Elite Observatory - Search your journal for potentially interesting objects, or notify you of new ones on the fly while exploring!

[Rudi Raumkraut]

this looks like a neat tool, thx!

as I dont have a clue about log parsing,
does the (very) interesting objects do just need a honk to be revealed or do they need a fss ?!
(could be categorised )

 

[Vithigar]

Everything this looks for comes from the FSS or proximity auto-scans. The honk doesn't write any specific information about bodies to the journal other than the number in system.

 

[GrandAdmiralThrawn]

Today I started seriously using this tool for the first time. I chose the text-to-speech option, as I'm playing in VR.

First time it said something to me, I almost got a heart attack because I was completely unprepared. It's using a Microsoft API for text-to-speech, I assume? It's still (almost?) as bad as I remember it from almost 20 years ago. But yep, the Observatory works, and I can say that it's truly useful!

I hope you can add GGG detection to it!

Thanks for your work!

Edit: And a feature request: You could add water worlds with no atmosphere. They do exist, but are somewhat rare (and quite impossible too, as I've been told). Might be worth adding. I can provide sample log entries if required. Same could also be done for terraformable ammonia worlds. I've not scanned any of those myself though, so I can't provide journal snippets for them.

 

[Vithigar]

Haha, yes, in the interest of avoiding other dependencies and being as lightweight as possible it uses the standard microsoft speech synthesis API (specifically a System.Speech.Synthesis.SpeechSynthesizer object). It's all straight defaults for its output at the moment*, though adding options to customise it is something I've been considering.
I also had exactly the same experience the first time I tried it myself in VR. I nearly jumped out of my seat.

Terraformable ammonia worlds are definitely interesting, and straightforward enough that I wouldn't need a journal sample to add. WWs with no atmosphere as well, probably, assuming the game is sensible about how they're logged (empty string atmosphere type, same as most others?).

Alternatively I can just get body type added to the available data for custom criteria, and anyone can add those themselves.

*Edit: That's a lie. I had to tweak it a bit to get it to say procedural system names properly, e.g. spelling out "AB-K" instead of pronouncing "Ab" as a single syllable.

 

[GrandAdmiralThrawn]

It logs them with no atmosphere, yes. Here's an example:

{ "timestamp":"2019-09-14T13:19:07Z", "event":"Scan", "ScanType":"Detailed", "BodyName":"Synauloo MK-C d14-15 5", "BodyID":25, "Parents":[ {"Star":0} ], "DistanceFromArrivalLS":2292.797119, "TidalLock":false, "TerraformState":"", "PlanetClass":"Water world", "Atmosphere":"", "AtmosphereType":"None", "Volcanism":"", "MassEM":10.134705, "Radius":14049019.000000, "SurfaceGravity":20.465788, "SurfaceTemperature":208.175446, "SurfacePressure":0.000000, "Landable":false, "Composition":{ "Ice":0.001698, "Rock":0.614176, "Metal":0.298179 }, "SemiMajorAxis":687180742656.000000, "Eccentricity":0.000798, "OrbitalInclination":1.197599, "Periapsis":251.408234, "OrbitalPeriod":238101264.000000, "RotationPeriod":53111.875000, "AxialTilt":2.641768, "WasDiscovered":false, "WasMapped":false }

Too bad they're "Landable":false.

 

[varonica]

Thanks for your work!

Edit: And a feature request: You could add water worlds with no atmosphere. They do exist, but are somewhat rare (and quite impossible too, as I've been told). Might be worth adding. I can provide sample log entries if required. Same could also be done for terraformable ammonia worlds. I've not scanned any of those myself though, so I can't provide journal snippets for them.

The same, I also started using it and it is very useful, although I did note a peculiarity. I have reports for small bodies under 300km radius turned on, just because I like small things, it spoke to me about all my newly discovered small bodies but on entering a system with an already tagged small body it didn't speak or record it in the log.

And feature request, landable bodies over 18,000km radius would be nice

Ok I have looked at the readme on creating your own criteria and it looks simple enough, I will give it a try later.

