If there is a line of perfect neutron jumps between points, it will choose them yes, regardless of ratio. It's only when you need to deviate that ratio will come in. With a lower ratio it's more likely that you'll have more regular plots inbetween your neutron stars (Sol => Colonia with a 1.1 ratio doesn't look too bad though)
Nicecan you try to compare it to a sol to colonia 3 ratio? I dont think the 3 ratio will be worse, might not be much better though since sol to colonia have been pretty well routed.
The ratio tweaking is a bit fuzzy, from some experiments I got the following:
Sol => Colonia with 27 LY range
900 jumps for a direct route (ratio 1)
853 with 1% (ratio 1.01)
808 with ~10% (ratio 1.1)
671 with ~15% (ratio 1.2)
810 with ~25% (ratio 1.3)
625 with 75% (ratio 4)
With a 54 LY range:
457 jumps for a direct route
370 with 1%
299 with 10%
236 with 15%
275 with 25%
263 with 30% (ratio 1.4)
273 with 50% (ratio 2)
200 with 75% (ratio 4)
So it's a little bit of a black art which ultimately comes down to how much data we have in the area, the problem seems to stem from just how big space really is and how much stuff there is there (and how little we have actually "discovered"). Given that Sol to Colonia is pretty well trafficed now it's one of the better known long range routes, other places are much less travelled and finding neutron routes automatically is much more difficult.
As such my best advice is to tweak it a bit and get a value you're happy with before setting off. I'll work on improving it "somehow"
Another suggestion - a way to mark or tick waypoints that you have already passed through. When travelling several thousand LY's it's easy to lose track of which one to copy and paste into the galaxy map next!
Hi I think I have found a situation that leads to the total number of jumps calculation being incorrect and higher then it should be. This happens when you are at a neutron star and can not reach the next one so it says plot a xx range jump towards the next system. What would happen is, if you have 25 ly range and the next the NS is 125 away it will say plot a 100 ly jump towards the next system and you would have 25 left for a total of 2 jumps. However it calculates the distance in this case with only normal jump range so it would say 5 jumps at the side instead of 2.
Here is a example for a route I plotted using a range of 34.84. http://www.spansh.co.uk/?from=Jueni...05C4B0-B012-11E6-A595-CC68F2195DFE&ratio=1.42
Done, it doesn't keep track of it so if you refresh the page it won't keep the ones you've visited ticked. However in that case you could always just recalculate it from your current position.
The slight problem with this is that I don't know where you ended up and the distances are real (unlike the jumps which are estimated). As such it just assumed you didn't move and carries on from there. It shouldn't affect the number of visits to the galaxy map anyway.
I see your point, but is not the point of the tool to find the fastest route this could make the fastest route seem slower then another route you might have tried. If you are traveling via NS route is highly likely that you are going to aim for a star in the direction you are traveling and go as far as possible probably within 90% of your max range.
+1 rep, added to my ever growing list of elite bookmarks![]()
Side effect of this thread: I've accidentally bagged 5 Neutron star firsts from stars this routed me to. I checked on EDSM to see who got there first, and I could see the path of a poor commander still out in the black doing a big loop over the past four weeks. The stars had only been visited twice: him, then me.
Have sent a friend request to apologise!
Thanks for posting this. I just finished one run, doing all the work myself. I took my route and then matched it to the one the tool plotted, and found them very similar. I plan to use it for my next trip.