The Quest To Find Raxxla

Rochester · Nov 10, 2022

Darrack said:
Looking at NASA's System map Mimas is outside of the ring formation, ive also flown around many times over the past couple of days and its not there.

Its a puzzle.

O7

Or just bad design, bug report it. Not everything in or not in game is intentional.

There is no Saturn hexagon, even though it’s been known since early 80s. Duplicated stars off separate databases, some with known errors were never corrected. Just because it’s in game or is not in game game does not denote the hand of god, it usually just identifies the hand of the slapdash or complacency of accepting secondhand data as true.

Louis Calvert · Nov 10, 2022

@Allen Stroud I'm sorry to ping you, but you mentioned work you'd done on Hyperdrives originally. I completely understand if you can't/don't want to give us more info

, but if you don't have an objection could you give us any more info on the 'order of development'?

Essentially I'm interested in this because of the Galnet Hyperdrive lore (which I think might have been based on your work?) that basically everyone is using as a basis for early FTL travel as defined in Eite Dangerous.

My question is: Is the order of information in that article correct?

(modified quote of the article retaining the structure of info):

"Hyperspace technology originated in the early 22nd Century, but it wasn't until the 2800s that consumer ships began to take advantage of it."

"The first commercially available hyperspace system was known as the 'Faraway Jump' ... "It was around this time the phrase 'witch-space' first appeared...

"The original hyperdrives were powered by a fuel known as quirium ...

If you read it top-to-bottom like you would a timeline you end up with:

1) 22nd C. Hyperdrive invented
2) unknown stuff for ~600 years
3) 2800 Faraway jump developed, powered by Quirium, consumer access.
4) Faraway Jump runs for ~300 years (until Galcop collapse)
4) Quirium formula lost, 2b is replacement, FSD replaced 2b.

This is how it's been presented on the wiki and tons of people read it like this, me too for years, but I've just realised, is it supposed to be read differently? Essentially an article summary at the top, then developing the details in subsequent paragraphs, so the information should read like this:

1) 22nd C. Faraway Jump Hyperdrive invented, powered by Quirium
2) ~600 years of commercial development
3) Consumer ships gain access to (now developed, safer) Faraway Jump (~2800)
4) Faraway Jump runs for another ~300 years (until Galcop collapse)
3) Quirium formula lost, 2b is replacement, FSD replaced 2b.

This reading drastically changes the information on early Hyperdrives!

Is it possible for you to clarify this for us Allen?

Louis Calvert · Nov 10, 2022

Hello All, I emailed support:

My original request:

and the reply:

Worth a try

Shout out to Fdev support staff, they have always been brilliant

cmdr milesred · Nov 10, 2022

sorry, it is a post by one of the posters here, it included a response he got from fdev by asking a question.
that response was then shown here , a typo or not a typo.
but it seemed as though it was an intentional gift/clue

Rochester · Nov 10, 2022

Louis Calvert said:
Hello All, I emailed support:

My original request:

View attachment 331743

and the reply:

View attachment 331744

Worth a try

Shout out to Fdev support staff, they have always been brilliant

Always worth a shot O7

One better might have been. ‘Do the codexes in game relate to lore based information or identifiable content which can be visibly confirmed currently by players currently interaction, it is unclear what their purposes are, as FD has in at least 1 occasion confirmed said codexes information related to content which cannot be interacted with, and is likely archived. Do all the codex’s point to something in game, if this is not true why is there this inconsistency?

The prong is to tip the hat and reveal a tell, ping interest off the Dev team, cross examination with their own information, don’t mention Raxxla, get them into an analysis of logic, put them in a linguistic cul-de-sac that demands a response.

Bait and switch.

Source: https://youtu.be/mSnnY7tSaIg

Louis Calvert · Nov 10, 2022

Rochester said:
Always worth a shot O7

One better might have been. ‘Do the codexes in game relate to lore based information or identifiable content which can be visibly confirmed currently by players currently interaction, it is unclear what their purposes are, as FD has in at least 1 occasion confirmed said codexes information related to content which cannot be interacted with, and is likely archived. Do all the codex’s point to something in game, if this is not true why is there this inconsistency?

The prong is to tip the hat and reveal a tell, ping interest off the Dev team, cross examination with their own information, don’t mention Raxxla, get them into an analysis of logic, put them in a linguistic cul-de-sac that demands a response.

Bait and switch.

Go for it, we'll good-cop-bad-cop it

Jorki Rasalas · Nov 10, 2022

It did it again! Ship jump range 60+ ly, got in game for a short while this afternoon & found one jump was only 11 ly! No NS in the route, so what’s happening??

Louis Calvert · Nov 10, 2022

Jorki Rasalas said:
It did it again! Ship jump range 60+ ly, got in game for a short while this afternoon & found one jump was only 11 ly! No NS in the route, so what’s happening??

What's this? You meant to jump 60ly and only jumped 11?

Zieman · Nov 10, 2022

Jorki Rasalas said:
It did it again! Ship jump range 60+ ly, got in game for a short while this afternoon & found one jump was only 11 ly! No NS in the route, so what’s happening??

The route plotter sometimes plots inexplicably short jumps in (longer?) routes.
I would guess it happens around the middle point, as if the plotter works from both ends towards the other and the feelers don't quite meet each other.

Allen Stroud · Nov 10, 2022

Louis Calvert said:
@Allen Stroud I'm sorry to ping you, but you mentioned work you'd done on Hyperdrives originally. I completely understand if you can't/don't want to give us more info , but if you don't have an objection could you give us any more info on the 'order of development'?

Essentially I'm interested in this because of the Galnet Hyperdrive lore (which I think might have been based on your work?) that basically everyone is using as a basis for early FTL travel as defined in Eite Dangerous.

My question is: Is the order of information in that article correct?

(modified quote of the article retaining the structure of info):

If you read it top-to-bottom like you would a timeline you end up with:

1) 22nd C. Hyperdrive invented
2) unknown stuff for ~600 years
3) 2800 Faraway jump developed, powered by Quirium, consumer access.
4) Faraway Jump runs for ~300 years (until Galcop collapse)
4) Quirium formula lost, 2b is replacement, FSD replaced 2b.

This is how it's been presented on the wiki and tons of people read it like this, me too for years, but I've just realised, is it supposed to be read differently? Essentially an article summary at the top, then developing the details in subsequent paragraphs, so the information should read like this:

1) 22nd C. Faraway Jump Hyperdrive invented, powered by Quirium
2) ~600 years of commercial development
3) Consumer ships gain access to (now developed, safer) Faraway Jump (~2800)
4) Faraway Jump runs for another ~300 years (until Galcop collapse)
3) Quirium formula lost, 2b is replacement, FSD replaced 2b.

This reading drastically changes the information on early Hyperdrives!

Is it possible for you to clarify this for us Allen?

That's okay. I think most of this is based on a Michael Brookes edit of a document I originally wrote. It looks accurate. I can check it against the documentation I have, but I'd rather not start doing that too much (see reason below).

I can't recall the final decision on 'Quirium'. The concept of 'Quirium' was one that was intended to be phased out in favour of the Sirius Corporation's monopoly/influence.

In general, I'm reluctant to go into too much detail here as the drafts I have will be pre-edited versions and would be subject to change by Frontier after I had completed the drafting.

With regards to the 2b to current FSD drives. As I mentioned, I will try to reach out to Frontier and resend the last document I wrote about this (and Stardreamer). From that point, it would be up to them to use/tweak/publish/etc. Generally, that's the way I've tried to work with all this.

Louis Calvert · Nov 10, 2022

Allen Stroud said:
That's okay. I think most of this is based on a Michael Brookes edit of a document I originally wrote. It looks accurate. I can check it against the documentation I have, but I'd rather not start doing that too much (see reason below).

I can't recall the final decision on 'Quirium'. The concept of 'Quirium' was one that was intended to be phased out in favour of the Sirius Corporation's monopoly/influence.

In general, I'm reluctant to go into too much detail here as the drafts I have will be pre-edited versions and would be subject to change by Frontier after I had completed the drafting.

With regards to the 2b to current FSD drives. As I mentioned, I will try to reach out to Frontier and resend the last document I wrote about this (and Stardreamer). From that point, it would be up to them to use/tweak/publish/etc. Generally, that's the way I've tried to work with all this.

Thanks! Totally understand that you don't want to get into the weeds

Jorki Rasalas · Nov 10, 2022

Louis Calvert said:
What's this? You meant to jump 60ly and only jumped 11?

No, my ship is capable of 60+ly, so I was very surprised to find a hop that was only planned to be 11ly.
I think Zieman is probably right-the route planner must work together from both ends of the route and could end up with a short hop near the middle. Though I don’t think I’m near the middle yet!!!

Rochester · Nov 11, 2022

*redacted

Darrack · Nov 11, 2022

Had a reply from CS re Saturn

Hey there CMDR,

Thanks for getting in touch with us.

When Elite Dangerous was created, Saturn actually had 62 moons! Only six of these are landable in game.

At this current point in time, Saturn has up to 83 moons, with 63 moons confirmed and named and another 20 moons awaiting confirmation of discovery.

We cannot comment on whether or not more moons of Saturn will be made landable in the future.

I hope this clarifies things for you! Please let us know if you have any other queries.

So no confirmation of the missing two, but it could be intentional if they paid so much attention to the current system.
They must be getting fed up with Raxxla related questions,

for their patience and fast reply's

O7

Louis Calvert · Nov 11, 2022

Thanks @Darrack that's great info. Interesting that this suggests that a decision was made to exclude Mimas (Hyperion is a weird wibbly rock, but Mimas is/should be an actual round moon!)

Everyone, the kind people at EDDB discord came through with some great info - convo posted below.

TLDR:

Mimas was added to the EDDB on 5th Feb 2017 (3304)
No way to know if it was manually added
It's listed as a BLACK HOLE
Speculation is that since the type id for a black hole is '1' it may have just been the default entry type.

Make of that what you will, Raxxla hunters!

Jorki Rasalas · Nov 11, 2022

Mmm. There’s a theory that there may be a grapefruit-size black hole in our solar system (can’t remember where I saw that). So it might be worth searching around Mimas’ orbit to see if the Omphalos Rift appears/you fall into it.

Edit:think it was supposed to be in the Oort Cloud, perhaps a possibility for Planet X?

Merlin StWahgwaan · Nov 11, 2022

Just saw.... FSS Updates to include "Thargoid Rouge Signal Sources"....

I've said it before, and I'll say it again...

Raxxla is a Rouge planet, we just never had any tools or proof until now to prove that.

We now have the thargoid UA signals moving system to system, and a Rouge signal added to the FSS.... plus Rouge was already a "star" type.

All of the mechanics for Raxxla to be a traveling Rouge.

We have to find the "path", or take the "journey" to find it...
I called this my best, most likely theory like 2 years ago, and it's just being proven more and more now...

So, any thoughts on where the trail might actually begin? Or how we track/find the path Raxxla is on?

It's likely to be similar to the moving UI when it's in a system, moving, but not as fast, and yea... I'm more excited about the hunt for raxxla now then at any point in the last 2 years...

Darrack · Nov 11, 2022

Jorki Rasalas said:
Mmm. There’s a theory that there may be a grapefruit-size black hole in our solar system (can’t remember where I saw that). So it might be worth searching around Mimas’ orbit to see if the Omphalos Rift appears/you fall into it.

Edit:think it was supposed to be in the Oort Cloud, perhaps a possibility for Planet X?

In which case not an explorable region for us atm? ie not in SOL

O7

Darrack · Nov 11, 2022

Merlin StWahgwaan said:
Just saw.... FSS Updates to include "Thargoid Rouge Signal Sources"....

I've said it before, and I'll say it again...

Raxxla is a Rouge planet, we just never had any tools or proof until now to prove that.

We now have the thargoid UI signals moving system to system, and a Rouge signal added to the FSS.... plus Rouge was already a "star" type.

All of the mechanics for Raxxla to be a traveling Rouge.

We have to find the "path", or take the "journey" to find it...
I called this my best, most likely theory like 2 years ago, and it's just being proven more and more now...

So, any thoughts on where the trail might actually begin? Or how we track/find the path Raxxla is on?

It's likely to be similar to the moving UI when it's in a system, moving, but not as fast, and yea... I'm more excited about the hunt for raxxla now then at any point in the last 2 years...

My guess is unless someone makes a staggering discovery or uses some third party hack they wont introduce Raxxla just yet.
I think the Thargoid thing is a completely separate story (for now), im more inclined to think that Raxxla has more in common with the Guardians.

Im just of the idea that Raxxla after all these years is just such a huge deal than to be brought out as Elites Chrimbo special.

O7

Merlin StWahgwaan · Nov 11, 2022

Darrack said:
My guess is unless someone makes a staggering discovery or uses some third party hack they wont introduce Raxxla just yet.
I think the Thargoid thing is a completely separate story (for now), im more inclined to think that Raxxla has more in common with the Guardians.

Im just of the idea that Raxxla after all these years is just such a huge deal than to be brought out as Elites Chrimbo special.

O7

Oh yes, thargoid and raxxla are two separate things, I'm just using the thargoids as proof of how Raxxla could exist, even if they are different stories entirely

What i was trying to say, until now really, we never had anything to prove "rogue" things could or did exist in game, beyond the star class in the manual. Now we have 2 pieces of proof, the thargoid UA moving thru systems, and the FSS upgrade to see the UA.

So now it's a lot more likely that Raxxla could be a hidden Rogue planet, and we might finally have a tool to discover it... but we still need to find it and track it reliably, never mind getting to it yet...
Add-on: Raxxla likely won't show up from a different system, only the system it's in, and who knows from what distance... still a needle in a galactic hay stack, but atleast we have a tiny fridge magnet now? Lol