 

[CMDR DERPY SMOOG]

i like this tool quite a bit. i'm taking my exploration conda out to heart and soul to give it a test run. i hope to see more options in the future and a simpler method of creating custom alerts. o7

i kind of wish i could link this to voice attack so the text to speech could use the verity voice and make it sound like the ships ai is telling you about things you've discovered. i dont even know if something like that is possible but i can hope .

edit: after using this for a few hours i have to say i love it. i have already found several interesting things i would have missed otherwise. like this very close orbiting landable moon: https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/205763755886379009/622741458545278987/20190915032423_1.jpg

 

[Vithigar]

Update! https://github.com/Xjph/EliteObservatory/releases/tag/v0.3.19.258

This release addresses some of the feedback I received since releasing on Thursday. More specifically:

• Added built-in check for wide rings (greater than 1 light-second)
• Added built-in check for large landable planets (greater than 18000km radius)
• Added PlanetClass to event data available for custom criteria, specify as PlanetClass:[Class to match here]. Class to match must be a case-insensitive match to the planetclass text used in the journal, e.g. PlanetClass:Water World. Returns 1 when matched, 0 otherwise.
• "Very interesting" criteria clarified and is now called "Multiple Criteria Notification" in the settings pane
• User defined criteria now included in multiple criteria check (was not previously included in "very interesting" check)
• Fixed a crash bug caused by some really boneheaded date handling behaviour in Newtonsoft.Json.
• Added a "hidden" setting to change the name used for premium FSD boost synthesis. If you don't like the word "Jumponium" you can edit the user.config file in %localappdata%\Observatory and add a value for FSDBoostSynthName. If no user.config file exists just open the settings pane and change anything to create one. This is an unsupported feature. If you set the FSD boost name to something crazy and it breaks something, that's on you.

 

[Vithigar]

I have reports for small bodies under 300km radius turned on, just because I like small things, it spoke to me about all my newly discovered small bodies but on entering a system with an already tagged small body it didn't speak or record it in the log.

When you say "already tagged" what do you mean? If it's already discovered by someone else that shouldn't make a difference and might be a bug. I'd like to see your journal log file with those scans so I can see what's up.

 

[CMDR DERPY SMOOG]

nice update. i started it up and it immediately alerted me to this multi ringed beauty.

Spoiler

 

[Vithigar]

I just about gave myself a heart attack from the text-to-speech notification again. Next version is getting a volume adjustment.

 

[GrandAdmiralThrawn]

You could make the volume part a user-adjustable slider. For luxury: With a "Test" button..

 

[Vithigar]

Definitely will have a slider and test button. Might add some of the other available native text-to-speech settings as well while I'm at it, like selecting which voice you want, or adjusting pace.

Other upcoming improvements I have in mind are some small tweaks to improve the performance of reading all your old logs (not that anyone has complained, quite the opposite actually), and of course exposing more values for user defined criteria. The big one I want to add would be to have access to the data for the parent object of your current scan (if available) which would increase the flexibility of the custom criteria enormously. Another one is information about the current body's rings, which I expect will be somewhat easier.

 

[varonica]

When you say "already tagged" what do you mean? If it's already discovered by someone else that shouldn't make a difference and might be a bug. I'd like to see your journal log file with those scans so I can see what's up.

Yes already discovered by another CMDR.

I would have to try and remember the system, however I am coming up on a target with an already tagged small body, I have a list of systems with small bodies under 200km radius I am checking out. If it happens this time I will send a copy of the journal log for that system. The one I mentioned didn't tell me as I have text to speech on so it surprised me because I knew it was there, and when I checked in the observatory log is wasn't listed, so yes it sounds like a bug.

 

[varonica]

When you say "already tagged" what do you mean? If it's already discovered by someone else that shouldn't make a difference and might be a bug. I'd like to see your journal log file with those scans so I can see what's up.

I arrived at my new target with already discovered small bodies and the same behaviour did not happen, it reported them all correctly, so it looks like a one time glitch.

 

[Vithigar]

Odd. I'm glad it's not happening anymore, but I'd be even happier if I knew why it didn't work the first time so I could fix it.

 

[varonica]

Back with a real error this time and an error message, it seems to be an error parsing the logs if you ask it to parse all logs. Just note that this didn't happen with the previous version which read the logs fine.

 

[Vithigar]

Well poop.

I actually saw that once myself but couldn't make it happen a second time to figure out what was going wrong. If it's happening every time for you would you mind sending me your logs?

 

[varonica]

Well poop.

I actually saw that once myself but couldn't make it happen a second time to figure out what was going wrong. If it's happening every time for you would you mind sending me your logs?

It happens every time.

The problem is I am not sure which logs would be needed, it does return some results, a list from 12/4/2017 to 20/10/2017, so I am thinking there was maybe some update there that wrote some dodgy data to the logs and it starts parsing but stops when it hits the problem.

I have lots of logs, how do you want me to send them?

 

[Orvidius]

I'm seeing the same error. When I tell it to read all logs, it retrieves 2017 and most of 2018 (up into December 20), and nothing from 2019.