A quick run down on one method that can increase the chances of finding valuable planets such as Earth-Likes, Candidates for Terraforming and Water Worlds.
Mate this is invaluable, not just in terms of the game but in terms of my general understanding of Space, of which I know very little ..awesome stuff man watched about 5 times already 😊
At 5:27 you mention our Sun going supernova. But our star lacks the amount of mass required to produce a supernova. Instead our Sun will increase in size, swelling into a red giant. The outer layers then gently fizzle out into space causing a planetary nebula. It will produce a cloud of gas that may resemble the Helix nebula or the Ring nebula. The Sun will then be left as a white dwarf, the remaining planets orbiting in near total darkness.
Our sun will swell up to become a red giant. And then, as it gets larger and larger, it will eventually become what’s called an asymptotic giant branch star - a star whose radius is just under the distance between the sun and the Earth - one astronomical unit in size. So our Earth will be literally skimming the surface of the red giant sun when it’s an asymptotic giant branch star.”
I did a 5000ly trip outside the bubble for the first time last night, and the totally random system i picked to end up at was the first one i decided to scan, and it had 2 Water and 1 earth like, was like haha what are the odds.
Just as Apoc said, our star is a relatively small star in comparison and will not go into either type 1 or 2 supernovae. It will form a red giant and then burn out. Thanks for the video on what to look for though!
In the System Map, different planets actually make different sounds when you hover the mouse over them (and turn up your volume). This will let you quickly distinguish between a water world, an Ammonia World and an Earth-like planet, and whether or not it's worth visiting to scan. forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php/144782-GUIDE-Planet-sounds-and-how-to-know-everything-from-System-Map
find the three breasted woman, tell her the secret password "titty sprinkles" and she'll show you a good time. Dont tell her I sent you, the Martian version of Maury Povich told that bitch the kid aint mine but she isnt having none of that. Stock up on rubbers before, Martian condoms might as well be made in China.
As long as you don't mind waiting in the void for about a billion years before Mars actually becomes a habitable planet. If you follow the timeline, you will see that's the period of time between Earth becoming uninhabitable and Mars becoming habitable.
ObsidianAnt That moon at 8:00 would have been terraformable too... Also check the official wiki for star classes... Now that i can decipher what, for example G2 IVAB, means, i tend to focus on the smaller hotter stars... Basically, the roman numerals are the size of the star (I being supergiant and VII being white dwarf, V are most main sequence), and the nuber behind star class indicates temperature (0 hottest to 9 coldest). The A, AB or B at the end means Bright, semi-bright, dark. So that put togethter makes G2 IVab a semi-bright hotter G-class that is slightly larger than normal.. Full wiki: elite-dangerous.wikia.com/wiki/Stars#Stellar_Classification
Thank you, I have been searching around for which particular search parameters to select. I have been out for a month and a half and still 16kly away from the center of the galaxy, the reason why its taken me so long is I am planning to be out for at least 2-3 months. I guess my goal and the same for everyone else is to get to elite in every class and since exploration takes so long I might as well start now as I have had the game since April and only started Exploration at the beginning of July. It's really exciting to discover, today I found a small black hole (undiscovered), and the selected options I had was just non sequence stars as was looking at lots of Neutron stars. Now I know to select these particular stars in hopes of finding more Water Worlds and Earth like planets. Ohh also finding terraformable high metal content planets are worth a lot too. I would like to know if there is a maximum amount of time you can spend out in a ASP, I wont leave it to long as I don't want to loose my data.
