Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Xalabaster
Gallente Secondhand Smoke
|
Posted - 2009.04.09 00:56:00 -
[1]
We just had an amazing experience tonight...
Our objective was to find a radar site in a Class 3 W-system and we ended up with finding 4 WHs leading to different parts of space (high sec, lowsec, unknown). 4 WHs within a w-system? We are going to log in this system and find out if there are more of these, lol
Can we say WH-intersection or W-Hub?
================= Time for a sig... SecondHand Smoke - Now recruiting for deep space WH expeditions! |
JanoMark
ANZAC ALLIANCE Southern Cross Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.04.09 05:18:00 -
[2]
I'd like to hear of your findings, though I'd say it was just a lucky signature spawn.
|
Gaius Aemilius
Wormhole-space Surveying and Exploitation
|
Posted - 2009.04.09 06:28:00 -
[3]
Were you in a boundary system or below the boundary layer?
(I'll guess it's a boundary system since it's a Class 3 but I'd like to know for sure.)
Wormholes ate my sig.
They said it was yummy. |
Anopheli
Pillowsoft Total Comfort
|
Posted - 2009.04.09 07:00:00 -
[4]
It wouldn't be impossible. Hub systems have been found before (shameless self promotion)http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1038042(/shameless)
Do keep us informed, I'd love to know more. But do remember it's not impossible to have multiple wormholes. I've never seen four active at once. Three yes, to other W-space location which branch out further.
|
VicturusTeSaluto
Metafarmers
|
Posted - 2009.04.09 09:54:00 -
[5]
Its not weird at all. I found a system with 4 active wormholes. 1 to low sec, 3 to high sec.
I didn't consider that it might be a "hub." If such a system always had so many connections I don't think I would ever need to leave ;)
|
Xalabaster
Gallente Secondhand Smoke
|
Posted - 2009.04.09 10:18:00 -
[6]
I guess we were lucky. At the very last scanning attempt, we finally found a radar site but this is the first one we couldn't track down to 100% ; it always swifted between 99.20 to 99.98% , even with 7 probes out.
Will try to track it down tonight with a covops or scanfrig and hope that the sig didn't move after DT...
@Gaius, could you please define the two terms you were mentioning? Then I might be able to answer those. Thanks.
================= Time for a sig... SecondHand Smoke - Now recruiting for deep space WH expeditions! |
Minaruars
|
Posted - 2009.04.09 13:08:00 -
[7]
Originally by: Xalabaster I guess we were lucky. At the very last scanning attempt, we finally found a radar site but this is the first one we couldn't track down to 100% ; it always swifted between 99.20 to 99.98% , even with 7 probes out.
Will try to track it down tonight with a covops or scanfrig and hope that the sig didn't move after DT...
@Gaius, could you please define the two terms you were mentioning? Then I might be able to answer those. Thanks.
I've been in a WH with 4 exits.. it was a class 3, Highest I've seen is 4 though
|
Gaius Aemilius
Wormhole-space Surveying and Exploitation
|
Posted - 2009.04.09 13:10:00 -
[8]
Originally by: Xalabaster @Gaius, could you please define the two terms you were mentioning? Then I might be able to answer those. Thanks.
Certainly Xalabaster, I'd be happy to define them.
Boundary System: A boundary system is a system that is guaranteed to always have a WH to k-space in it. Pop the WH and another will open to k-space, though where is fairly random. Boundary systems can sometimes have WH to other w-space systems as well. Boundary systems have been confirmed both by dev comments and by observation.
Boundary Layer: Visualize the ocean, vertically. The Boundary layer is the surface of the ocean, it consists of boundary systems and constitutes the interface between the depths of w-space and k-space.
Deep W-space: There really isn't a consensus on this term, but it's what I use. The depths consists of w-systems that aren't boundary systems. Typically these systems have one WH spawn in each system, those WH always lead to other w-systems. This results in them forming "Chains" of w-systems one leading into another. Eventually a chain will either lead to a boundary system or will dead-end.
It is worth noting that circumstantial evidence seems to indicate that boundary systems are Class 1 and Class 3 systems usually, and that Class 2 and 4 systems seem to always be in the depths. I currently lack sufficient. evidence on Class 5 and 6 systems to opine on the topic. Wormholes ate my sig.
They said it was yummy. |
Minaruars
|
Posted - 2009.04.09 13:23:00 -
[9]
Originally by: Gaius Aemilius
Originally by: Xalabaster @Gaius, could you please define the two terms you were mentioning? Then I might be able to answer those. Thanks.
Certainly Xalabaster, I'd be happy to define them.
Boundary System: A boundary system is a system that is guaranteed to always have a WH to k-space in it. Pop the WH and another will open to k-space, though where is fairly random. Boundary systems can sometimes have WH to other w-space systems as well. Boundary systems have been confirmed both by dev comments and by observation.
Boundary Layer: Visualize the ocean, vertically. The Boundary layer is the surface of the ocean, it consists of boundary systems and constitutes the interface between the depths of w-space and k-space.
Deep W-space: There really isn't a consensus on this term, but it's what I use. The depths consists of w-systems that aren't boundary systems. Typically these systems have one WH spawn in each system, those WH always lead to other w-systems. This results in them forming "Chains" of w-systems one leading into another. Eventually a chain will either lead to a boundary system or will dead-end.
It is worth noting that circumstantial evidence seems to indicate that boundary systems are Class 1 and Class 3 systems usually, and that Class 2 and 4 systems seem to always be in the depths. I currently lack sufficient. evidence on Class 5 and 6 systems to opine on the topic.
We found a WH from low sec to a class 5, but once in that class 5 for almost 2 weeks not a single wormhole spawned to k-space.. we had to chain up to 5 WH to get to k-space
|
Gaius Aemilius
Wormhole-space Surveying and Exploitation
|
Posted - 2009.04.09 15:56:00 -
[10]
Originally by: Minaruars We found a WH from low sec to a class 5, but once in that class 5 for almost 2 weeks not a single wormhole spawned to k-space.. we had to chain up to 5 WH to get to k-space
Fascinating. So clearly it was not a boundary system AND clearly it did spawn a k-space WH at least once.
Perhaps non boundary systems spawn WH with semi-random destinations. Which would imply the occasional, but clearly rare, WH to k-space.
Very interesting. I'll have to chew more on this.
Maybe we need a thread on stellar cartography. Wormholes ate my sig.
They said it was yummy. |
|
Gallopez
|
Posted - 2009.04.09 17:48:00 -
[11]
Gaius, from my findings you may be looking a a couple of things wrong.
First off a class 2 can be a boundary system, I have been in one for a month. It always has one WH to K-space and one to a class 4.
Secondly, I have come to believe that K-space systems can randomly generate a wormhole to just about any WH system that exist.
The WH system rules that you and I see living in wormholes is not influenced by Wormhole generation that occurs in K-space. This is how people get stranded in W-space, If they enter a WH that originated in K-space and it pops, there are then playing under that w-space systems WH generation rules which may not have a connection back to K-space.
When in W-space people need to look at WH's to help understand what rules they are playing under. Are they incoming or outgoing? It makes a big difference.
For the record Gaius, Your posts are always some of the best.
|
Nethras
Minmatar Heretic Army Heretic Nation
|
Posted - 2009.04.09 17:56:00 -
[12]
Originally by: Xalabaster I guess we were lucky. At the very last scanning attempt, we finally found a radar site but this is the first one we couldn't track down to 100% ; it always swifted between 99.20 to 99.98% , even with 7 probes out.
Sounds to me like your scan probe strength was almost exactly the theoretical minimum to probe that site - to check if it's possible for you to scan down something you have that close but can't seem to get 100% on, deactivate all but one probe and check what strength it gets, preferably with the probe centered on the dot - if a single probe gets less than 50%, you can't scan it down without higher probe strength. If it's above 50%, you can, though it may take 4 probes as close as possible in a tetrahedron-ish shape that has all the probe-site-probe angles at least 90 degrees.
