive Targeting Modules: The Anamoly

K950 wrote:4) Will the target see a yellow box after the end of the cycle duration, or ever?
A: Never. For part of the test I waited with a lock for about 90 seconds, and my companion did not indicate to me that a yellow box ever occured. For a hostile module, the target will see from his side, nothing, nothing, then suddenly a red box. After the module which aggresses the target is removed or deactivated, the red box disappears, and there won't be a yellow box in its place.
On a related note, while non-hostile modules like cargo/ship scanners won't give you a red box from the scanner, it will show the module animation (and sound) coming from the scanner hitting your ship. So if you pay attention and zoom in enough on your own ship, you can spot the passive scans visibly.

Btw, love your inquisitive nature and the fact you posted this so others could learn from your tests

Member

### Re: Passive Targeting Modules: The Anamoly

This is a wonderful write up. I have always been curious about that module, but never seemed to have had a reason to use one or look into what the target will see when using it.

Gives me some ideas of some rather fun games to play with people out in Low and Null.

Member

### Re: Passive Targeting Modules: The Anamoly

This is really awesome; thanks for posting this. I always figuring the passive targeter was just for gankers to scan cargo but this study raises some interesting possibilities.
Señor Personnel Officer

Member

### Re: Passive Targeting Modules: The Anamoly

Alto DeRaqwar wrote:This is really awesome; thanks for posting this. I always figuring the passive targeter was just for gankers to scan cargo but this study raises some interesting possibilities.

It's a good write-up, but really, the module is still as niche as it ever was.

Member

### Re: Passive Targeting Modules: The Anamoly

Daniel Wittaker wrote:
Alto DeRaqwar wrote:This is really awesome; thanks for posting this. I always figuring the passive targeter was just for gankers to scan cargo but this study raises some interesting possibilities.

It's a good write-up, but really, the module is still as niche as it ever was.

To be fair; niche is what I'm looking at. Have missed several opportunities to alpha station campers due to them docking up as soon as I yellow box. Totally had a blank on using passive targeting until K950 mention it in his study.
Señor Personnel Officer

Member

### Re: Passive Targeting Modules: The Anamoly

Thank you for your research! There is only one measelly paragraph on the wiki about passive targeters - would you like to work your results into the page, in order to make them more accessible to the wider EVE community?

Member

### Re: Passive Targeting Modules: The Anamoly

Noemie Belacqua wrote:Thank you for your research! There is only one measelly paragraph on the wiki about passive targeters - would you like to work your results into the page, in order to make them more accessible to the wider EVE community?

Probably more sensible to do this as a link or call out from the targeting page, as there is quite a lot of detail here.
Daniel Wittaker wrote:You could have a bright career ahead of you in Goonforums. That's some upvote-quality Helldump posting. Well done, sir.

Member

### Re: Passive Targeting Modules: The Anamoly

Alto DeRaqwar wrote:
Daniel Wittaker wrote:
Alto DeRaqwar wrote:This is really awesome; thanks for posting this. I always figuring the passive targeter was just for gankers to scan cargo but this study raises some interesting possibilities.

It's a good write-up, but really, the module is still as niche as it ever was.

To be fair; niche is what I'm looking at. Have missed several opportunities to alpha station campers due to them docking up as soon as I yellow box. Totally had a blank on using passive targeting until K950 mention it in his study.

You can lock with turrets hot and accomplish the same thing.

Member

### Re: Passive Targeting Modules: The Anamoly

Alto DeRaqwar wrote:
Daniel Wittaker wrote:To be fair; niche is what I'm looking at. Have missed several opportunities to alpha station campers due to them docking up as soon as I yellow box. Totally had a blank on using passive targeting until K950 mention it in his study.

I have more than once thought about visiting one of the trade hub systems with a nice fleet and jamming the crap out of them. The fleet would dock up first, slowly, one by one. A bait ship fit for collossal EHP to make them activate their weapons timers comes out. Then 3 Griffins/Blackbirds would show up at optimal and jam the crap of them. Then the fleet undocks and brings on the kapow. Ideally the bait ship would fit for mega-strong armor tank (can have a repper fleet waiting in the next system ready to jump in, or have them docked, waiting to undock) and fit for the maximum number of warp scramblers.

Member

### Re: Passive Targeting Modules: The Anamoly

f*ck the armor tank, to start. Use a hull tank. Reason for that is twofold. One, hull is a lot more enticing to keep them aggress'd. Two, the ships that fit really strong armor tanks are obvious. The ships that can fit bullshit-strong hull tanks are not.