There is a way to possibly find them. The names of systems in the black actually are codes that reveal the total mass of the system. DTEA has a good guide on this and explains it much better than i could in a reply
It's rather only F, G & K (mnemonic _'For great kings!'_ ) which are most likely Sol-like stars and thus can have, if at all, Earth-like planets in an habitable zone situated at the same distance = 1 astronomical unit (AU) = 150 million km away from its star. The higher the F, G K class star's mass the further away the planet has to be to be terraformable/ within a possible habitable zone. Classes L and M instead and below are too cold, so if they have planets, they are probaly only ice or rock-ice plantets of low value! The distance of the HZ increases proportionally to the star's mass, just not to the same extent, e.g. if the star is twice as heavy as mother Earth's Sol (2 Sol masses), then the distance of the habitable zone has to be further out, obviously, or it wouldn't be within an habitable zone of this particular star. The relation is *1 Sol mass to the square root of the ammount of Sol masses* , in our planet's case it's obviously 1 Sol mass, which gives us the sqrt of 1 = 1 = 1 AU distance, right the distance of our planet to our parent star. And for the aforementioned 2 solar masses it's = sqrt of 2 = 1.4 AU respectively and so on and so forth. Also key: the planets in question should be somewhat brown or blue, with or even without atmosphere, but with a rather structured surface to be Earth-like (terraformable high metal content bodies look differently, though). The planets also have to have a radius of at least half of Earth's radius (thus more than 3,000 km) or it could already be too small. A temperature of about 300 K would be ideal, though there are twice as hot planets possible still being terraformable. 6:47 In this example it's pretty obvious that this planet not only looks Earth-like but also shares other significant values like her mass, almost the exact same radius, the correct temperature etc. However, you can't determine the exact distance to its star in the video's system map. Do not fall for the AUs of the semi-major axis. This does NOT tell you the distance of the planet from its star but is the half of its orbit (ellipse) longest diameter. This diameter runs not only from the centre to the perimeter but also through the focus, right where the star sits. Hence it's longer than the planets distance to its parent star. The eccentricity tells you, how much off the elipse's centre the star sits which the planet is orbiting. For Earth it's 0.0167 - which is mathmetically still an ellipse but looks in fact almost like a perfect circle. In the galaxy map you should click on the star of your liking and then immediately open its system map, hence BEFORE you travel there just to find out that you wasted your time. Don't know if this wasn't possible back in 2015 amd you had to travel to the particular star to be able to open its sytsme map. I also can't see the distance of the planet to its star in light seconds, when ObsidianAnt hovered over his found planet. But this is what I (and everybody else) can see in the todays system map. What's this good for? Because you certainly don't want to calculate the planet's real distance from its star using the semi-major axis' AU values. Instead know, that the light of our Sun/Sol takes 8 min 20 seconds to reach planet Earth, in other words it takes roughly 500 sec to cover 1 AU = 150 mio km = 500 ls = 1 AU. So, if you now know the star's Sol mass, just chose it in the system map to see its mass, then you can easily determine the necessary distance of its habitable zone: Just take the square root of the star's certain multiple Sol-mass and multiply it by our 500 ls which stand for 1 astronomical unit and voilà, you have found the necessary distance of any possibly terraformable or Earth-like planet orbiting your chosen star. *Example:* star's Sol mass = 4; sqrt 4 = 2 * 500 ls (= 1 AU) = 1,000 ls necessary distance of the planet from your star/jump point. That's it. Closer might be too hot and further out might be not close enough. Check the planets in the system map and find the one which matches the 1,000 ls best. Check his radius as well. At least roughly 3,000 km or more? Fine. Temperatur may vary from 200 K up to 1,000 K, while 1,000 K being not a no-go yet per se, since the planet of your desire can still have a high pressure atmosphere to compensate for the high temperature. This is an easy way how you check manually certain star systems if there are TWW, terraformable HMCs (high metal content) or even Earth-like worlds (ELWs) present/possible. May sound a bit intimidating at first glance, especially for people with dyscalculia, but it's in fact fairly simple and will soon become second nature on your search for terraformable planets of high value out there. Have a calculator at hand to quickly take the square root of stars' multiples of Sol masses, this gives you the factor you have to multiply 500 ls by to get the distance of any habitable zone around any stars as long as it's a star _' _*_F_*_ or _*_G_*_ reat _*_K_*_ ings'_ ;)
thx will try ut out. do u have to use a detailed sacanner on all planets in the solar system to get more $ or just earth like 1's? Giddy up and thx again!
The problem with the ED system map is that the distances from sun arent represented properly. each planet is a uniform distance visually. Having to check each planets distance from warp in and compare the stars luminosity/temperature is somewhat cumbersome to see if it's possibly in a habitable zone or terraformable. It would be nice if developers added a graphical indicator for the habitable zone in system maps...
I must have done about 60 - 70 jumps in one trip and still not found an earth-like, terraformable or water planet. I did get about 2.2 Mn for the metal, gas and icy ones.
So what I always wondered about exploration in elite ist : Is it just randomly generated meh systems and planets or are there actualy discoveries, structures, hidden surprises etc. etc.
I was travelling upwards in the galaxy and I've discovered 3 Earth-likes. I stopped going up because I got scared that my Navigation panel wouldn't detect any other nearby system. Systems are far from each other on the top.
I noticed the amount of stars in the backdrops of Obsidian's view of space was much brighter, rich and full of stars then what I view in game, is this because he is deep in the center of the galaxy or is this part of the enhanced graphics mod he has installed?
As I am currently moving towards the center to explore I have a question: Isn't it better for your balance if you simply scan all planets instead of searching for terraformable/etc. specificly as you have to scan them anyways?
M and L? Nah, delete them, stick to K, G, and F. The habitable zone of an M or L is too close to the star, and you're very unlikely to find anything that isn't tidally locked.
Do not forget terraformable rocky planets. Maybe the moon for the 3rd planet was one of there (Average profit is now about 30600cr based on 6 objects that I was found [but not discovered])
i am new to this game i have a question what happen when i find a Terraformable planet ? i can make a space station on it ? do that location become mine ? and again thx for u great video like u voice
Akuda Fox pretty late to be responding to your question bit if you havent found out you can only discover and scan the planet. if no one else has scanned it then you get your gamertag on the info of the planet once you turn in the data to a station. sadly you cannot place space stations
I found a lot of undiscovered planets on my way to Colonia. Basically you need to fly about 1000 ly from the Bubble in any direction and you will start to find undiscovered systems. Maybe less then 1000 ly if you are chose an unpopular direction.
But what if I want to make money out of every system? Isn't it better to plot a route and explore every single planet in those systems and then go back? I'm going to Witch Nebula (quite close to it now in a 3 days trip), then straight to Orion Nebula (there is a massive cluster there) and Bernard's (I guess half of Elite's population went there at this point) plus some other little nebula's. I'm exploring every system (taking from 10 to 20 minutes each sometimes even more), and then I'll go back to the place I started but following a different route. I'm using fastest routes so I don't have to visit double the stars/systems. What's the point to jump 5 times without even scan the main star or the others and then go to a single planet? It doesn't pay out to me when it comes to money per time in that case...even if it can take "less" time to go to a single planet at every jump. Then you should go back have that in mind. Maybe I'm not "exploring" as it was intended but I don't want to be out in the wild for so long since there is the risk of loosing your ship in the long run. I prepared my ASP for the trip of course. FD should do something about the time it takes to scan planets, it is like they don't care about how much time you loose searching for systems, plotting a route, then going from system to system, explore and scan every star and planets. You need to stare at those planets and moons for 10 to 15 seconds each time...I mean come on, I went there and took me some time, don't make me loose more of it. Yesterday I found 2 massive systems...one with 76 celestial bodies to explore and later I was hoping to not see one as big as that...and a massive system with 85 celestial bodies appeared. Imagine my face...lol Once I come back I will go back to trading and forget about exploring for a long time.
***** You faced the hard reality of an explorer first hand, and are obviously displeased with the results so let me explain a few things for you :) Exploring takes time. A lot of it. I'm just under 20k LY from Sagittarius A* and I've been out in the void for 2 weeks. Enjoy your time out there for the vistas you see, unless you really are out there specifically to make money. If you are... harsh reality: It isn't very quick money. It is the slowest method of making money next to Piracy. We do it because we want to do it, not because it makes the big bucks. Rocks are worthless. Stop scanning them. If you want to scan everything; that's fine... Just remember you are going to be out there significantly longer the more targets you scan. Just stop scanning rocks. Just got to think about time to effort ratio. Which targets you should scan and which ones you should ignore all the time. AKA: Ice Worlds and Rocks. (They are literally worth 200-500 credits...) Earth-Likes, Black Holes, Neutron Stars (And Pulsars too), White Dwarves, and Terraformable Water Worlds are worth at least 40-50k each if not more. Add 50% to those numbers if you are the first one to discover them and always scan these. Always. High Metal Content planets are a couple thousand a piece and they are very plentiful, scan as many as you can. Just remember... time. Gas Giants; these are an odd bunch. Scan the ones you want to scan and always look at their rings and try to think if it will have life on it before deciding to scan them. Rocky or Icy ring = worthless. Metallic or Metal Rich is what you are looking for if you want money. Massive systems are common place, better get used to it. However a sizable chunk of the number is just asteroid belt targets, usually.
***** Thank you very much for the info mate. I am not 100% for the money...but it would be great to make enough money in let's say 1 to 2 weeks to buy an Imperial Clipper (so I don't have to buy my beloved ASP)...but I headed that way for the vistas of course. I really like space overall and I know it will take time to make a journey like this one (in my case "just" 1100ly in one way but scanning everything). I know more or less the value of each thing so I don't expect to get that much for my "small" trip. I knew that asteroid belts are a lost cause at least...imagine scanning each one of them to get nothing...lol (I did that in my very first day when the game was released just to find out the truth haha). I decided to go exploring after a long time of trading and some bounty hunting...tried mining a long time ago...not sure if with the new drones got a little bit better but I sure know it takes a lot of time as well. Again, thanks for the info commander! ;)
I made 4.5mil Credits for a 250 System trip to the Seven Sisters and Barnard's Loop. It really depends how lucky you get or how determined you are to finding those rare objects.
+Foxiol I guess if you actually enjoy scanning everything then go for it, but personally I don't have the patience. I'm mainly trying to find cool places and I scan along the way so when I get back i'll have some money. I ignore all icy and rocky planets and only focus on high metal, water, earths, and giants. I do agree with you that scanning the actual planet is pretty tedious. especially the rocky's and ice planets since you typically have to be right on top of them, then your ships accelerates too slowly due to the gravity well. and since icy plantes and rockys barely pay out, I just ignore them. I'd rather spend my time finding cool stuff than making pennies flying within spitting distance of giant floating snow balls. imagine my irritation after scanning dozens of asteroid belts only to read on the forums that they don't pay anything. are you kidding me!? there's not a mining company out there that will pay for belt surveys? oh well, I'm new so I'm still learning, but still....
Yes, you are get a reward. Size of a reward depends on type of a planet, type of a scan you did (just discovery scan/scan a planet with basic scanner/scan a planet with detailed surface scanner). And if you are the first player who scan a body (not only a planet, but stars, moons ans black holes), AND first player who sold information to the Universal Cartographics then you get even bigger reward and your CMDR name will be displayed near that planet on system map (i.e. "first discovered by ObsidianAnt" for example).
The Sun will not go supernova, please don't scare the earthlings with this fiction. It is too small for that and will only gently expand (not explode) into a planetary nebula. Thanks for publicizing the habitable zone calculator, it is one of my favorites. In my experience, it is a good guide, but the mass variable is too constrained to be fully useful. You can still use it as a rough calculator though, and Elite is very close to these values. The best use for it however is to realize that K stars are the most efficient and numerous place to search for close and densely packed terraformables. G stars are OK too, but they are rarer and take 3-4 times as long to reach the Goldilocks zone. M and L very rarely have enough metal and require a planet to be abnormally close to the star, and the F zones are ridiculously far away, extremely variable based on age, and relatively narrow given the common orbital radius ratios.
ZiljanVega The habitable zone calculator is a very interesting tool to play with, and it is surprising how similar Elite is with the data. Yet there are indeed some differences...in some cases Elite seems to put Earth-like planets in places they shouldn't be. All good stuff though, nonetheless.
Indeed the ELWs around black holes and neutrons are a bit fishy. However, in most cases, when the terraformable is outside the "habitable" zone (or doesn't qualify when it should) it is because of the age of the star, the presence of a binary companion, self heating from geological activity, tidal locking, ratio of greenhouse gases, abnormal surface gravity, or albedo modifiers. Elite's goldilocks zone calculator is quite sophisticated even if it isn't perfect. There are other web-based habitable zone calculators that are more precise, but I like this one because of the age slider ;)
Please do no give bad information on why or why not a star will go supernova. the size has absolutely zero to do with that. Do not confuse mass and density with size.
onbekende telefoon nothing can’t create everything.... there most definitely is a God.... He’s revealed himself in the Bible.... check out Ravi Zacharias’ vids /rzim.org
I highly doubt our future will be interfered with... We are on our own... We cannot rely on imagitory beings fixing our problems... We gotta adjust and adapt to survive as we have done many o times already... We are the problem and The solution if there is one/ multiple ones to be found... If we dont focus our efforts towards that goal we will probably be obliterated in due time by our own current habitat... As so many other species of life has been. But then again, im often wrong!
