# Ship/Cargo Scanner to give penalty e.g. suspect timer **URL:** \ **Category:** Player Features & Ideas\ **Tags:** game-mechanics, modules\ **Created:** [June 17, 2018, 10:36am UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/ship-cargo-scanner-to-give-penalty-e-g-suspect-timer/83572 "2018-06-17T10:36:46Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 23
**Author:** ![Marcus\_Gideon](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/marcus_gideon/32/141713_2.png) [@Marcus\_Gideon](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Marcus_Gideon)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2018, 12:44am UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/ship-cargo-scanner-to-give-penalty-e-g-suspect-timer/83572/478 "2018-07-12T00:44:03Z")
> [@MinerArt](#): > > The problem with truth is you can’t bend it to suit your view. This is why: > > > [@Marcus\_Gideon](#): > > > > If that were the case, we wouldn’t need scanners. We could just look at a ship and know what it’s carrying. But the truth is you must fit a specific sensor module to your ship in order for it to work. Which means you’re sacrificing a slot that could have held some other module instead. > > You confirm that ships aren’t made of plexiglas now. If the ship is not made of plexiglas then you must attack the hull to get information that is within it. Otherwise there is no reason you would detect the contents of a ship. > > You talk in circles to suit your argument and discard logic. I never said ships were made of plexiglass. You did, jackass. And I also never said that a Scanner “attacks” the target to gather info, you did. There are plenty of examples of sensors and scanning techniques which can examine the interior of something, and none of them would be considered “attacking” the subject. Now… Quit… Being… Pedantic… > **[Pedant](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pedant)** > > A pedant (/ˈpɛd.ənt/ PED-ent) is a person who is excessively concerned with formalism, accuracy and precision, or one who makes an ostentatious and arrogant show of learning. > The English language word pedant comes from the French pédant (used in 1566 in Darme & Hatzfeldster's Dictionnaire général de la langue française) or its older mid-15th century Italian source pedante, 'teacher, schoolmaster'. (Compare the Spanish pedante.) The origin of the Italian pedante is uncertain, but several dictiona... ---
**Author:** ![MinerArt](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/minerart/32/33728_2.png) [@MinerArt](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/MinerArt)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2018, 1:29am UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/ship-cargo-scanner-to-give-penalty-e-g-suspect-timer/83572/479 "2018-07-12T01:29:32Z")
> [@Marcus\_Gideon](#): > > I never said ships were made of plexiglass. > [@Marcus\_Gideon](#): > > Enclosed trailers are not enclosed for privacy. They are enclosed to keep the contents from spilling out. > [@Marcus\_Gideon](#): > > Every TD&H is capable of taking photos of the motorcycles or snowmobiles you’re pulling behind your pickup, without repercussions. Lets review shall we? I still don’t see how you can take a photo of the contents of this trailer: [https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/uploads/default/optimized/3X/e/9/e93b9603dc2ad6f600ead3e4e1ab50d74b67448a\_1\_690x345.jpg](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/uploads/default/optimized/3X/e/9/e93b9603dc2ad6f600ead3e4e1ab50d74b67448a_1_690x345.jpg) Because sadly as much as you would like to say it’s possible to see inside I am not gifted with X-ray vision or ability to travel thru time to watch the truck loaded. > [@Marcus\_Gideon](#): > > And I also never said that a Scanner “attacks” the target to gather info, you did. Game mechanics say otherwise. You must activate a scanner on a target to get information. You do not get free information on cargo just by existing. ---
**Author:** ![MinerArt](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/minerart/32/33728_2.png) [@MinerArt](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/MinerArt)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2018, 1:50am UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/ship-cargo-scanner-to-give-penalty-e-g-suspect-timer/83572/482 "2018-07-12T01:50:09Z")
Well… Goodbye thread. Was nice knowing ya. People can’t discuss the topic anymore without resorting to filter dodging or swearing at the opposition. Next up: Well if the thread is about to get a padlock I might as well deliver the argument the opposition should have used. If the ship fit with the cargo scanner actually was using only default scanners that the ship had it would be a non-invasive scan. For example the Atron has a