Two, forget bringing the fleet in and docking it up. That's not what you want. You want a wormhole leading into the hub. They're going to watch you stream past from OOC alts on the in-gates. Wormholes, nobody every bothers to check.

Fit the bait ship cheap because 50/50 you're going to lose it anyway. And you don't want to have to sacrifice tackle in order to save the bait, that kind of defeats the purpose of bait.

SPOILER WARNING!
[Dominix, Baited]Damage Control IIReinforced Bulkheads IIReinforced Bulkheads IIReinforced Bulkheads IIReinforced Bulkheads IIReinforced Bulkheads IIReinforced Bulkheads IILarge Micro Jump DriveJ5b Phased Prototype Warp Scrambler IJ5b Phased Prototype Warp Scrambler IX5 Prototype Engine EnervatorX5 Prototype Engine EnervatorHeavy Unstable Power Fluctuator IHeavy Unstable Power Fluctuator IHeavy Unstable Power Fluctuator IHeavy Unstable Power Fluctuator IMedium Unstable Power Fluctuator IMedium Unstable Power Fluctuator ILarge Transverse Bulkhead ILarge Transverse Bulkhead ILarge Transverse Bulkhead I

206k EHP, 236m isk. You can fit more heavy neuts, but the medium ones have a faster cycle time more conducive to GTFOing.

SPOILER WARNING!
[Brutix, Bait]Reinforced Bulkheads IIReinforced Bulkheads IIReinforced Bulkheads IIReinforced Bulkheads IIReinforced Bulkheads IIDamage Control II50MN Quad LiF Restrained MicrowarpdriveMedium Micro Jump DriveJ5b Phased Prototype Warp Scrambler IX5 Prototype Engine EnervatorModal Neutron Particle Accelerator I, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge MModal Neutron Particle Accelerator I, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge MModal Neutron Particle Accelerator I, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge MModal Neutron Particle Accelerator I, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge MModal Neutron Particle Accelerator I, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge MModal Neutron Particle Accelerator I, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge M[empty high slot]Medium Transverse Bulkhead IMedium Transverse Bulkhead IMedium Transverse Bulkhead I

95k EHP, 60m isk. And 400 DPS before drones.

Member

### Re: Passive Targeting Modules: The Anamoly

I thought about the hull tank principle just after I made that post ... you are right in that respect. A Damage Control II and Reinforced Bulkheads sound right to me.

Good idea on the wormhole -- your entire fleet can sit on the wormhole exit waiting to warp in. Best case would be a k-k wormhole, but I haven't encountered that many of those.

Use the neutralizers on the main damage dealers, I imagine? Obviously more scramblers = better to catch more prey, but we have various limitations on that.

EDIT: I'll hop on the test server in a bit and put on 4 passive targeting systems on a Heron and see if...the longer duration time means I can passively lock 4 targets. I could go out and buy 3 more Passive Targeter IIs but they've shot up in price. grrr

May take a little bit since I need 4 subjects to cooperate. I think that would be the sole benefit of the PTII: the longer duration time means you can passively lock more targets at once.

Member

### Re: Passive Targeting Modules: The Anamoly

Neuts on stuff with a scram, because you want the option to MJD the bait out. The trick is to not neut too early, because you don't want to cap the bait out.

Wormhole type doesn't matter, so long as you have enough remaining mass to get the entire fleet through. Even if it's not K-to-K, you can sit inside a W-space mid just fine, so long as the hole isn't actively occupied. Most low-class holes aren't populated by anybody that'll give a decent fleet a rough time.

Member

### Re: Passive Targeting Modules: The Anamoly

I hopped on Singularity and ...

Used a Heron with 5 Passive Targeter IIs.

You have to use the keyboard, you won't be able to move your mouse fast enough to select the next target. 4 targets passively locked is possible, but somewhat challenging. 3 is more than doable. 5 is not really possible because it gets stuck in the "Locked" phase -- could have had something to do with the fact that my Heron with my present skills only allow 4 targets maximum. A cloak fitted to buy you more time by reason of the scan resolution reduction would make 5 doable just fine.

Still, not sure when you'd need to passively lock more than one target at time before the game is up, but you never know. 2 is probably about the most you'll need, assuming you're using dual Warp Disruptors or something like that. You'd need enough mid slots to make it work, obviously something you'd be alpha'ing off the field with artillery or the like.
Next