If you land the probe exactly on the site and get 50%, CCP's probe system is taunting you, since when you move that probe away even one tiny bit to be able to place other probes there, the single-probe strength will drop below 50% and you won't be able to scan down that site.
If you continue to explore wormholes and want to scan down that particular site type in the future, taking along 4 sisters probes is probably the simplest and cheapest solution, others being to increase skills, rig the ship for scanning, and/or use a sisters probe launcher (more expensive than the probes for less bonus).
|
hipeanut2006
Secondhand Smoke
|
Posted - 2009.04.09 18:09:00 -
[13]
I guess its time to invest in some sisters probes
|
Gaius Aemilius
Wormhole-space Surveying and Exploitation
|
Posted - 2009.04.09 20:08:00 -
[14]
Originally by: Gallopez First off a class 2 can be a boundary system, I have been in one for a month. It always has one WH to K-space and one to a class 4.
Secondly, I have come to believe that K-space systems can randomly generate a wormhole to just about any WH system that exist.
The WH system rules that you and I see living in wormholes is not influenced by Wormhole generation that occurs in K-space. This is how people get stranded in W-space, If they enter a WH that originated in K-space and it pops, there are then playing under that w-space systems WH generation rules which may not have a connection back to K-space.
This fascinates me. It would explain some inconsistencies I've been seeing. It also would seem consistent with the dev's original classifications of WH into categories like k-w and w-k that were a bit confusing.
So maybe a boundary system is guaranteed a w-k, while k-space produces additional WH leading into w-space that are k-w ones. Then we'd have the traditional w-w WH that those of us living here see so often, and lead inevitably to the chains we traverse below the boundary layer.
Very interesting theory indeed.
That does it. We need a Stellar Cartography thread. Both to explore these theories of how w-space is linked up as well as to centralize info on WH classes and on w-space system classes as well.
I'll work on something to post tonight. Wormholes ate my sig.
They said it was yummy. |
Vladimir Norkoff
Income Redistribution Service
|
Posted - 2009.04.09 21:15:00 -
[15]
Originally by: Xalabaster Can we say WH-intersection or W-Hub?
Four isn't that uncommon. My system just got 4 for the second time. It makes for a great day of killing people that come in. Then they all collapse and it's back to 2 WHs per day.
My guess is that 5 WHs is max for a system. Some people claim to have seen that many, but I have not.
Taxman VII: Kingdom of Vlad
|
Xalabaster
Gallente Secondhand Smoke
|
Posted - 2009.04.09 22:49:00 -
[16]
Originally by: Nethras
Originally by: Xalabaster I guess we were lucky. At the very last scanning attempt, we finally found a radar site but this is the first one we couldn't track down to 100% ; it always swifted between 99.20 to 99.98% , even with 7 probes out.
Sounds to me like your scan probe strength was almost exactly the theoretical minimum to probe that site - to check if it's possible for you to scan down something you have that close but can't seem to get 100% on, deactivate all but one probe and check what strength it gets, preferably with the probe centered on the dot - if a single probe gets less than 50%, you can't scan it down without higher probe strength. If it's above 50%, you can, though it may take 4 probes as close as possible in a tetrahedron-ish shape that has all the probe-site-probe angles at least 90 degrees.
If you land the probe exactly on the site and get 50%, CCP's probe system is taunting you, since when you move that probe away even one tiny bit to be able to place other probes there, the single-probe strength will drop below 50% and you won't be able to scan down that site.
If you continue to explore wormholes and want to scan down that particular site type in the future, taking along 4 sisters probes is probably the simplest and cheapest solution, others being to increase skills, rig the ship for scanning, and/or use a sisters probe launcher (more expensive than the probes for less bonus).
Very interesting info. Actually, I was probing with 7 probes and I'd always get stuck between hilarious strengths of 99.22% and 99.97% etc... I think deactivated two probes and got 100%... Wish I had tried it yesterday hehe... Now I need to find new exits/entrances for my mates :P
@Gaius, looks like we were talking about a boundary system. :)
================= Time for a sig... SecondHand Smoke - Now recruiting for deep space WH expeditions! |
Banni Vinda
Minmatar Veto.
|
Posted - 2009.04.10 12:16:00 -
[17]
Originally by: Gaius Aemilius Deep W-space: There really isn't a consensus on this term, but it's what I use. The depths consists of w-systems that aren't boundary systems. Typically these systems have one WH spawn in each system, those WH always lead to other w-systems. This results in them forming "Chains" of w-systems one leading into another. Eventually a chain will either lead to a boundary system or will dead-end.
How can a w-system that typically spawns only one WH be anything other than a dead-end? Surely a chain implies it must have two WHs, one to each of the adjacent systems along the chain? |
Minaruars
|
Posted - 2009.04.10 12:37:00 -
[18]
I found a class 5 system WH in a 0.9 system,
Thats a first for me, high class WH I only find them in low or 0.0.
Also the higher class wormholes are harder to scan out it seems
|
Marlenus
Caldari Ironfleet Towing And Salvage Tear Extraction And Reclamation Service
|
Posted - 2009.04.10 16:48:00 -
[19]
Right now the top post on my blog describes a day when there were five wormholes in my boundary system (defined: always has at least one wormhole to k-space.) So, I can confirm the reports of this happening. ------------------ Ironfleet.com |
Cameron Freerunner
|
Posted - 2009.04.10 18:16:00 -
[20]
I can also confirm all levels of w-space WH in hi-sec K-space. I've run into every level of W-space from minmatar space. I've also seen WH to hisec and once a hole to 0.0. It's random, probably with modifiers for the level of local system. I'm curious to know how often holes to hisec occur in 0.0 or losec space.
To the person asking about one WH and the term "chain," please keep in mind that the WHs don't have to exist simultaneously. |
|
Nicodemus Shylock
|
Posted - 2009.05.01 05:57:00 -
[21]
Personally I just put wormholes into two catagories: Static and random.
A wormhole system will always have at least 1 static wormhole that will consistently respawn as the same type. i.e. if it's an X877 wormhole, it will always be an X877 wormhole no matter how many times it respawns.
Random wormholes are just that, completely random, they can occur anywhare and lead from k-space to w-space, k-space to k-space, and w-space to w-space. I've only had 3 simultanious random wormholes inside a given w-space. I've found a couple w-systems that have had up to 3 static wormholes though. One led to null sec, and the other two led to wormhole space. Nice little system.
|
Qual
Gallente Cornexant Research
|
Posted - 2009.05.01 10:15:00 -
[22]
I would class as system that has MORE than one standard wormhole in it as a hub. Havent heard that such systems even exists. As previous posters have said all system have one wh of a specific type that allways respawns, so that not really special. Of course any system that have gatetypes that leads to high class systems are interesting, but far from rare, and I would not call them hubs.
"The short version: Qual is right." -Papa Smurf |
Pwett
QUANT Corp. QUANT Hegemony
|
Posted - 2009.05.01 18:12:00 -
[23]
Originally by: Banni Vinda
Originally by: Gaius Aemilius Deep W-space: There really isn't a consensus on this term, but it's what I use. The depths consists of w-systems that aren't boundary systems. Typically these systems have one WH spawn in each system, those WH always lead to other w-systems. This results in them forming "Chains" of w-systems one leading into another. Eventually a chain will either lead to a boundary system or will dead-end.
How can a w-system that typically spawns only one WH be anything other than a dead-end? Surely a chain implies it must have two WHs, one to each of the adjacent systems along the chain?
My only experience with a dead-end WH system is one that spawns wormholes back into the system you used to enter them. I don't think there are 'static' dead ends, but I got myself into a W-space system, waited for the wormhole to collapse, and the next one formed back into the same system I came from the day before. _______________ <Q> QUANT Hegemony QUANT is rebuilding, EVE-Mail me for recruitment info. Item Database |
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |