Release Neutron Highway long range route planner

Spansh

S
duodsg said:
As so many have told you over the years- thank you for dedicating your time and effort to creating such a phenomenal set of tools. It was one of the first tools I heard about when I picked up ED in November and I haven't looked back since. I can't thank you enough (and I need to figure out how to donate for its maintenance/your sacrifice).

Question (which I'm sure you've heard before, but I couldn't find references throughout this long thread):

When I run the neutron plotter, I find that even though my jump range is set to the current amount for my ship (45, not to be confused with the unladen range of 47), the number of jumps between neutron stars is often off by a significant amount- 25% or more in most cases.

For example, it said the first neutron star from my current system was 4 jumps away, but when I input the route on my galaxy map, it says it's 7. Once I got to the next one, the plotter said the next neutron was 21 jumps away- when I plot it on the galaxy map (using Fastest Routes + Use Jet Cone Boost, since using FSD boost "Supercharged" always refuses to work and says it's out of my jump range), my route is now 29 jumps long.

Over time on long trips, these extra jumps add up. Is there something I'm doing wrong when calculating my routes (I'm optimizing the efficiency % so the number of jumps it the lowest value possible). I do top off my fuel scoop every time I enter a system, but I would expect that the 45 ly jump range is taking that into account since I know my next jump point before I ever start scooping, and my route does not change as I get more fuel into my tank.

Thank you in advance!
Click to expand...

The number of jumps is estimated. It assumes that you'll be able to jump roughly 90% of your current range (including the first supercharged jump) in order to get to your destination (it's usually a pretty good estimate).

As an example, assuming your jump range is 45 and the next neutron star is 300 LY away it would say your first jump could be 162 LY (90% of 180 LY) leaving 138 LY. That would mean the system would estimate that you could manage 40.5 LY per jump which would give 3.4 jumps (rounded up to 4) as such it should give you an estimated jumps of 5.

That said it's possible there is a bug somewhere, can you link a route where you feel it's way off?
 
Last edited:

duodsg

duodsg
Spansh said:
The number of jumps is estimated. It assumes that you'll be able to jump roughly 90% of your current range (including the first supercharged jump) in order to get to your destination (it's usually a pretty good estimate).

As an example, assuming your jump range is 45 and the next neutron star is 300 LY away it would say your first jump could be 162 LY (90% of 180 LY) leaving 138 LY. That would mean the system would estimate that you could manage 40.5 LY per jump which would give 3.4 jumps (rounded up to 4) as such it should give you an estimated jumps of 5.

That said it's possible there is a bug somewhere, can you link a route where you feel it's way off?
Click to expand...

Thanks for your response- I did check on the tool and it's true that "estimate" does leave a lot of wiggle room, especially since I am sure the tool won't be calculating the exact jumps between each star (that would be nuts from a performance perspective).

Here's an example of a jump route that I referenced earlier- the tool estimated 21 jumps, but the final number was 29:

Origin: Pyroo Eohn QF-L d9-0
Destination: Cho Thua JY-Z d13-2
Efficiency: 90
Jump range: 45

I can provide more as well- it seems that every jump set is off by a pretty significant margin, but again, it could be a convenient intersection of me not using the tool properly + the fact that it's just an estimate.

Thanks again for such a great tool. You are awesome!
 

Spansh

S
duodsg said:
Thanks for your response- I did check on the tool and it's true that "estimate" does leave a lot of wiggle room, especially since I am sure the tool won't be calculating the exact jumps between each star (that would be nuts from a performance perspective).

Here's an example of a jump route that I referenced earlier- the tool estimated 21 jumps, but the final number was 29:

Origin: Pyroo Eohn QF-L d9-0
Destination: Cho Thua JY-Z d13-2
Efficiency: 90
Jump range: 45

I can provide more as well- it seems that every jump set is off by a pretty significant margin, but again, it could be a convenient intersection of me not using the tool properly + the fact that it's just an estimate.

Thanks again for such a great tool. You are awesome!
Click to expand...

Looking at the plot for that the estimates are accurate to how I described them, however that particular route is way out towards the edge of the galaxy and it's possible that the 90% mark doesn't work quite so well there with a much less dense area of stars.

Ultimately it'll do the best it can and the improvement via neutron stars will be real just with the jump count estimate not being as good as suggested.
 

duodsg

duodsg
Spansh said:
Looking at the plot for that the estimates are accurate to how I described them, however that particular route is way out towards the edge of the galaxy and it's possible that the 90% mark doesn't work quite so well there with a much less dense area of stars.

Ultimately it'll do the best it can and the improvement via neutron stars will be real just with the jump count estimate not being as good as suggested.
Click to expand...

Ok that's fine, I did have the thought since I am very far out there that the jump estimates will vary even more compared to plots closer to the bubble where things are charted out in more detail.

I appreciate the help! Thank you again!
 

Deleted member 38366

D
I've been wondering why some Body Searches take exceedingly long since a while, then found out : the LY Distance filter to a given Reference System doesn't seem to work.

i.e. searching for Stars -> Black Holes with reference System Merope and a set 100LY limit turned out a huge Galaxy-wide results table.

I take it this produces undesired and unneeded stress on the Server and should be looked into.
 

Spansh

S
FalconFly said:
I've been wondering why some Body Searches take exceedingly long since a while, then found out : the LY Distance filter to a given Reference System doesn't seem to work.

i.e. searching for Stars -> Black Holes with reference System Merope and a set 100LY limit turned out a huge Galaxy-wide results table.

I take it this produces undesired and unneeded stress on the Server and should be looked into.
Click to expand...

This (and another bug where you couldn't actually view pages after 1) have been fixed. However this fix is rolled up into a rather large release. You will note that the systems and bodies search pages have been completely redesigned to be clearer and easier to read.

This required a substantial rewrite and code cleanup. As such there may still be some bugs so please shout up if you spot something you're not sure about.

There are a couple more small tweaks I do intend to make but since there were a couple of bugs which had been noticed and picked up I've gone ahead and released the current version.

Hopefully everyone likes the new interface, but any feedback is welcome.
 

Lance 'Spacecat' D.

Lance 'Spacecat' D.
I'll admit I miss how the 'common' stuff was always visible. But I guess it's a bit of a trick with this layout.
Definitely a good idea to hide uncommon requests behid the odd tab.
 

Lance 'Spacecat' D.

Lance 'Spacecat' D.
Well, if I was doing this, I'd always keep... Huh, not that much stuff.
-The reference system or coords
-Distance in light years, so there's a limiter being encouraged (does that help your searches, actually?)
-System name maybe?

So the 'from what' fields would always be there, that'd be my logic. The 'searching for what' would be in all the tabs. That'd be my logic.
 

Spansh

S
I've released on updated site with slightly updated (and cleaner) navigation and a couple of new features.

A Tourist routing page. Choose a starting system and a set of destination systems and find an optimal route around them (optionally looping back to the starting system).

I've also added that option into the road to riches router so you can now generate a route which just ends "somewhere random".

I've also added a search summary section to the search results pages (it's a button, click it to show the summary).

As usual, let me know of any problems.
 

Qizmett

Q
I just heard about your site and it's super amazing. I'm using the road to riches router, but I'm having a bit of an issue.

I've logged in, made a route, clicked the complete boxes down the route, but it doesn't seem to actually save. I was just trying it out to see if it did, but it gives me the exact same route over and over. Not sure if it's an actual issue, or just me doing something wrong.
 

Spansh

S
Qizmett said:
I just heard about your site and it's super amazing. I'm using the road to riches router, but I'm having a bit of an issue.

I've logged in, made a route, clicked the complete boxes down the route, but it doesn't seem to actually save. I was just trying it out to see if it did, but it gives me the exact same route over and over. Not sure if it's an actual issue, or just me doing something wrong.
Click to expand...

I see what the issue is, unfortunately it requires a rebuild of the index so it'll take me a day or two to sort it out, however anything you have marked as completed will be fixed afterwards.

I have written something which will fix the current saved scanned bodies so they won't appear in your current routes, I'll run it every 10 minutes or so until I get the actual bug fixed. (Basically I was saving one ID in the table and it was the wrong ID, I've remapped them and that should fix it all).

As such you can continue to click the completed checkbox and it will apply after about 10 minutes.
 
Last edited:

Lance 'Spacecat' D.

Lance 'Spacecat' D.
Heyo mr Spansh...

A little heads up, I have a suspicion that your database redownload from EDSM might not be quite working as intended. You informed me a while ago that you do it about once a week... I think something isn't quite working right.

Here's why I think so: I've been having a ball crossing the galaxy to 'cleanup data' by scanning planets with zero radius and updating them in EDSM. I'm using this search to guide my travels: https://www.spansh.co.uk/bodies/search/33B7E60C-9943-11E9-A3FD-F65D164732BF/1
Currently there's 33 in that list, with my travels of the last two months, that number should be down to 10 or so. Take Aucoks FZ-D d13-51 A 1 and A 3 as examples. EDSM states no ship has been in that system in the last 7 days. The radius in EDSM is fine, therefore the weekly dump to spansh must've missed the radius somehow...
So I'm just flagging this as a potential glitch to look into. (also gleefully awaiting the day that particular search returns zero results! That'll be a job well done!)

And as a sidenote, the three stars with unnamed subtype, as per this search, have all been corrected in EDSM: https://www.spansh.co.uk/bodies/search/95C75B4E-9DF2-11E9-AE8C-8BD95B7281BC/1 So that's one wacky subtype that can be removed from the search features. XD
 

Spansh

S
Lance 'Spacecat' D. said:
Heyo mr Spansh...

A little heads up, I have a suspicion that your database redownload from EDSM might not be quite working as intended. You informed me a while ago that you do it about once a week... I think something isn't quite working right.

Here's why I think so: I've been having a ball crossing the galaxy to 'cleanup data' by scanning planets with zero radius and updating them in EDSM. I'm using this search to guide my travels: https://www.spansh.co.uk/bodies/search/33B7E60C-9943-11E9-A3FD-F65D164732BF/1
Currently there's 33 in that list, with my travels of the last two months, that number should be down to 10 or so. Take Aucoks FZ-D d13-51 A 1 and A 3 as examples. EDSM states no ship has been in that system in the last 7 days. The radius in EDSM is fine, therefore the weekly dump to spansh must've missed the radius somehow...
So I'm just flagging this as a potential glitch to look into. (also gleefully awaiting the day that particular search returns zero results! That'll be a job well done!)

And as a sidenote, the three stars with unnamed subtype, as per this search, have all been corrected in EDSM: https://www.spansh.co.uk/bodies/search/95C75B4E-9DF2-11E9-AE8C-8BD95B7281BC/1 So that's one wacky subtype that can be removed from the search features. XD
Click to expand...

It's happening on a daily basis currently (mostly). The problem is that EDSM hasn't produced a new bodies.json file in 2+ weeks https://www.edsm.net/en/nightly-dumps (look at the dates on bodies).

I do import from both the bodies.json file and bodies_recently.json to get daily updates. It may be that I need to keep track of bodies_recently.json over time as well.

I'll check with the EDSM devs and see what's going on.
 

rekikire

R
Good morning. looks like the issue that's been reported earlier in this thread where the road to riches is just wiggling their fingers forever and not returning any results. I tried a different browser to see if the issue was on my end and on the other browser I can't even select a system name it's just continually Loading Options.
 

Spansh

S
Lance 'Spacecat' D. said:
Heyo mr Spansh...

A little heads up, I have a suspicion that your database redownload from EDSM might not be quite working as intended. You informed me a while ago that you do it about once a week... I think something isn't quite working right.

Here's why I think so: I've been having a ball crossing the galaxy to 'cleanup data' by scanning planets with zero radius and updating them in EDSM. I'm using this search to guide my travels: https://www.spansh.co.uk/bodies/search/33B7E60C-9943-11E9-A3FD-F65D164732BF/1
Currently there's 33 in that list, with my travels of the last two months, that number should be down to 10 or so. Take Aucoks FZ-D d13-51 A 1 and A 3 as examples. EDSM states no ship has been in that system in the last 7 days. The radius in EDSM is fine, therefore the weekly dump to spansh must've missed the radius somehow...
So I'm just flagging this as a potential glitch to look into. (also gleefully awaiting the day that particular search returns zero results! That'll be a job well done!)

And as a sidenote, the three stars with unnamed subtype, as per this search, have all been corrected in EDSM: https://www.spansh.co.uk/bodies/search/95C75B4E-9DF2-11E9-AE8C-8BD95B7281BC/1 So that's one wacky subtype that can be removed from the search features. XD
Click to expand...

Elite: Dangerous Index

www.spansh.co.uk www.spansh.co.uk

New bodies file finished generating Jul 18, 2019, 6:06:14 PM, it's been processed and you can see there are now only 3 bodies with a radius of 0.
 

Lance 'Spacecat' D.

Lance 'Spacecat' D.
Ahhh, the fruits of my hard work! There were 55 before I got started on the data cleanup by travelling the galaxy. Now only three left!

I am basking in my good work. ^_^ (Thanks Spansh!)
 

Thrygon

T
Seems like the Trade Planner is having issues with finding routes when requesting to go with only routes that have large landing pads, only kicking out the response of "Could not find any trade routes" and was hoping that the most recent update didn't completely break things.
 

Spansh

S
Thrygon said:
Seems like the Trade Planner is having issues with finding routes when requesting to go with only routes that have large landing pads, only kicking out the response of "Could not find any trade routes" and was hoping that the most recent update didn't completely break things.
Click to expand...

Sorry for the late reply I have been a bit busy, but I did notice this in the logs and fixed it a couple of weeks ago (I think the same dsay you posted here). I also managed to speed up the route generation process a bit. Let me know of any issues.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom