MattG's Observatory plugins
- Thread starter MattG
- Start date
I finished a new PC and installed EDO yesterday. I used Codex Companion a couple of years ago and moved it over to my new system. I have v0.23.93.708 and was wondering if this has been updated in the past two years since I got it.
This is not listed on the below website, so I thought I would ask in this forum thread.
https://edjp.colacube.net/observatory
This is not listed on the below website, so I thought I would ask in this forum thread.
https://edjp.colacube.net/observatory
It's changed a lot, and is now built in to BioInsights - it's the 4th button (I think!) in the BioInsights UI
Okay and thanks for the response!
Here's a question about BioInsight 1.2.1.3043, and the Valuable Bodies settings.
What is "Minimum Base Value"? It suggests there's something called a Base Value, but I can't make out what that is. (An attempt to avoid having value and bonus as separate entities?)
What is "Individual Biological Value"? The payout from Vista Genomics for just one set of samples? (Can't involve bonus as that value is adjusted later by the user ...)
How do they work? Individually, i.e. if at least one of the two critiera matches, the body is considered valuable? Or together, i.e. both critiera must match for the body to be classed as valuable?
Can I disable one of the criteria, and so remove it from consideration? (Or do I need to set some impossibly high criterium that can't be matched for that?)
What is "Minimum Base Value"? It suggests there's something called a Base Value, but I can't make out what that is. (An attempt to avoid having value and bonus as separate entities?)
What is "Individual Biological Value"? The payout from Vista Genomics for just one set of samples? (Can't involve bonus as that value is adjusted later by the user ...)
How do they work? Individually, i.e. if at least one of the two critiera matches, the body is considered valuable? Or together, i.e. both critiera must match for the body to be classed as valuable?
Can I disable one of the criteria, and so remove it from consideration? (Or do I need to set some impossibly high criterium that can't be matched for that?)
Last edited:
Base Value is the value of the biological excluding any First Logged bonus. BioInsights standardizes on this as it is not possible to accurately know if a biological will receive the First Logged bonus. It shows both the Base Value and the First Logged value of bios in the Codex Companion section.
Minimum Base Value is the pessimistic sum of the base value of predicted genuses based on the number of bio signals on the body. If a body has 2 bios and BioInsights predicts a Bacteria at 1m, a Bacteria at 1.8m, a Concha at 7.7m, a Concha at 19m and a Stratum at 19m the minimum base value will be (1 + 7.7) = 8.7m
Individual Biological Value is the most valuable species of those used to calculate the minimum base value. In the above example, this would be the Concha at 7.7m. Assuming the predictions are correct, there has to be a bio worth at least 7.7m on the body.
If either criteria is met, the body will be flagged "High Value". Either criteria can be disabled by setting them to zero.
Minimum Base Value is the pessimistic sum of the base value of predicted genuses based on the number of bio signals on the body. If a body has 2 bios and BioInsights predicts a Bacteria at 1m, a Bacteria at 1.8m, a Concha at 7.7m, a Concha at 19m and a Stratum at 19m the minimum base value will be (1 + 7.7) = 8.7m
Individual Biological Value is the most valuable species of those used to calculate the minimum base value. In the above example, this would be the Concha at 7.7m. Assuming the predictions are correct, there has to be a bio worth at least 7.7m on the body.
If either criteria is met, the body will be flagged "High Value". Either criteria can be disabled by setting them to zero.
Thanks! The explanation of 'Individual Biological Value' cleared the thing up: I could not think of a reasonable explanation for it, and that probably spread to the other terms as my brain went for a topspin. It also explains why I couldn't make any of my attempts at setting a criterion work as I expected.
Ideally, of course, your explanation should not be needed. But ... that may be easier said than done. (It seems desirable to keep the word 'value' for the separate samples, and not reuse it for the sum of them and so confuse it.
'Minimum Base value' need to show that it is a sum of several values. "Sum of lowest possible values" seems slightly better, but is still weird. "together worth at least" might be another possibility. 'Pessimistic full payout' ?
'individual Biological Value' is more diffucult. I'd like to get rid of the word 'biological' entirely as it adds nothing to the actual meaning, and also the word 'individual' assuming that the term 'value' always is used for a single sample. 'Max lowest possible value' might do if 'sum of lowest possible values' was used. 'Best pessimistic single sample payout' ?
'Pessimistic' might be replaced with 'Guaranteed'.
Tricky.
You can't guarantee that any of the predicted species is actually there. Sure BI is nearly perfect, but that's not enough to guarantee anything.
True, so scratch that.
Hello! long time observatory and bio-insight user! I recommend it to ever new biologist going out into the black as 100% essential. If I could add any feature request it would be that alongside the lovely pictures of every lifeform, maybe have a little blurb about how to best find it? Like "mostly found in rocky mountainous area" or "easy to find on most flat terrain". I think it would help so so many new players who struggle to find samples before they start to memorize where things like to grow.
I've released small updates to BioInsights, Evaluator and AstroAnalytica that fixes a theming issue experienced by a small handful of people.
I've also added an option to have the "bodies still to map" persistent notification always shown while there are still bodies marked "worth mapping" (instead of just in DSS). You can also adjust it's position.
If you've not turned off auto-updates, you should get them soon. Otherwise, they're available here
I've also added an option to have the "bodies still to map" persistent notification always shown while there are still bodies marked "worth mapping" (instead of just in DSS). You can also adjust it's position.
If you've not turned off auto-updates, you should get them soon. Otherwise, they're available here
Here's a odd thing I've just noticed after running into a couple of systems with more than 12 planetary bodies.
When the notification voice says something like 'body 13 C has ...' there's some kind of glitch in the pronunciation of 'thirteen' (or perhaps the space immediately after it). It sound a bit like a old-style gramophone record click. It's not a major problem -- at least it's not more irritating than to have to listen to 8 repetition of 'body 13 A|B|C...'. But there's something there that probably shouldn't be.
As far as I can tell, Core voice settings are all default
When the notification voice says something like 'body 13 C has ...' there's some kind of glitch in the pronunciation of 'thirteen' (or perhaps the space immediately after it). It sound a bit like a old-style gramophone record click. It's not a major problem -- at least it's not more irritating than to have to listen to 8 repetition of 'body 13 A|B|C...'. But there's something there that probably shouldn't be.
As far as I can tell, Core voice settings are all default
I have a problem with the data shown in Bioinsights compared to my Codex in game.
I have switched my PC, as i got a new one after my old harddisk crashed. Now Bioinsights often shows me some species/colors as found previously, but my codex ingame says i havn't found it yet. There also was the other way, when Bioinsights told me i found a new variant (new to me), but when i looked into the codex, i saw i have found it in the past.
Is there any way to get 'live' data from the game, so both sides are up to date to each other?
I have switched my PC, as i got a new one after my old harddisk crashed. Now Bioinsights often shows me some species/colors as found previously, but my codex ingame says i havn't found it yet. There also was the other way, when Bioinsights told me i found a new variant (new to me), but when i looked into the codex, i saw i have found it in the past.
Is there any way to get 'live' data from the game, so both sides are up to date to each other?
Are you sure you just haven't crossed into a new area and this bio is the first time you have found it in the new area?
Also keep in mind bioinsights pulls data from your journal files, if you didn't copy your journal files over fully to the new hard drive then it can't know which bio you have already found, so one of these two is probably the reason, and no, you can't pull data from the game, it's stored on FDEV servers and they wouldn't like you accessing them.
If your old HDD crashed and you didn't have the latest version of your journals backed up that is probably the most likely reason for the mismatch between the game and bioinsights.
So, if i understand it right, there is no way to pull a kind of live data from the codex. Thats sad :/ so i'll be ever out of sync with Bioinsights.
To explain a little more detailed:
I lost all the journal files from before my laptop crashed. BUT...
I am exploring in Empyrean Straits now. Its the first time i am here and i have all journal files that contain my exploration of the sector. While waiting for my new laptop harddrive i played on my desktop computer, which i usually do not use. I entered Empyrean Straits the first time ever on my desktop pc, so i should have all journal data from this sector. When moving back to the newly installed laptop, i copied over the journals from desktop computer to the laptop. They should be included into the 'Read all' from Bioinsights. It means, i have all journal files from the point of my first entry into Empyrean Straits and Bioinsights should know them - but still i have mismatches in both directions.
Shouldn't this mismatch only be in one direction - Codex saying i found the specific plant and Bioinsights not knowing i found it yet? How can it be the other way around? Codex saying i didnt find it yet and Bioinsights saying i found it - even if i would miss journal entries of this sector, it shouldn't be this way. And i am sure i didnt find any Fonticula Digitos yet (which is missing in the Codex but Bioinsights says i found it previously), since i play on my new installed computer.
Back up.
Nope, if you have lost your journals unless you were backing them up somehow they are gone, forever. There is no way to recover that data, EDSM may have your flight log but everything else, gone.
I repeat...make back ups regularly of this data!
There may be journal data in some form available from the Elite Dangerous CAPI. However, I know nothing about details, nor do I know any tools that retrieve that particular information in that particular format, so for all practical purposes it is probably not available. (There is a simple C# client from 2020? 2021? called Gist on github that may help: it only requests the user's profile, but seems to show the authentication process, so modifying it for journal data may be relatively simple. It does not show the limits Frontier has requested be observed for use with CAPI, though, so thoughtless use might result in lockout.)
However, until the reported discrepancy between BioInsight and Codex data has been definitely traced to missing log files, it seems less important.
In my second post i said, i have all my journal files since i entered Empyrean Straits the first time a few days ago and Bioinsights read them all. So its definitely not 'definitely traced to missing log files'.
What i lost is the stuff from before that point. Its not nice, but with all you explained to me, it is not of importance in my case, as i should have all data from Empyrean Straits.
And still there is a difference in several species.
But for theory:
If i would miss all my journal data, the only error should be, that my Codex in game has all bio data i found up to now and Bioinsights has nothing - it should say all plants are 'unknown' to me. I would understand that.
So how can Bioinsights tell me, that there are species known to me, when Codex says they are not?
What i lost is the stuff from before that point. Its not nice, but with all you explained to me, it is not of importance in my case, as i should have all data from Empyrean Straits.
And still there is a difference in several species.
But for theory:
If i would miss all my journal data, the only error should be, that my Codex in game has all bio data i found up to now and Bioinsights has nothing - it should say all plants are 'unknown' to me. I would understand that.
So how can Bioinsights tell me, that there are species known to me, when Codex says they are not?
Last edited:
The codex is not always correct, strange as that may seem, but your journals are because they capture the data as it is sent to FDEV. The Codex is a complex piece of programming that has had issues from the very first time it was launched, unfortunately not knowing the exact circumstances you are experiencing means we can't really help much except to make suggestions based on the information you have provided.
By default, BioInsights will only notify of new entries galaxy-wide - most people just want to see one of each thing and don’t care about region. If you want them per region, go into Settings and tick the per region option.