I've found an importan evidence/clue about the surface mapping redundant bug! Please read FDEV

Unfortunately I had the Instant Replay OFF (everytime I update the GeForce drivers it goes off 🤬).
Anyway this is what happened:
I had a planet and a moon very close to each other. I wanted to map the moon so I shot a probe at it and I noticed that also the planet on the side started showing the surface grid when the probe hit the moon and I saw the planet being mapped too!!! The planet mapping was synchronized with the moon, you can imagine the mapping radius growing at the same time in the very same position on both bodies, but on the planet the radius was smaller (becuase the planet is bigger I suppose) and when the moon surface was completed, so was the planet (only graphically because it's not mapped in the system map).
If some FDEV wants to reproduce it here below is a screenshot with the body name (moon is selected): system is TEQIA LG-Y E970 (discovered today by me on EDSM).

131781
 
I came across two close by planets and thought I'd video the mapping.


Two Four other nearby planets were also "mapped" at the same time.
I had to go 1,000LS away to get a planet that had not been "mapped".

@SenseiMatty Did you do a bug report in the end?
I could add this to it.
 
Last edited:
Judging by your video, @Nick Sticks, it looks like a display issue rather than a scan issue? Meaning, while the first planet you probed seemed to mark the two of them, you were still able to scan the second planet afterwards (though it looked like it had already been completed)? Am I understanding that correctly?

Must be said, when I see things like this I do wonder at what optimisations are going on - I'd have thought that keeping planets separate in a space game was rather a fundamental requirement...
 
I came across two close by planets and thought I'd video the mapping.


Two Four other nearby planets were also "mapped" at the same time.
I had to go 1,000LS away to get a planet that had not been "mapped".

@SenseiMatty Did you do a bug report in the end?
I could add this to it.
That's exactly what I was describing in the OP! Good catch!
 
Top Bottom