SURFACE SIGNAL: GEOLOGICAL (What's the number for?)

[kris44dad]

Is the number at the end, the actual number of samples there are to find at the landing site, or what?

 

[Northpin]

a site id to make sure what site you are visiting

 

[ADAMtheWELSHMANz]

Especially useful if you're looking for a codex entry you know is on the planet as you won't revisit the same site twice by mistake

 

[Riverside]

If there are 10 persistent POI sites on a particular body the number is just to differentiate each site. It's fairly common for there to be at least two different types of Geo site, so it's worth visiting more than one and as Northpin and ADAMtheWELSHMANz say it helps you to confirm which sites you have visited.

The number is not related to the size of the POI.

 

[DNA-Decay]

Used to be the Thargoid Barnacles didn't have an ID number.
So you'd find a planet with a bunch and you'd end up revisiting the same Barnies and DAMMIT ALREADY SCANNED THAT ONE.

 

[GreyAreaUK]

Pretty sure it's just an index.

 

[Factabulous]

Pretty sure it's just an index.

No need to prevaricate - it is an index. One of the changes that fdev added after Cmdr feedback, so we could tell them apart.

 

[Aashenfox]

Yep, we use it to identify sites which are easily traversable in our Raw materials farming thread (recommended sites: #1, #5, #21 and #34 for example).

 

[Micha]

No need to prevaricate - it is an index. One of the changes that fdev added after Cmdr feedback, so we could tell them apart.

The next improvement would be tagging each one with an icon after you've visited it()... as well as showing them on the Surface Map ().

(*)indicating the type if you scanned it.

 

[Flossy]

These numbers were especially useful on DW2 where basecamps were often placed at one of them - much easier to navigate to than a set of coordinates!

 

[Stealthie]

Is the number at the end, the actual number of samples there are to find at the landing site, or what?

Just to clarify what a bunch of other people have already said, the point is so people know which site is which.

When there are 20 sites on a planet, you visit one, move on to the next, and it's almost impossible to keep track of which ones you've visited.
They give all the sites a unique number so you can keep track of which ones you've been to and which ones you haven't.

Sensible idea, really.

 

[Dagwit]

No need to prevaricate - it is an index. One of the changes that fdev added after Cmdr feedback, so we could tell them apart.

I was one of the CMDRs feeding back on this - I was pretty pleased with the devs' response.

It's not all YOU SUXORS DEVS!

 

[CMDR Duk'ath Lo'makh]

The next improvement would be tagging each one with an icon after you've visited it()... as well as showing them on the Surface Map ().

(*)indicating the type if you scanned it.

YES PLEASE!

 

[ysfsim]

What i have observed is that the number are not really indexes. Im in the Hip 36601 system collecting raw mats from around that large system. Each of the planets that did the detailed surface scan, reviled many sites that are numbered. I found that the sites with the higher numbers were very difficult to access with ships to land and it is very hard to drive srvs around due to the very rough terrain. The sites with lower numbers are very easy to access for terrain. I am lead to believe it has to do with difficulty rather than a simple index scheme.

 

[Zed]

What i have observed is that the number are not really indexes. Im in the Hip 36601 system collecting raw mats from around that large system. Each of the planets that did the detailed surface scan, reviled many sites that are numbered. I found that the sites with the higher numbers were very difficult to access with ships to land and it is very hard to drive srvs around due to the very rough terrain. The sites with lower numbers are very easy to access for terrain. I am lead to believe it has to do with difficulty rather than a simple index scheme.

I'm assuming this is a joke unless you believe there's a direct correlation between the number of sites on a plant and and how hard it is to get to them.

 

[Bottom Hat]

I'm assuming this is a joke unless you believe there's a direct correlation between the number of sites on a plant and and how hard it is to get to them.

I thought it was an inverse square law?

 

[Riverside]

What i have observed is that the number are not really indexes. Im in the Hip 36601 system collecting raw mats from around that large system. Each of the planets that did the detailed surface scan, reviled many sites that are numbered. I found that the sites with the higher numbers were very difficult to access with ships to land and it is very hard to drive srvs around due to the very rough terrain. The sites with lower numbers are very easy to access for terrain. I am lead to believe it has to do with difficulty rather than a simple index scheme.

I don't think that's the case but it's an interesting theory & one than you could test

 

[Speedcuffs]

I thought it was an inverse square law?

It's hip to be inverse square.

 

[Bottom Hat]

It's hip to be inverse square.

Certainly is at the shard sites!

 

[ysfsim]

I don't think that's the case but it's an interesting theory & one than you could test

I flew around some more in that system and one of the moons had many sources and a look in the nav panel shows numbers up to 22 however a quick glance shows less than 22 entries. I also decided to visit the geo site sources and started with the "1" and it was an very easy terrain. As I moved up the numbers I found the terrain getting harder to land at and access. Im headed to the Outotz LS-K d8-3 system to get some other mats. I will see if its the same .