magneto-metric scanner by default. If the cargo/fit scanner was limited to this an visual input then it would logically follow it could detect anything that a magneto-metric scanner could by proximity and the cargo/fit scanner was merely correlating the data that already is available. The down side would be that anything that is not classified as having a magneto-metric signal would be completely and totally invisible to this Atron. Gallente would only get Magneto-metric signals. Caldari would only get Grava-metric signals. Amarr’s would only see contents flagged as detectable by RADAR. Minmatar would only see LADAR outputs. This would functionally change the way that the cargo scanner works though and would deny much of the ability to detect what really is inside a cargohold. It would break the cargo scanner completely and drastically nerf the ship scanner. Thus I wouldn’t suggest sorting all things that could be fit inside a ship to be classified based on these for what can be output. Instead I suggest upgrading the cargo/fit scanners to be an active directed beam of all of the above resulting in a full spectrum analysis giving information based on cycle. You could set it to scan for a specific object if you so desire but a directed scan of this nature is suspicious if you are not authorized by the faction to do it on their behalf. Added: Thus a double wrap container would not prevent detection of a specific device if scanned for directly. If I am scanning for a freight container it will tell me if the ship contains one but not what it’s contents are. If I’m looking for compressed blue ice putting it inside a freight container will do nothing to prevent me from finding it. Resume: NPC’s have permission to do this within their space (Gallente, Amarr, Minmatar, Caldari, Concord) but capsuleers (while able to fit the device and not strictly denied it) would be suspect flagged for doing such. It’s a very dangerous double edged sword to do either method without careful consideration. Continued elaboration: Right now a Cargo Scanner has a 5 second cycle and a Ship Scanner has a 2 second cycle. This would identify one thing about your target on cycle end. If your target doesn’t exist at the end of the cycle your scan failed. So if I was to target scan this: > **[Catalyst | Daniel Simmons | Killmail](https://zkillboard.com/kill/71194373/)** > > Daniel Simmons (New Order Logistics) lost their Catalyst in Uedama (The Citadel) Total Value: 1,572,927.11 ISK (Sorry @Daniel\_Simmons but you’re the most current at time of my posting.) My first cycle of a Cargo Scanner would tell me no cargo but if I was scanning for Antimatter rounds it would be detected as present on the ship. Specific scanning would be hit/miss output only. General scanning would tell me random item exists on target ship. Note that Tritanium is one object so putting 100 piles of 1 Tritanium would not slow the scan down. Blockade runners just don’t have a signal that can be detected from within the cargohold. My first cycle of a Ship Scanner would tell me 8 blasters. Second would tell me afterburner and sensor booster. Third would tell me Magnetic Field Stabs. Fourth would tell me no rigs. I could shorten the Ship Scanner time by just fitting more Ship Scanners. ---
**Author:** ![Salt\_Foambreaker](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/salt_foambreaker/32/280119_2.png) [@Salt\_Foambreaker](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Salt_Foambreaker)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2018, 4:53pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/ship-cargo-scanner-to-give-penalty-e-g-suspect-timer/83572/483 "2018-07-12T16:53:33Z")
> [@Marcus\_Gideon](#): > > @CCP_Falcon could you _ **please** _ mute this jack hole? All he’s doing is stirring up trouble. Agreed 100%, this guy MinerArt is obviously trolling and has been for dozens of posts. ---
**Author:** ![MinerArt](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/minerart/32/33728_2.png) [@MinerArt](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/MinerArt)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2018, 8:42pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/ship-cargo-scanner-to-give-penalty-e-g-suspect-timer/83572/484 "2018-07-12T20:42:10Z")
![image](https://global.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/original/3X/0/3/03b710c1426342cd8c1d294a3ffb617852b0a5d0.jpg) Appears the only thing the opposition has is to declare somebody a troll and insult their intelligence. It’s a shame that logic is impossible to work around in their favor even when given their out. ---
**Author:** ![Anderson\_Geten](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/anderson_geten/32/390041_2.png) [@Anderson\_Geten](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Anderson_Geten)\ **Post date:** [July 16, 2018, 4:37am UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/ship-cargo-scanner-to-give-penalty-e-g-suspect-timer/83572/485 "2018-07-16T04:37:22Z")
> [@Marcus\_Gideon](#): > > Scanners don’t spray the target with anything. Nobody can say that taking a picture of a building with your camera has an adverse effect on the building. All you did was record data with your camera. The building remains unaffected. No, it’s the DEFINITION of a scan to be ACTIVE. IRL when you talk about a scanner, it is always active : radar, sonar, fax are active scanning devices, while camera, sound recording are passive devices. Many things can be deducted from passive observation, but also many things can’t. > [@Marcus\_Gideon](#): > > Does my Afterburner “attack” the area behind my ship? Does my Dscan “attack” everything within 14 au? your AB is not targeted, nor does it have a AoE, and dscan is not a module. Your question makes no sense. > [@Marcus\_Gideon](#): > > You don’t get info just by existing. In fact, yes totally, you perceive your environment just by existing. Theoretically, any device that has an effect on something can be observed by that something (assuming it has an observation device), because it impacts it. Your environment is affecting you, so you can observe it (eg with your 5 senses). Some thigns are affecting you and you don’t have the device to observe it (eg radiation), but if we were born with a geyger counter we could observe it, the same way some birds and fishes have an internal compass. ---
**Author:** ![Ryan\_B\_Thiesant](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/ryan_b_thiesant/32/293156_2.png) [@Ryan\_B\_Thiesant](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Ryan_B_Thiesant)\ **Post date:** [July 16, 2018, 7:14pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/ship-cargo-scanner-to-give-penalty-e-g-suspect-timer/83572/486 "2018-07-16T19:14:15Z")
Does anyone know why I get an aggression timer for boosting mining lasers? ---
**Author:** ![Black\_Pedro](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/black_pedro/32/257285_2.png) [@Black\_Pedro](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Black_Pedro)\ **Post date:** [July 16, 2018, 7:23pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/ship-cargo-scanner-to-give-penalty-e-g-suspect-timer/83572/487 "2018-07-16T19:23:02Z")
> [@Ryan\_B\_Thiesant](#): > > Does anyone know why I get an aggression timer for boosting mining lasers? You get an aggression timer for all fleet boosts. It’s to prevent someone from playing station games by boosting someone and immediately docking the rationale being if you are providing a benefit to other players, you should be vulnerable. ---
**Author:** ![Ryan\_B\_Thiesant](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/ryan_b_thiesant/32/293156_2.png) [@Ryan\_B\_Thiesant](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Ryan_B_Thiesant)\ **Post date:** [July 16, 2018, 7:35pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/ship-cargo-scanner-to-give-penalty-e-g-suspect-timer/83572/488 "2018-07-16T19:35:29Z")
> [@Black\_Pedro](#): > > You get an aggression timer for all fleet boosts. It’s to prevent someone from playing station games by boosting someone and immediately docking the rationale being if you are providing a benefit to other players, you should be vulnerable. Oh, thanks. (genuine) Completely understand that on an aggressive module, or even a or sensor, or a shield boost. But perhaps not a mining foreman boost. Since when are mining lasers lethal weapons? Thats like giving a suspect timer for using a ship scanner. That’s just silly. (sarcasm) Egoes aside, let’s just enjoy an amazing game. ---
**Author:** ![Black\_Pedro](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/black_pedro/32/257285_2.png) [@Black\_Pedro](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Black_Pedro)\ **Post date:** [July 16, 2018, 7:48pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/ship-cargo-scanner-to-give-penalty-e-g-suspect-timer/83572/489 "2018-07-16T19:48:35Z")
> [@Ryan\_B\_Thiesant](#): > > Completely understand that on an aggressive module, or even a or sensor, or a shield boost. But perhaps not a mining foreman boost. Since when are mining lasers lethal weapons? Arguably you are right. You could make a case that you shouldn’t be able to increase someone’s yield with zero risk to your boosting ship, but honestly it is so annoying to dock after each boost, no one would do it. I guess it does prevent boosting miners while under tether, but there are also no asteroids under tether either. I think this is just another of those cases where it was easier to just implement all the command boosts the same way rather than have a special exception for one of them. Either way though, it isn’t really that big a deal. ---
**Author:** ![MinerArt](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/minerart/32/33728_2.png) [@MinerArt](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/MinerArt)\ **Post date:** [July 16, 2018, 7:59pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/ship-cargo-scanner-to-give-penalty-e-g-suspect-timer/83572/490 "2018-07-16T19:59:27Z")
> [@Black\_Pedro](#): > > I think this is just another of those cases where it was easier to just implement all the command boosts the same way rather than have a special exception for one of them Comically this is exactly what the ship/cargo scanners do the opposite of. Go figure. ---
**Author:** ![Marcus\_Gideon](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/marcus_gideon/32/141713_2.png) [@Marcus\_Gideon](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Marcus_Gideon)\ **Post date:** [July 17, 2018, 12:10am UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/ship-cargo-scanner-to-give-penalty-e-g-suspect-timer/83572/491 "2018-07-17T00:10:53Z")
> [@MinerArt](#): > > > [@Black\_Pedro](#): > > > > I think this is just another of those cases where it was easier to just implement all the command boosts the same way rather than have a special exception for one of them > > Comically this is exactly what the ship/cargo scanners do the opposite of. Go figure. > **[Scanners](https://eve.fandom.com/wiki/Category:Scanners)** > > A list of all scanner systems. > Cargo Scanners - reveal contents of target ship’s hold, do not cause aggro > > Survey Scanners - reveal ore composition of target asteroid, do not cause aggro > > Scan Probes - reveal location of spatial anomalies, do not cause aggro > > Combat Probes - reveal location of ships, do not cause aggro > > Ship Scanner - reveal fitting of target ship, do not cause aggro Damn, you’re right. Those blasted Cargo Scanners are the exact opposite. Certainly no blanket policy in place regarding those. Not like Scanners in general are considered fair play. ---
**Author:** ![MinerArt](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/minerart/32/33728_2.png) [@MinerArt](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/MinerArt)\ **Post date:** [July 17, 2018, 12:23am UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/ship-cargo-scanner-to-give-penalty-e-g-suspect-timer/83572/492 "2018-07-17T00:23:04Z")
> [@Marcus\_Gideon](#): > > Scan Probes - reveal location of spatial anomalies, do not cause aggro Those aren’t the module. The module would be the launcher. Which would also cover the combat probes. There are 4 versions of the probe launcher. The launcher does not target a ship. Thus it’s a false analogy to compare a target to a non-target launch. Incidentally the probes of all kinds only listen and do not send a beam into a ship from multiple AU’s away. Survey scanners… (as amazingly hard as this might be to understand) don’t target anything. They don’t tell you there is more rock than in range of it’s ability to listen. It does not reveal there are hidden rocks. It amazingly listens to what the rock produces and can do math. I know that’s really hard to believe because it doesn’t actively target anything to do math with but that’s what actually happens. Now what actually has a target? Ship scanner and Cargo Scanner. Why is it that every single thing in the game that needs a target to work can get you suspect or criminal and yet… this does not… Repairs? Can get you suspect. Totally a benefit and not a harsh penalty. Sensor boost? Can get you suspect. Totally a benefit but doesn’t actually do damage to anything directly. Cargo/Ship scanner? Totally a benefit but completely immune to risk. To gain a benefit you must take a risk at a cost. Your benefit is you learn about the contents/fitting of your target at the cost of using the module at … where’s the risk? ---
**Author:** ![Marcus\_Gideon](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/marcus_gideon/32/141713_2.png) [@Marcus\_Gideon](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Marcus_Gideon)\ **Post date:** [July 17, 2018, 12:34am UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/ship-cargo-scanner-to-give-penalty-e-g-suspect-timer/83572/493 "2018-07-17T00:34:54Z")
> [@MinerArt](#): > > > [@Marcus\_Gideon](#): > > > > Scan Probes - reveal location of spatial anomalies, do not cause aggro > > Those aren’t the module. The module would be the launcher. Which would also cover the combat probes. There are 4 versions of the probe launcher. The launcher does not target a ship. Thus it’s a false analogy to compare a target to a non-target launch. Incidentally the probes of all kinds only listen and do not send a beam into a ship from multiple AU’s away. > > Survey scanners… (as amazingly hard as this might be to understand) don’t target anything. They don’t tell you there is more rock than in range of it’s ability to listen. It does not reveal there are hidden rocks. It amazingly listens to what the rock produces and can do math. I know that’s really hard to believe because it doesn’t actively target anything to do math with but that’s what actually happens. > > Now what actually has a target? Ship scanner and Cargo Scanner. Why is it that every single thing in the game that needs a target to work can get you suspect or criminal and yet… this does not… > > Repairs? Can get you suspect. Totally a benefit and not a harsh penalty. > Sensor boost? Can get you suspect. Totally a benefit but doesn’t actually do damage to anything directly. > Cargo/Ship scanner? Totally a benefit but completely immune to risk. > > To gain a benefit you must take a risk at a cost. Your benefit is you learn about the contents/fitting of your target at the cost of using the module at … where’s the risk? Survey scanners gather info from the targets. They are doing the exact same thing a Cargo scanner does, telling you what’s inside worth getting out. But you’re fine with those… Combat Probes gather info from the target. They tell you where your prey is hiding. But you’re fine with those too… Repairs are actually beneficial to the target. If you get Flagged for applying repairs, that means the target was in a fight, and you’re interfering with the fight. Same goes for Sensor Boosters and such, outside interference during a battle gets you in trouble. But I think we’ve narrowed down the root of this argument. You guys are butthurt b/c the Ship and Cargo Scanners **_shine a light at your ship_**. If we take away the light, then you’ll all shut the hell up. We could rub some technobabble on them, and say that they rely on picking up the cosmic background radiation as it passes through your ship. The sensor still needs to be focused on a target b/c it needs to listen in the right direction. But so long as it’s not **_shining a light at you_** then it doesn’t matter. Eureka! We’ve done it! @CCP get on it! Turn off the Scanner ray animation, pad the flavor text, and these whiny crybabies will shut the hell up. =) ---
**Author:** ![MinerArt](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/minerart/32/33728_2.png) [@MinerArt](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/MinerArt)\ **Post date:** [July 17, 2018, 12:40am UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/ship-cargo-scanner-to-give-penalty-e-g-suspect-timer/83572/494 "2018-07-17T00:40:41Z")
> [@Marcus\_Gideon](#): > > Survey scanners gather info from the targets. Incorrect. Fit one, Fly to a belt, TARGET NOTHING, press button. > [@Marcus\_Gideon](#): > > Combat Probes gather info from the target. Also incorrect. It tells you they think there is a ship here based on the signals that the set listens to. Using 2 probes really makes it hard to find anything. They do not focus on a ship and hunt it down for you. You position them and they listen. > [@Marcus\_Gideon](#): > > But I think we’ve narrowed down the root of this argument. You guys are butthurt b/c the Ship and Cargo Scanners _ **shine a light at your ship** _ . If we take away the light, then you’ll all shut the hell up. Nope. It still targets. The ones that target still target. The ones that do not still do not. But sensors do not need to target to listen. The survey scanner does not target but still listens. Probes do not target but they still listen. You can direct probes to listen more closely to what you think you want to find but it doesn’t change them into warping into target themselves and attaching the hull saying “Here I am” to you about what you want to find. Also you don’t need to resort to insulting the opposition. Get some class. ---
**Author:** ![Marcus\_Gideon](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/marcus_gideon/32/141713_2.png) [@Marcus\_Gideon](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Marcus_Gideon)\ **Post date:** [July 17, 2018, 12:43am UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/ship-cargo-scanner-to-give-penalty-e-g-suspect-timer/83572/495 "2018-07-17T00:43:00Z")
So what you’re saying is… you advocate for making Ship and Cargo Scanners reveal the contents and fittings of everyone within range? ---
**Author:** ![MinerArt](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/minerart/32/33728_2.png) [@MinerArt](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/MinerArt)\ **Post date:** [July 17, 2018, 12:44am UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/ship-cargo-scanner-to-give-penalty-e-g-suspect-timer/83572/496 "2018-07-17T00:44:05Z")
> [@Marcus\_Gideon](#): > > So what you’re saying is… you advocate for making Ship and Cargo Scanners reveal the contents and fittings of everyone within range? Either we make them passive and thus you can’t tell who’s carrying what out of how many cookie cutters are within range by just listening or you leave it at target, we buff it up so you can focus on trying to find what you want, and give it that suspect flag. Choose. ---
