UAs, Barnacles & More Thread 6 - The Canonn

Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.

Rekah

R
Another late night for me, full of experiments, legal life pods, data points and one fruitless search for the evil base that took me to 22% hull last night (more about that in a moment).

I went to my fourth banacle site on Pleiades Sector JC-U B3-2, planet 1 to find it on such an incline I decided to do both triangulation methods (above and behind in the ship, looking down my "arrow" and another with the SRV aligning the spires as best I could, despite the radar not being flat, reversed into the rear arrow spike.)
barnacle4.jpgbarnacle4b.jpg
The headings were 276 and 284 so I averaged it to 280.
Then I put the plots and headings into my new improved 1080x1080 grid layout (could go even bigger to increase the resolution, though) :p
Here is the important bit (pay attention, you guys watching the skies)
triangulate 2.jpg
This pretty much confirms that headings are planetary at this point, rather than directly galactic (although I'm not ruling out the intersections being underneath a particular patch of sky).
The intersection point is somewhere around 38, 13, although based on a straight line of flight I did yesterday (315 degrees from barnacle C), which had me at a weird, heavily armed base, the target could be as far off as 36, 12

Here's me getting all excited by the mysteries appearing out of the night (I only turned to 328 once I saw the lights appear)
base.jpg
I was too low to tell if it would have formed a POI and was thinking it was the small tea factory until I was flying over it and noticed the layout was much more impressive so I turned around
Screenshot8.jpg
It has four defence turrets and at least three of those flying things.

Try as I might, I couldn't find it today, even using both the new co-ordinates and the ones you can see in the screenshot. It was daytime on the planet but I'd still expect to be able to see something that big from 100 metres or so and I want vengeance!
If anyone has seen one of these before (especially as a random occurence) I'd be grateful if you let me know what sort of stash should be there :D

Lastly, I managed to get some morse code from a Data Point (holding phone to speaker - blame Xonar for not allowing Windows 7 to do a stereo mix thing OR allow a cable straight from headphone to mic socket and don't get me started on the noise cancelling "feature" of the extension unit that had me thinking I was recording something until I realised it was just the room!).
I'll try to get to that another time, unless it's already been done by someone.

Now it's eight hours past my bedtime, I'm off. TGIF! :p
 
Last edited:

LordZoltan

LordZoltan
You can record 'what-u-hear' with audacity - even if it doesn't work straight away, there are notes on how to get it to work just by switching the audio devices in its UI - works really well ;)

- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -

RedWizzard said:
Others had far less. Bond Hub in Varati had less than 50 (possibly less than 20) delivered when it started having problems. The inconsistency is evidence that it is not solely UA numbers that cause the problems. There are theories that it may still be automatic but with other factors involved, such as number of players making deliveries, but the most likely explanation is that FD simply decides manually which stations are affected and UA numbers are not the sole consideration.
Click to expand...

This - there's a lot of misinformation around about just how many UAs were required to trigger malfunctions - the truth is, nobody knows for sure, but it could be as few as 20. Bond went down really early in the story.

JManis' failed attempt to shut down that station remains a mystery - but I'm also thinking it's because it didn't have a commodity market, meaning it didn't show up on Frontier's radar.
 
Last edited:

KellyR

KellyR
How much have these UA's been damaged? If there's no damage to them, then they won't shut down a station. Only if their repair cycle is activated will they begin to degrade stations.
 

rizal72

rizal72
KellyR said:
How much have these UA's been damaged? If there's no damage to them, then they won't shut down a station. Only if their repair cycle is activated will they begin to degrade stations.
Click to expand...

Sorry, but it doesn't work this way: in the exact moment you scoop it, you damage it.
In fact, it always start eating your ship. The rest is just RP from FD.
 

Jmanis

Jmanis
Herkfixer said:
Im pretty sure they aren't going to post in Galnet that Professor Palin discovered that the UA's ARE the cause of the station malfunctions, without knowing that they are the cause of the station malfunctions. I don't care what a player did, the people who wrote the code said the UA's cause it, then they cause the malfunctions. On top of that, if the UA's cause the malfunctions, how do you think the UA's got to the stations? They flew themselves through the mail slots and sold themselves to the blackmarket dealers?
Click to expand...

The problem is you're conflating my claim there's no player agency in station malfunctions with the idea that selling UA's at stations don't cause malfunctions.

I never said that UA's don't cause station malfunctions. I did suggest the idea once after my Walker Survey experiment failed to bring the station down, but only as a possible explanation as to why it hadn't failed. I had complete confidence that was the wrong explanation though.

I won't go into the history because I don't care enough to, but 200 UA's is *more* than enough to affect a station. The long and the short was, you'd be lucky to have found even 100 sold at a single station before the first failures started occurring.

While Red Wizzard has a point that, just because Galnet says Palin says the UAs are responsible for the failures, doesn't mean Palin is correct, I think that's going to be an incredibly unlikely outcome.

Assuming Palin is correct, the lack of player agency comes about because of this: Stations going into a failure state are almost certainly (no decisive evidence) the result of FD intervention. FD intervention comes about when they observe UAs being sold at a station, either by:
- Server-side collection of statistics
- Observation of players publicly announcing in forums/reddit of their sale; and/or
- Players self-reporting the sales in private to FD

By selling UA's in secret, I was testing the collection of statistics. By announcing publicly on the forums I'd sold (at the time) 200, I also tested the other two mechanisms. None of these resulted in Walker Survey's failure. This can only mean two things:
- The server-side collection of stats *failed* in the case of Walker Survey (Thus, my bugreport, which I incorrectly linked before); or
- FD plays an active role in deciding which stations which have UAs sold to them fail
- Or a combo of the two

The first is exactly why I've bugreported it. The second, however, means players have no agency whatsoever in determining which stations fail. Sure, they can sell UAs to a station to "bring it to FD's attention" so to speak, but ultimately it's their choice whether it goes down. And if that is the case, then my actions were rendered meaningless by FD's choice, thus, I have no agency, and as such players have no agency, unless their actions happen to be "popular".

The Galnet article, again assuming Palin is right, means that the only possible outcome of Walker Survey's lack of failure is one of those two options.
 
Last edited:

CMDR Soundwave

CMDR Soundwave
Just catching up on the thread. And please put your tin foil hats on. What if the "cure" is some kind of intended biomechanical interaction. The pods / meta alloys akin to "sperm" and the UA's akin to "eggs". These are aliens and they're definitely somewhat "alive".

The way FD is spinning this tale is giving me the jitters.
 

Han_Zen

Han_Zen
Jmanis said:
The problem is you're conflating my claim there's no player agency in station malfunctions with the idea that selling UA's at stations don't cause malfunctions.

I never said that UA's don't cause station malfunctions. I did suggest the idea once after my Walker Survey experiment failed to bring the station down, but only as a possible explanation as to why it hadn't failed. I had complete confidence that was the wrong explanation though.

I won't go into the history because I don't care enough to, but 200 UA's is *more* than enough to affect a station. The long and the short was, you'd be lucky to have found even 100 sold at a single station before the first failures started occurring.

While Red Wizzard has a point that, just because Galnet says Palin says the UAs are responsible for the failures, doesn't mean Palin is correct, I think that's going to be an incredibly unlikely outcome.

Assuming Palin is correct, the lack of player agency comes about because of this: Stations going into a failure state are almost certainly (no decisive evidence) the result of FD intervention. FD intervention comes about when they observe UAs being sold at a station, either by:
- Server-side collection of statistics
- Observation of players publicly announcing in forums/reddit of their sale; and/or
- Players self-reporting the sales in private to FD

By selling UA's in secret, I was testing the collection of statistics. By announcing publicly on the forums I'd sold (at the time) 200, I also tested the other two mechanisms. None of these resulted in Walker Survey's failure. This can only mean two things:
- The server-side collection of stats *failed* in the case of Walker Survey (Thus, my bugreport, which I incorrectly linked before); or
- FD plays an active role in deciding which stations which have UAs sold to them fail
- Or a combo of the two

The first is exactly why I've bugreported it. The second, however, means players have no agency whatsoever in determining which stations fail. Sure, they can sell UAs to a station to "bring it to FD's attention" so to speak, but ultimately it's their choice whether it goes down. And if that is the case, then my actions were rendered meaningless by FD's choice, thus, I have no agency, and as such players have no agency, unless their actions happen to be "popular".

