This morning I did a scan blitz for the first time in about 4 months and scanned over 100 planets. The first 73 were during 99%. However, this is where I ran into an issue. I had 23 failures during this 99%. This doesn't compute to me. It seems way to high a number of failures.

And just to confirm I am not confused about them being cloaked, 2 of the scan (not included in the 73) noted that I found a planet but it was lost due to cloaking.

At 99%, there is no way I should have that many failures, especially when it is not due to the planets being cloaked!

I'm wondering if the response is different if you "cannot possibly scan" because its cloak > your scan, vs. it might have been possible but the roll failed.

Exact note for those who care: "Your scanners almost lock onto a signal, but it was too cloaked to detect."

What was your scan during that run ? The cloak failure rate I had with about 4k cloak was 25%, yours looks like 35%. Some planets are not scan-able but with enough cloak most of them have a chance, though it might be small.

I didn't keep track of that but somewhere in the range of 5000.

Well logically most of the planets that failed wouldn't have over 5k cloak, so the two that failed in that way probably did have over 5k cloak; the rest were just a bad roll... but I would expect a message in that case to tell you.

If the planets had more cloak then his scanners he would got this message:

Dan,

Please address this.

With a 99% he should not be getting so many failures.

My last scan blitz caused me to post a thread which resulted in the adjustment to the program to send a message if the cloak was to high.

What happen in his case?

Does another message need to be created?

Couple possibilities; the estimated % is wrong (is lower than displayed), messaging for failing a cloak roll isn't in there except for the case where their cloak > you scan (as opposed to your scan > their cloak but you just failed the random roll). When you fail I would always expect a message though, and it's always going to be because of cloaking if it's truly 99% chance calculated.

I rolled '35' scan fails at 99% my last scan run.

I did a scan spree yesterday, i spent around 1k energy (so around 100 clicks)
when i was at 99%, i got scan failed atleast 2/3 clicks.

Not the one where scan < planets cloak message, just scan failed.

Well, this scares me. I have been saving my aidonium and credits for my mark 3 scanners (5 billion creds each...geez) and now I may get misses on 99%? That seems really, REALLY unfair considering how hard it is at my rank to get that kind of credits and minerals to not find jack crap after preparing, researching and saving for a couple weeks.

In the immortal words of Ralphie:

"Crapola."

hey thats nothing i have the highest level scanners 5 of them and with all of the scan buffs you can use and i still cant get higher than 13% chance to find a new planet. I have over 500 planets on my tab 380 of which i dont want and since it takes way to damn much exotic to get one scan purger i have amost zero chance of getting anything worth a damn. There are almost a million planets so i have scanned less than .0005 percent of them. This is bullxxxx and im getting to the point of saying screw this damn game its rigged way to hard to find anything new especially when you cant clear your planet tab because it take a bizillion exotic and enegry yo do it. Speaking as a person who spends quite a bit of money on GP's im getting ready to skip out and tell dan to take his game and shove it.

The accuracy of the % summary could be a lot better. We plan to update it for the next release.

What you need, Dan, is more planets, more good planets, and a lower failure rate. I too have failed way to many times at 99%. I know the success rate is overstated and you can fix that, but we need to be able to scan more planets, period. At one time 10% of my planets were usable. Now when I do a scan blitz, I am lucky to find 3-4% usable and then only if I want to invade 3/4 of that. Seems to me we need more planets so I don't find so many already scanned by someone else.

all i want really is that you should be able to find the players you really wanna find easier

One of the answer could be artifacts that help with specific planets no one would bother with. Instead of the normal bonus of +x size and +y resources, maybe something that is "convert any size planet to Very Large (or massive)." Right now there is a glut of small & smaller planets. Most people in the know won't bother with them, even if they are decent. This would be a benefit since people would have a reason to colonize some smaller planets.

(Now) I wouldn't settle a VS Desert, Extremely Rich planet, even knowing I can make it small ultra rich with the gamma-crystallizer. However, I would settle it if there was an artifact to make it Very Large (or bigger).

Yeah....25 billion credits, 450 aidonium, and 9400 scan and I can find one ONE world that even makes it into the first tab of my planets rank by resource richness. My own worlds I had already are superior to EVERY world I scanned.

I had 99% chance for 20 minutes worth of clicking.....

Seriously man....does that seem fair, Dan? I waited, saved and plotted for weeks, and had to deal with this embargo and this is my reward? A crapton of average size MEH planets?

Wow....just wow.

I observed right after the planet count increases, usually 50-100k adjustment, go do a scan run. I have found most of the scanned planets were 0 other ppl scanned, suggesting it takes from the pool of new planets at least a % of your scans. The failure message was still wrong last time I did it, in that it doesn't say the cloaking is blocking you, but there's no other explanation. Higher scan should result in less failures from this cause; it was 10-15% at 5700 scan @ 99%. See http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q40VVv7vIhM for a scan run video; "Scan failed to find a new planet." was the message for cloak failure (I guess). I'm not sure if it's really supposed to calculate "almost 99%" and drops off or something before it shows that it drops. Dan, is it cloaking failure or a calc display problem ?

The other solution is a % of scans are (if not already) find/create a random new world, something like 25%, but I know there is a planet/active player balancing going on as well. The planet distribution is unlikely to change, I'm not sure "make all planets better" or something that ppl ask for is a realistic solution.

If you put any work into improving your planets then that's bound to happen. I wouldn't expect to find any in my top ten either; a lot of the ones in my top ten have had a lot of work put into them, and I wouldn't expect a random planet to have such high abundance.