**Author:** ![Marcus\_Gideon](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/marcus_gideon/32/141713_2.png) [@Marcus\_Gideon](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Marcus_Gideon)\ **Post date:** [July 17, 2018, 12:49am UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/ship-cargo-scanner-to-give-penalty-e-g-suspect-timer/83572/497 "2018-07-17T00:49:58Z")
> [@MinerArt](#): > > > [@Marcus\_Gideon](#): > > > > So what you’re saying is… you advocate for making Ship and Cargo Scanners reveal the contents and fittings of everyone within range? > > Either we make them passive and thus you can’t tell who’s carrying what out of how many cookie cutters are within range by just listening or you leave it at target, we buff it up so you can focus on trying to find what you want, and give it that suspect flag. > > Choose. Now you’re advocating for buffing the scanners in exchange for the penalty of being Flagged? How exactly do you propose we buff them beyond what they currently do? Oh, and there is a 3rd option. Leaving everything exactly as it is. Scanners scan ships, and nobody gets Flagged. You know, kinda like every Sci-fi show ever. > “Mr. Worf, what kind of armaments do they have on that ship?” > “Well Captain, I could tell you, but then they’d be free to open fire on us for checking.” ---
**Author:** ![MinerArt](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/minerart/32/33728_2.png) [@MinerArt](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/MinerArt)\ **Post date:** [July 17, 2018, 12:58am UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/ship-cargo-scanner-to-give-penalty-e-g-suspect-timer/83572/498 "2018-07-17T00:58:02Z")
> [@Marcus\_Gideon](#): > > Now you’re advocating for buffing the scanners in exchange for the penalty of being Flagged? How exactly do you propose we buff them beyond what they currently do? We have a large group of items you can select from by default. Ships, PI, Ice, Ore, Weapons, Ammo, Shields, Engineering equipment, etc… there is such thing as a market which has a complete listing of everything that can be put on the market sorted by which you wish to choose from. So if you want to take that scanner and listen for ice being brought along a route (yes, I know that’s a fun target for gankers) it will active signal at a target with intent to make that ice signal it exists. Any ice. Compressed, not compressed, null only, high, rares, etc. Double wrap doesn’t protect it anymore so would become useless. Cargo containers don’t protect it anymore because you’re not generic scanning but specific scanning. You can still CHOOSE to not specific scan and a cargo container would be detected before the contents but that’s your choice. A risk you might miss something because you weren’t looking for exactly that. A benefit that you might find something you weren’t looking for (ooo… a mutaplasmid from a level 5) by accident. Also you might want to stop referances on the USS Enterprise of the FEDERATION of PLANETS which would be like saying Gallente doesn’t have rights to scan everything and anything at any time that enters their systems… [![](https://global.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/original/4X/1/8/0/180794630f681eb0d46d8b2fc4c1f5b83bc3470a.jpeg "Worf gets DENIED again and again on Star Trek TNG.") ](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=edflm7Hh3hs) I know… 14 minutes of “No Worf, No. Sit. Stay. Stop.” Edit again: Ya know… they already have specific scanning. They detect exactly what they want to find and more or less ignore everything else… ---
**Author:** ![Marcus\_Gideon](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/marcus_gideon/32/141713_2.png) [@Marcus\_Gideon](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Marcus_Gideon)\ **Post date:** [July 17, 2018, 1:19am UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/ship-cargo-scanner-to-give-penalty-e-g-suspect-timer/83572/499 "2018-07-17T01:19:06Z")
Or maybe they detect what they detect, and the person running the scanner only reports the things the Captain asked about. How many times has Data gone on and on and on and on and on and on… Until someone told him to wrap it up. [Previous page](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/ship-cargo-scanner-to-give-penalty-e-g-suspect-timer/83572.md?page=22) [Next page](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/ship-cargo-scanner-to-give-penalty-e-g-suspect-timer/83572.md?page=24)