I read on another thread about geysers that there is a technical limit of 3 per planet atm. Not sure how accurate this is or where the information came from, but if true it would explain why it is so incredibly difficult to find one on any given world. Doesn't fill me with confidence for the advent of atmospheric worlds....I mean if FD have problems spawning more than 3 geysers per planet then how many more problems will arise when they attempt to spawn multiple rivers, oceans and clouds?
X-Terminator
Banned
Ideas here for the next CG! [big grin]
you might want to be a bit more consistent, instead of devaluating the people that tried to answer your question(s):
compare with:
___
i think the farthermost system is some 30k ly out .... amazing how fast FDEV went through all the system from sol to that place to put them in manually ;-)
compare with:
___
i think the farthermost system is some 30k ly out .... amazing how fast FDEV went through all the system from sol to that place to put them in manually ;-)
It's actually quite a bit a further than that, we have been keeping records and locations in the geyser and fumarole thread in the exploration sub-forum and have had people out Beagle Point way reporting sightings. Personally I have discovered 15 or 20 more than 20kly out, they aren't rare, just hard to find.
I think the game lacks really big geysers.
I also consider the tools the game provides to do search and exploration as fairly limited.
I understand and agree that it cant be handled in a silver plate to the player, but now is kind of annoying and way too time consuming. Which it would be ok if the game were to reward your invested time even if only a little.
I also consider the tools the game provides to do search and exploration as fairly limited.
I understand and agree that it cant be handled in a silver plate to the player, but now is kind of annoying and way too time consuming. Which it would be ok if the game were to reward your invested time even if only a little.
I just tested one geyser sightseeing mission and it worked ok. Geyser area was marked with beacon so it can't be easier than that. So sightseeing is one sure way to find geysers.
Scanner is coming. Don't worry. If they can now mark geyser area with a beacon surely they can mark it with scanning.
Well I hope so, I've looked on loads of planets that supposedly have geysers and magma eruptions but have yet to find a single one. Very frustrating and time consuming.
They're all down East London ain't it
I feel your pain and frustration OP, I really do. I too have sunk a lot of time into searching for these aaaand iv not found a single one.
Iv been to one after finding co-ordinates on the forum, but iv never found one myself. To me this is somewhat broken. If there is a technical limit, is that inclusive of everything on a planet? I am pretty sure iv seen planets with 4 - 5 persistent bases on it.
In my mind, if a planet has volcanism we have lots of obvious objects where to find it.
-Mountain ranges
-Big impact craters
-Canyons
-Stress locations (such as the terminator in tidal locked systems)
Thus far I dont think anyone has reported back finding any volcanic peaks, any within large impact crators or obvious stress locations. Thus far i believe it is mostly been Cracks, Canyons and occasionally planes near the canyons
Id love to hear back from FDev regarding this and the possibility of improving the feature. I mean, in our own solar system we can see these objects from far away in some cases, we can see bases on the surface in orbital cruse...
It just leaves me to speculate why and probably get it personally wrong, but seems like based upon the planetary generation the automatic selection and placement of a vocalic cluster could be the issue. That the client cant easily figure out what are the tectonic regions based upon the seed it gets from the servers to generate the surface. So generating it is perfectly ok, but the locations are being retroactively selected rather than it being a core part of the seed. This means the limit being at 2-3 is more about limiting database size than anything else.
I dunno - wild speculation from me at this point to be fair.
Said it before and Ill say it again... this has been the first feature added to ED that Iv been quite throughly disappointed with, I had a vision of driving into a foggy basin and within that fog there being volcanic activity, that you would see these things in some of the more hellish places quite prominently. Right now... its easier to find a crashed wreckage of an F63 or Diamondback on a planet than a natural feature such as volcanism... sad
Iv been to one after finding co-ordinates on the forum, but iv never found one myself. To me this is somewhat broken. If there is a technical limit, is that inclusive of everything on a planet? I am pretty sure iv seen planets with 4 - 5 persistent bases on it.
In my mind, if a planet has volcanism we have lots of obvious objects where to find it.
-Mountain ranges
-Big impact craters
-Canyons
-Stress locations (such as the terminator in tidal locked systems)
Thus far I dont think anyone has reported back finding any volcanic peaks, any within large impact crators or obvious stress locations. Thus far i believe it is mostly been Cracks, Canyons and occasionally planes near the canyons
Id love to hear back from FDev regarding this and the possibility of improving the feature. I mean, in our own solar system we can see these objects from far away in some cases, we can see bases on the surface in orbital cruse...
It just leaves me to speculate why and probably get it personally wrong, but seems like based upon the planetary generation the automatic selection and placement of a vocalic cluster could be the issue. That the client cant easily figure out what are the tectonic regions based upon the seed it gets from the servers to generate the surface. So generating it is perfectly ok, but the locations are being retroactively selected rather than it being a core part of the seed. This means the limit being at 2-3 is more about limiting database size than anything else.
I dunno - wild speculation from me at this point to be fair.
Said it before and Ill say it again... this has been the first feature added to ED that Iv been quite throughly disappointed with, I had a vision of driving into a foggy basin and within that fog there being volcanic activity, that you would see these things in some of the more hellish places quite prominently. Right now... its easier to find a crashed wreckage of an F63 or Diamondback on a planet than a natural feature such as volcanism...
sadNo I don't think so, we have heard that there may be 3 on a planet, I suspect this is to do with procedural generation issues, the bases are all hand placed so not subject to the same restrictions, but I am just speculating, what I do know is so far we have never found more than three on a planet or moon. FDEV want us to find things out for ourselves, this simply may be an expression of that.
FDEV has said that the location of the features follows proper geological rules, I haven't seen much evidence of that yet. I do know they don't seem to appear in craters unless the crater has some sort of canyon or disruption.
That's correct as far as I am aware, there's always a chance something knew may come along, I really hope so.
I dunno - wild speculation from me at this point to be fair.
Said it before and Ill say it again... this has been the first feature added to ED that Iv been quite throughly disappointed with, I had a vision of driving into a foggy basin and within that fog there being volcanic activity, that you would see these things in some of the more hellish places quite prominently. Right now... its easier to find a crashed wreckage of an F63 or Diamondback on a planet than a natural feature such as volcanism...
I have been disappointment not really with the feature but that they introduced it without making any improvements or changes to the exploration mechanic, but that seems to be the way they work, introduce a new feature then later see how better to integrate them into game play
Hoping for improvements in exploration in the next update
I dont really buy this, FDev have gone a lot of effort to figure out the procedural generation to get the orbits to work correctly and the sizes of objects and their periods, they ahve also gone to a lot of effort to place objects in reasonable positions... other than a few Earth like worlds in locations that are weird such as neutron stars or blackhole systems, they have tried to go for realism. Same for the planetary generation. An attempt to get this close to what makes sense.
So why hold an class of objects back to obscurity when they realistically are all over the place?
As you said it is most likely an issue in the procedural generation, that the flagging and placement is happening as a secondary routine which means it has to be very very limited otherwise things go really desperately wrong.?
In the other thread, we talked about the Earth... for geysers i think the list was something like 30-40 locations... and volcanism... yeah i dont want to guess that one but it is way way way more than 40 locations.
Basically it means that unless the planet is a pebble... there is zero point in looking for these objects.
Fdev has said that there a not so many geysers per planet due technical limitations. What are those, I don't know. I saw about 25 geysers holes in one spot but only a few of them were active at the same time.
Cos multiplayer I suspect.
Never having found a geyser, I'm not sure, but if they are dropping materials and commanders share the instance then it might not be possible to make the instance very large or you'd be potentially sending vast amounts of data back and forward.
After many, many, many, many hours and many, many, many planets I found geysers at Benapem 3 A -59.8480, -163.1086. Cool features but not worth the time and effort to find.
Exactly, and this is why I suspect most commanders are looking but finding nothing. if a planet or a moon is not under 500 klms max radius and if it doesn't have clear features to search I don't bother, nor do most of the dedicated geyser/fumarole hunters.
The surface area of you average sized planet, say 6,000 klm radius comes out at around 450m sq klms, once you drop down to the low hundreds that drops down into the single millions, 350klm radius gives us 1.5m. Most of the finds are on smaller worlds with vey few on large worlds, and once you hit the really big ones the surface area balloons hugely, the largest landable planets for instance come in at over 5 billion sq klms. The single biggest factor in finding sites is simply picking the right target, then throw in a bit of technique and a lot of luck and there you go.
Last edited:
Here's our most distant geyser find so far, just 50ly from Beagle Point.
https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showt...a-Collection?p=4851439&viewfull=1#post4851439
https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showt...a-Collection?p=4851439&viewfull=1#post4851439
Use sightseeing missions to go to geysers. That way you can find them bookmarked. It's not worth looking them otherwise now.
Last edited: