I agree mostly, but right now you can’t get anything but grade 1 mats from them. If it stays that way it will be unfortunate.So far I prefer the new system, for exploration rather than for material collecting. There's no denying that collecting materials with those small POIs was a lot easier. But I do miss the days where collecting mats meant driving around for a bit. That was a lot more time consuming, certainly, but gave a reason to explore with the SRV. In contrast, the POIs took all of the gameplay out of it. But that was quick and convenient, so for gathering mats I loved it.
I just think giving up the quick and easy mats is a reasonable trade-off for making us hunt and explore a little bit to find biology/etc. And it's not too hard if you fly low and slow, and go where the DSS map shows you to go. We also still have the Bug Killer (I assume) for topping up on mats while in the bubble.
Unable to Locate Bio/Geo Notable Signal Sources (ODYSSEY)
- Thread starter CMDR CaptainScrotium
- Start date
You mean this filter? This filter is crap or dont work. It is always more or less the same on the filter options even if its geo 2, it still shows for evrything and same on evry planet i scan, there is no "spots" where it is located, and wherever i go in these dark blue areas, there are nothing for miles. Clerly broken feuture atm.
I see what you say and I'd agree if all locations follow the same rule, but it's not right that geo/bio need to be searched for, while crash sites are plain POI. I think it makes no sense and is unfair for geo/biologists vs scavengers.
Geo is all mixed in together, you will find lava spouts, fumaroles and geysers in the same areas so the map is the same for each feature, it's not broken. Every time I have landed on a body it's a matter of a few minutes before I find something by following the traces on the SRV radar. The "dark blue" areas are the wrong areas, there is no proper heat map at the moment, it's just a general location map and different colours don't indicate different densities, FDEV have changed it but not explained it properly. Just go the light blue areas and follow the indications on the SRV radar.
Because the crash sites have a specific location but the bio/geo is quite literally everywhere in huge abundance. It makes sense you can locate and isolate an instance of advance technology with energy signature and refined metals etc, for bio/geo it's like putting a marker in the middle of the Amazon and saying go to this spot to find the rain forest.
Well, thanks for your view but I disagree: geo locations are numbered, so there are hotspots for them. If my DSS was able to number them as unique features, it should be able to pinpoint them. It's even more true when you get down to any planet: most of its surface has no trace of volcanic activity, so a field of geysers or magma sprouts should be easily identifiable by the sensors. It's not "like putting a marker in the middle of the Amazon and saying go to this spot to find the rain forest"; actually it's like locating an oasis in the desert. These features stand out in the surface of these planets the same or more than some debris from a crash.
Anyway, it's cool to go directly to POIs, but it would work if you can' go to any. I simply would be happy if all locations were treated the same, and not giving advantage of one type over the other.
Actually I think the number, rather than number of hotspots, now refers to the number of different features. If a planet has Geological (3), that means it can have Vents, Fumaroles, and Lava Spouts, for example. I was confused about this at first too but after mapping a dozen or so planets my hypothesis seems to hold so far.
I found https://forums.frontier.co.uk/threads/finding-bio-signals.576565/post-9190847 from another thread (https://forums.frontier.co.uk/threa...ical-and-biological-sitest-in-odessey.578145/ ) that's also having issues and has a wonderful description with screenshots for how to find Biological and Geological sites, plus the scanning. This whole process, along with Geological, seems tedious AF. I was already behind on Materials for Engineering in Horizons because I didn't grind mats at the "optimal way", but now it's going to be even more slow and tedious. Who has time for this? If I could at least pay other pilots for their excess mats in some kind of market, that'd be awesome. I'll gladly trade credits (even though I'm sub-100m) to avoid this tedium. I love exploring and discovering things, but also tying grinding crafting materials to this process is ludicrous.
Maybe the heat map for geological activity isn't supposed to be all blue? Every single piece of Odyssey is bugged beyond belief right now, so maybe the idea is that instead of the just blue there will be green, yellow, red, etc. to indicate denser areas of activity? If that's how it worked, and if it was possible to get higher-tier materials, I could be into it.
No they aren't, they used to be, the number now refers to the types of geo, not the number of geo like the old days. Every single area I have landed on for every single planet I have landed on has geo if it's in the blue area, it is literally everywhere, there are no particular locations. If I land in the blue I find vulcanism, if I take off and pick a random location in the blue there is vulcanism, every single time.
Wreckage POI's are artifical POI's, man made, alien made, biology and geology are natural features.
Indeed it is, it marks the area in blue where you will find them, how hard is that to understand?
I'm not someone who aimlessly wanders the black "looking for things".
I methodically plan and execute complicated expeditions discovering all of the tourist beacons, systems of import, undiscovered exotic objects, as well as the stellar, biological, and geological Codex entries within a sector
Having to look at my SRV wave scanner and guess what the signals indicate (Lava spout, Fumarole, Brain Tree, Anemone etc), then driving 10 kilometers to find an 'Outcrop' is not fun to me.
Is there a new reference guide anywhere as to what signals indicate what features on the wave scanner? The current guide does not indicate what these signals should look like on the wave scanner.
I methodically plan and execute complicated expeditions discovering all of the tourist beacons, systems of import, undiscovered exotic objects, as well as the stellar, biological, and geological Codex entries within a sector
Having to look at my SRV wave scanner and guess what the signals indicate (Lava spout, Fumarole, Brain Tree, Anemone etc), then driving 10 kilometers to find an 'Outcrop' is not fun to me.
Is there a new reference guide anywhere as to what signals indicate what features on the wave scanner? The current guide does not indicate what these signals should look like on the wave scanner.
Thing is, I expect the underlying model still has the graduations. There are probably regions that have lesser and greater densities of the features, but we can't see them because they most likely just turned off that distinction in the UI, not the model.
There would be thermal, gaseous, and density properties to volcanic sites that should be pretty easy to pick up with 34th century sensors.
Stepping outside the simulation, I get how this is much better from the software point of view. Generating surface maps and placing dozens of contacts on it is why the system map took forever to calculate all the data in big systems. The problem is that there are not steps you can take at each step that lead you closer to your target. There should be an incremental process of refinement, and that dovetails pretty nicely with FDEV having some flexibility about where transient contacts get generated. For example,
1. Enter new system; honk finds bodies.
2. FSS identifies bodies with geological features and mineral content.
3. DSS identifies broad area of planet where features can be found (nothing generated yet).
4. Dropping out of supercruise and staying above 2km, blue circles should make a comeback to represent zones where a feature exists. Ideally also filtered like DSS.
5. Landing in blue circle (where features are generated within its bounds), SRV wave scanner or probeulator points to nearest features. Ideally also filtered like DSS.
6. Zap and scoop or probeulate as appropriate.
That's what it should look like, soup to nuts.
Last edited:
How many places on earth (the only planet with life we can sample in reality) lack biological units?
If life arises anywhere on a small planet then the only unrealistic thing would be for it to exist only in widely separated clumps. Those organisms filling every spot they can get to and live in is something you'd expect to happen in a few hundred thousand years at most.
On a small planet with little to no geological or climatological differentiation then that should be every spot.
If or when we get life that can run about then you might have to chase around for a bit to find some but everything we have at the minute is static. How far do you have to go from pretty much anywhere on earth right now to find the nearest algae or moss or grass? Those things are pretty ubiquitous.
That relates to how common planets with any life at all should be. What level for that is realistic is largely unknown. Should we find hard evidence of current or extinct life on Mars or at least one of the Galilean moons of Jupiter (both still possible) then we should find it everywhere. If those are barren it would likely be much more rare.
That is quite likely to be unrealistic. Some level of panspermia may be possible but identical organisms on multiple planets across systems hundreds of light years apart is, unless there're some god-level aliens who planted it all waiting to be revealed, vanishingly unlikely. This is probably a mix of gameplay (making the Codex feasible) and code limitations (properly distinct proc-gen life forms that are obviously unique are just too hard to get right).
However. Responding solely to your original point that you never have to go far to get from one organism to another on a planet with life being unrealistic? Given a planet with life it should be everywhere it can be very quickly.
I have never driven 10klms to a geo feature, in fact I have never driven even far enough for my ship to lift off before I find them, often I can walk to them from the ship. The signals haven't changed, the signals on the wave scanner are picking up the minerals on the geo features. If you are driving 10klms before finding them then you are missing a lot and driving straight by them.
I also plan out expeditions carefully, for the last few months I have been taking part in the HIP project, I have just started a private one of my own that I am going to do personally because it doesn't involve as many systems, the only planets I land on to check are the ones in my target systems for bio and geo, but it really is everywhere. if you don't want to look for features don't, but now we have actual skill based exploration and everyone is going "oooh it's to hard, make it easier".
For stuff like Brain Trees you can spot easily by flying and you don't need to do much of that, no need for the SRV, but geo is often hard to spot while flying if it isn't active because it's no longer concentrated into a couple of spots per planet, but a lot of times I end up landing right on it no matter where I land so I don't really know why people are having trouble finding it or driving for hours and not finding it.
True, I can walk outside my door and spot 20 or 30 different types of plants, and with a bit of a look around as many animals. Plants will evolve to fill available ecological niches, and they will continue to do so until they are all filled, and then they will continue to evolve to try and steal some other plants ecological niche. the fact there are around 6-8 types of plants per planet is unrealistic, it should be millions, and you should be able to stand by your ship and spot twenty or thirty of them without moving, but this is a game so I don't expect absolute realism, however that being said the same plants in the bubble and near Beagle Point is pushing things a bit far! I would expect that far away a completely different range of plant types and I am disapointed they didn't at least do that, even if it was only a half dozen types.
The conditions that have a direct impact on life creation can be pretty similar around Sol and around Beagle. I'd expect more variety between Earth, Mars and Venus than between Earth and an earth-like body orbiting a class G star 65 kylies away.
I mean, in theory...
Last edited:
Nope, that just incorrect, you will never find identical plants from two different evolutionary processes. They might look "similar" due to parallel evolutionary pressures, but they will never be the same plant, the same biology, the same DNA. That's the issue here, they don't "look" similar, they are the same plant. In fact even if you introduced the same plant into two very similar biomes far apart the chances of them remaining the same for very long is very small, minor pressures like predation, slightly different rainfall and sunlight and next thing you know you have two different species.