Alien archeology and other mysteries: Thread 9 - The Canonn

[Tessa R Act]

I'm not a fan of the elmo/hex naming either. We have a bot command on the discord running with this naming convention

Guardian Site # by order found - [ruins layout type] - location....

so the overall nomenclature should be

GS1 - [Beta 1a] - Synuefe XR-H D11-102, planet 1B at -31.7347, -128.9212
GS2 - [Beta 1b] - IC 2391 Sector GW-V B2-4, planet B1 at -29.1664, -30.5041
GS3 - [Alpha 1a] - IC 2391 Sector ZE-A D101 planet C3 at 29.42, -59.54
GS4 - [Beta 1c] - Synuefe XO-P C22-17 planet C1 at 19.53, -141.76
GS5 - [Alpha 1b] - Synuefe ZL-J D10-119 planet 9B at -23.3821, 178.9094
GS6 - [Beta 2a] - Col 173 Sector KY-Q D5-47 planet 8C at 16.2701, 18.1282
GS7 - [Alpha 2a] - Col 173 Sector KY-Q D5-47 planet 8C at 46.07, -171.33
GS8 - [Beta 1d] - HIP 39768 planet A 14F at 7.0924, 170.2272

to ident down to location ?

 

[QorbeQ]

Discord - the modern name for IRC?

Edit: Googled it all. Hmm. Ok. Seems like a flash in the pan

 

[zorbaq]

We're not real scientists until we've had an argument over naming conventions.

 

[MyklAtrum]

so the overall nomenclature should be

GS1 - [Beta 1a] - Synuefe XR-H D11-102, planet 1B at -31.7347, -128.9212
GS2 - [Beta 1b] - IC 2391 Sector GW-V B2-4, planet B1 at -29.1664, -30.5041
GS3 - [Alpha 1a] - IC 2391 Sector ZE-A D101 planet C3 at 29.42, -59.54
GS4 - [Beta 1c] - Synuefe XO-P C22-17 planet C1 at 19.53, -141.76
GS5 - [Alpha 1b] - Synuefe ZL-J D10-119 planet 9B at -23.3821, 178.9094
GS6 - [Beta 2a] - Col 173 Sector KY-Q D5-47 planet 8C at 16.2701, 18.1282
GS7 - [Alpha 2a] - Col 173 Sector KY-Q D5-47 planet 8C at 46.07, -171.33
GS8 - [Beta 1d] - HIP 39768 planet A 14F at 7.0924, 170.2272

to ident down to location ?

No. I think that gets too confusing. Use the GS naming for order of site. We don't need to further identify by number of specific layout found do we? That gets redundant and there's no real reason to know the order of those found. If I want to know the third ruin of Beta, I'll look at the GS designation and count. Otherwise, its just getting way too deep and people won't understand the key. The GS designation does a fine job of order in my opinion. Beyond that, you just need to know ruin type/obelisk layout.

 

[Tessa R Act]

No. I think that gets too confusing. Use the GS naming for order of site. We don't need to further identify by number of specific layout found do we? That gets redundant and there's no real reason to know the order of those found. If I want to know the third ruin of Beta, I'll look at the GS designation and count. Otherwise, its just getting way too deep and people won't understand the key. The GS designation does a fine job of order in my opinion. Beyond that, you just need to know ruin type/obelisk layout.

fine for me - as long as You keep the task cataloging em and keep everything on track once we start finding em by the dozends

add: should go that way to FP then so everybody can refer to it...

 

[viper1209]

Greetings CMDRs,

I'm pretty new to this forum and this thread but I'm currently investigating the alien ruins and came up with some (probably rather noobish) questions. I tried to find answers in this thread but hey, this thing grows faster than I'm able follow
First of all what about the time limit of the mission? I assume you need to hand in the mission even if you did not found everything before time runs out. I remember I read somewhere you will get the same mission with 4 weeks time again, is this right?

Second I'm driving around on several different sides in solo, open and PG for some time but the last few days only the obelisks from solo are active (even in open/PG) and if I'm switching instances it seems like exactly the same are active. This leading to me having everything scanned I'm able to but not being able to go on with the mission. Is this just bad luck or am I doing something wrong?

 

[Brakhir]

Could you illustrate your positioning, beacon positioning and angles on a beta site map please?

Here are some pictures :

http://imgur.com/a/gKNhv

o7

 

[zorbaq]

I assume you need to hand in the mission even if you did not found everything before time runs out. I remember I read somewhere you will get the same mission with 4 weeks time again, is this right?

Correct.

 

[Factabulous]

First of all what about the time limit of the mission? I assume you need to hand in the mission even if you did not found everything before time runs out. I remember I read somewhere you will get the same mission with 4 weeks time again, is this right?

Yes and yes Ninja'd - We need a designated 'answerer of the known'

Second I'm driving around on several different sides in solo, open and PG for some time but the last few days only the obelisks from solo are active (even in open/PG) and if I'm switching instances it seems like exactly the same are active. This leading to me having everything scanned I'm able to but not being able to go on with the mission. Is this just bad luck or am I doing something wrong?

You need other ppl to be present in the group to see other obelisks, as there are so many sites now ppl are probably spread out - try and find somewhere popular, then relog like crazy. Good luck

 

[danteuk]

so the overall nomenclature should be

GS1 - [Beta 1a] - Synuefe XR-H D11-102, planet 1B at -31.7347, -128.9212
GS2 - [Beta 1b] - IC 2391 Sector GW-V B2-4, planet B1 at -29.1664, -30.5041
GS3 - [Alpha 1a] - IC 2391 Sector ZE-A D101 planet C3 at 29.42, -59.54
GS4 - [Beta 1c] - Synuefe XO-P C22-17 planet C1 at 19.53, -141.76
GS5 - [Alpha 1b] - Synuefe ZL-J D10-119 planet 9B at -23.3821, 178.9094
GS6 - [Beta 2a] - Col 173 Sector KY-Q D5-47 planet 8C at 16.2701, 18.1282
GS7 - [Alpha 2a] - Col 173 Sector KY-Q D5-47 planet 8C at 46.07, -171.33
GS8 - [Beta 1d] - HIP 39768 planet A 14F at 7.0924, 170.2272

to ident down to location ?

For me the GS is meaningless - who cares what order we found them in ? it's not relevant in any way to the data they contain - which IS the important factor.
Alpha - for Elmo shape because it's the 1st set of data
Beta - for Hex shape because it's the middle set of data
Gamma - for 3rd set of data

Then either 1/2/3 or a/b/c for extra data sets without those as above.

Again GSx is no use to anyone except the few people that can remember the specific order in which they were found - going forward that's going to be more more useless as more sites get found.

 

[Lorgius]

No. I think that gets too confusing. Use the GS naming for order of site. We don't need to further identify by number of specific layout found do we? That gets redundant and there's no real reason to know the order of those found. If I want to know the third ruin of Beta, I'll look at the GS designation and count. Otherwise, its just getting way too deep and people won't understand the key. The GS designation does a fine job of order in my opinion. Beyond that, you just need to know ruin type/obelisk layout.

GS part will fail pretty soon when we reach 100+ new sites found. Should be something short that gives , system short-cut, site type, site variation and site number in system (we can use GS here). For planets and exact cords, we will have to make another row anyway because it is to long for short. The biggest problem will be find an efficient way to shorten system designation.

For example:

Col173KY-Q D5-47 /B2a/GS1
Col173KY-Q D5-47 /A2a/GS2
SynuXR-H D11-102 /B1a/GS1
IC 2391 ZE-A D101 /A1a/GS1

Underline part need to be worked out for something more efficient thou.

Edit:
Although GS part still doesn't work - especially in moment we find next site in same system.

 

[QorbeQ]

Here are some pictures :

http://imgur.com/a/gKNhv

o7

Perfect, thank you commander.

o7

 

[Sutore]

We're not real scientists until we've had an argument over naming conventions.

Correction - you're not real scientists until you change the naming conventions because normal people began to understand them [smile]

 

[viper1209]

Correct.

Yes and yes Ninja'd - We need a designated 'answerer of the known'


You need other ppl to be present in the group to see other obelisks, as there are so many sites now ppl are probably spread out - try and find somewhere popular, then relog like crazy. Good luck

Thank you too for the fast answer. I have been with others (at least in open) several time. I'm in right now and get other obelisks than the solo ones. I assume it really has been just bad luck

 

[Stormprooter]

Fact :

I was at col sector... beta.2 site. (planet 8C)
Positioned at the center of the site (16.2786, 18.0986).
Aligned my ship with the B1 beacon (orientation of the map). Gives me a bearing of ~ 279°

Used EDBearing and enter coordinates of alpha.2 site (same planet, (46.0971, -171.3270))
Gives me a bearing of 281°. (http://www.hotdoy.ca/edbearing/?lat=46.0971&lon=-171.3270&title=)

Question :

No conclusion yet (I'm quite a noob Explorer) , but :
Is ~ 2° difference a lot ?

That is definitely a close match.
What I would try next (and will - but anyone else is also welcome should they wish) is to find the position where the beacon is exactly 281 degrees bearing, then reverse back along that line to see what's on the ground. I have a hunch it might be the the bit that sticks out to the left on the "key" shape.

 

[MyklAtrum]

fine for me - as long as You keep the task cataloging em and keep everything on track once we start finding em by the dozends

add: should go that way to FP then so everybody can refer to it...

Oh dont worry. I have been keeping track of them that way and will continue to do so for quite some time. At some point a list will probably become too long and a spreadsheet will do just fine.

Again GSx is no use to anyone except the few people that can remember the specific order in which they were found - going forward that's going to be more more useless as more sites get found.

GS part will fail pretty soon when we reach 100+ new sites found. Should be something short that gives , system short-cut, site type, site variation and site number in system (we can use GS here). For planets and exact cords, we will have to make another row anyway because it is to long for short. The biggest problem will be find an efficient way to shorten system designation.

While I do agree that over time, the order will become meaningless, my ocd to organize requires that the list still stay in sequential order for the moment. When it becomes dozens of sites, a spreadsheet similar to the barnacles will do fine. In both cases, we would only need location/ruin topology type/obelisk layout type. No need for any order at that point other than data order.

But.. There will always be someone who asks which one was the first, or third.

 

[Factabulous]

Thank you too for the fast answer. I have been with others (at least in open) several time. I'm in right now and get other obelisks than the solo ones. I assume it really has been just bad luck

Also possible you were in an instance where everyone is waiting for someone else to scan so they can 'leech' results. Glad you're getting stuff now.

 

[madwax]

Correction - you're not real scientists until you change the naming conventions because normal people began to understand them [smile]

Correction - you're not a real scientist until you renamed a understandable nameing system to something scientific because "normal people" keep miss understanding things, think they are experts and ask the same stupid questions over and over again

 

[MyklAtrum]

Question.. Did I miss it? Or was it not discussed that there are no obelisks AT ALL at the site Zorbaq found??? A cmdr on discord has screenshots showing none.

 

[Stormprooter]

I like the Hex/Elmo naming, but then I am a software developer, we love quirky names for things