I think youve had the wrong attitude for some time so yes probably best to give up.
or you coud look at the puzzle. You say you have been to 2 sites the K & A class, but wilfully ignore the 3rd log and M class in the logs and the actual dates in the logs which tell you the order it happened, instead picking out the 27th for some reason and trying to criticise it when there is no associated log for that date...that you have so far?
how did 'this reference' to a geo station suddenly become relevant? Maybe if you finished it youd find out.
You have a reference to CSN, you have a 300 LY distance from one point, you know the date and the star class from the log....and yet you ignore all this and spend time moaning on the forums, yes give up, give up now.
My, you've got a smart mouth on you...
You have me completely wrong pal. I've spent days on this. I have put in a significant amount of time getting the maths right (yes, resurrecting 40 year old memories of O levels, doing maths rather than just trying to guess distances and keep a straight line in the very inaccurate galmap) to find the K class LP, and then using the same technique to work the other way and locate the Sidewinder at the A class. I have all the logs and have read them thoroughly thanks. And I'm fully aware of the timeline.
Yes I have a reference to CSN but no intermediate location, either before or after the nebula, to plot a line through from HIP 69200 to match up with an M class at the relevant distance in the CSN (which given the simplest approach, and likely to be similar to the others, is a straight line jump at the distances given) in this case 300ly. I presume you have looked at the number of M class in the CSN? Rather a large number eh?
In the absence of this information one would expect the LP data to reveal some sort of clue, just something to narrow it down, not necessarily point a big yellow arrow at it. The fact that it doesn't and appears to be undecipherable is my main problem with the whole process. It smacks of not very well thought through game design that relies on out of game knowledge and hints in livestreams. That it comes down potentially to a mass search is not good gameplay.
As to 'wilfully' ignoring the middle log entry for the M class, well of course not, that's what all this is about, I have been asking questions
around the whole subject. The information in the M class log entry only has any further value once you have found the M class. In the same way that flailing around looking for a K class with 11 planets would be futile until one had narrowed down the search area for the K class.
I've not published my every step on here for all to comment on, therefore you have no idea of my train of thought, process or progress. I have spent far less time 'moaning' as you have it, than actually doing the legwork. But hey, points to you for selectively quoting me.
If you must know my questions related to the 27th were as a result of posts on the forum a few days ago, I was still catching up having chosen to do the legwork myself. In those posts I saw references to logs from Carver on the 27th from the survey post, and was asking a simple question. From this I concluded that this was the survey post referred to in the Ghost Ship log, nothing more. I'm certainly not criticising it.
There, you have the full story. Happy now? If you want, tell me exactly how you completed the whole thing, start to finish. I'll wait.
< this is me. Dont be like me. Or should i say:
< this was me before the LP.