The Galnet article, again assuming Palin is right, means that the only possible outcome of Walker Survey's lack of failure is one of those two options.
Click to expand...

Well done for bug reporting it. I very much suspecting that the server-side collection failed in the case of Walker Survey. Most likely due to the missing commodity market.

I have little doubt that the affected station reports are manually created by FD. They are after all just Galnet articles. The affected stations seem to be a combination of FD chosen stations and stations that actually had a significant amount of UAs delivered.

Comments from MB regarding the UA/T-Class scanning bug, suggests that server monitoring is the 'tool' they use to monitor player activity. If a station fails to meet the criterion in the monitoring script, it will go under the radar.

It will be interesting to see if you get a response on the bug report.
 

rizal72

rizal72
Xsannz said:
anybody notice this posted by ZAC
***Carrier Signal Compromised***Hey guys,

Some of the eagle-eyed amongst you may have noticed that there have been a few reports of compromised carrier signals in local news bulletins.

Keep an eye out for these on your travels as they may lead you to something of interest. ;)

Mysterioulsy yours,

Zac
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

Zac confirmed that the Compromised Carrier Signals thing, is not related to UA or Barnacles...

https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php?t=228467
 
Last edited:

Han_Zen

Han_Zen
rizal72 said:
Zac confirmed that the Compromised Carrier Signals thing, is not related to UA or Barnacles...

https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php?t=228467
Click to expand...

But they are related to the large plantet side persistent wrecks. If a report shows up in the Maia Herald, I will be interested. ;)

I think there are more persistent wrecks in the Pleiades. To my knowledge, no one has found a T9 yet. There should be wrecks with multiple ships (a T9 and two Condas?) as well.
 

simulacrae

simulacrae
Ok since I was unable to discern any way to orient the map ... I decided to use the less glamorous approach and assuming the Barnacle spike placement is a galaxy map ... And assuming the Barnacle is the Center (Sag A*) The only likely candidates for the Pleiades would be the outer ring of eight spikes.

So I plopped things into my fancy mapping program for each of the eight alignments and spat out some coordinates based on those assumptions... The scaling up to galaxy from Barnacle is a very big fudge factor... but if the points all get me close to Nebulae then its a win.

Alignment 1
0CPFiWb.jpg
Alignment 2
VyasWME.jpg
Alignment 3
56Ri1ru.jpg
Alignment 4
9NKXNym.jpg
Alignment 5
1kgG8hD.jpg
Alignment 6
DcYFeQF.jpg
Alignment 7
Uzj6DgC.jpg
Alignment 8
HnI52PD.jpg
Hmmmm would be neat if one of these actually is right .... im going to check tomorrow though ... spent too much time on this tonight ;)
 

LordZoltan

LordZoltan
Han_Zen said:
But they are related to the large plantet side persistent wrecks. If a report shows up in the Maia Herald, I will be interested. ;)

I think there are more persistent wrecks in the Pleiades. To my knowledge, no one has found a T9 yet. There should be wrecks with multiple ships (a T9 and two Condas?) as well.
Click to expand...

Generation ships?
 

Han_Zen

Han_Zen
LordZoltan said:
Generation ships?
Click to expand...

I doubt it. We have not seen a single glimpse of anything that could be a generation ship.

I still think 'regular' ships could be related to lost colonists. Most colonisation attempts in at least the last 800 years will have been done in hyper-space capable ships. The Anaconda is a very old model and a big ship. It's a good candidate in my mind.
 

simulacrae

simulacrae
Han_Zen said:
I doubt it. We have not seen a single glimpse of anything that could be a generation ship.

I still think 'regular' ships could be related to lost colonists. Most colonisation attempts in at least the last 800 years will have been done in hyper-space capable ships. The Anaconda is a very old model and a big ship. It's a good candidate in my mind.
Click to expand...

I'm keeping my fingers crossed .. Still hoping that stuff like the antares wreckage will look different than the standard modern wreacks
 

Nydo_Horth

Nydo_Horth
Hey guys, is there a way ton only show MB messages into this thread?
Could help me following the thread of deep spacemadness 7 =)
 

Ian Phillips

Volunteer Moderator
Ian Phillips
Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom