EVE Search - Planetology/Adv. Planetology --- worth it?

All Channels

Science and Industry

Planetology/Adv. Planetology --- worth it?

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 2 post(s)
John DaiSho	Posted - 2010.06.16 02:25:00 - [1] Well, hi i want to ask if someone has made good experiances with learning that 2 skills up some more. I read about some juicy hotspots that yield 2,5k and more units per cycle at 23h depletion but...i cant find them hehe. I do PI in 0.0 but the best i could find i sometimes 2k per cycle, most times im glad to extract 1,5k every 30 min so i can run a processor with 2 extractors 24/7. But then sometimes i just cant find good spots for stuff that should be good on a planet (down to 900 per 30min...sigh) so my question is, will learning those 2 skills more find me significantly better spots? Or is anything more than planetology 3 only for people who want to min/max everything out to the last little bit? Greetings, John o7
Dr BattleSmith PAX Interstellar Services	Posted - 2010.06.16 03:39:00 - [2] Seems completely worthless skill to me. Can just throw down extractors and grow towards the higher numbers. They should have made the skill relate to actual yield rather then being a skill to make more pretty colours.
Boogie Bobby	Posted - 2010.06.16 05:04:00 - [3] With planetology lvl 2 I can reliably get 1500/cycle or more on my first extractor placement. When it's critical to get more, like 3 extractors putting out 6000 total, I start at the hotspot my crappy skillset identifies and build new extractors branching out from there to find the real spot with 2k/30 min extraction and decomission the bad ones. Skilling up more planetology would have saved me time and the 45k isk per extractor. That's all irrelevant once the operation is up and running though. Advanced planetology should have had some kind of ongoing use/benefit...missed opportunity.
menacemyth	Posted - 2010.06.16 07:41:00 - [4] Planetology and Advanced Planetology just increase the number of bolinger bands when you scan for a resource. In most instances, planetology 3 is sufficient. There are circumstances where a resource will be very evenly distributed on a planet, and hotspots when using the slider will still appear quite large. Adding bolinger bands in this case would make it easier to find the highest extraction point. So Advanced Planetology is only useful to find hotspots for a resource that is evenly distributed over the planet, like some gases on the gas planet or complex organisms on alot of the temperate/barren/oceanic planets. M
Merdaneth Amarr Angel Wing.	Posted - 2010.06.16 08:03:00 - [5] Originally by: Dr BattleSmith Seems completely worthless skill to me. Can just throw down extractors and grow towards the higher numbers. They should have made the skill relate to actual yield rather then being a skill to make more pretty colours. This for me. I plunk down a few extractors to test the waters and use them to find the optimal extraction points after the scan has given me the general area. ____ The Illusion of Freedom \| The Truth about Slavery
Louis deGuerre Gallente Amicus Morte Shock an Awe	Posted - 2010.06.16 08:05:00 - [6] Essential : no ? Does it help : yes ? I've done comparison by checking the bases of a corpmate who has planetology 3 (I have advanced planetology IV). On 2 occasions I could see hotspots twice as close to his base that he could not even see, allowing him to switch locations and increase the number of facilities due to decreased link lengths. I also managed to improve his raw material production by 10% by guiding him towards the actual center of the hotspots he found (different place than what he sees). Can you find them by randomly dropping extractors all over the planet : yes, but seriously, do you actually wanna do that ??? 2K is pretty good for a 23/hour cycle in 0.0. Sol: A microwarp drive? In a battleship? Are you insane? They arenÆt built for this! Clear Skies - The Movie
Luke S Zeta Corp.	Posted - 2010.06.16 08:09:00 - [7] I've notice that The higher the skill is the easier it is to find a good spot. I've also notice that the good spots move when you have a higher skill. If you want to just pull **** out of the ground. just for go the basic skill. ---
Lefty Twotimes	Posted - 2010.06.16 09:12:00 - [8] I have Advanced Planetology leveled up to 3. I'm in WH space and my lowest extraction rate is 1800. Average is 2000 and my highest is in the 2300's on the 23 hour cycle.
Dillon Arklight Universal Army Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2010.06.16 09:49:00 - [9] I trained it up to advanced level 3 and im starting ton wonder if it was worth it. Generally i follow the same method as the guys say in the above posts; just place down extractors until you find that 'sweet spot'. TL:DR Not worth it.
Lutz Major Austriae Est Imperare Orbi Universo	Posted - 2010.06.16 09:58:00 - [10] A picture says more than thousand words: https://docs.google.com/View?docid=dhnp447p_9cb32qjzd
Dillon Arklight Universal Army Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2010.06.16 10:09:00 - [11] Originally by: Lutz Major A picture says more than thousand words: https://docs.google.com/View?docid=dhnp447p_9cb32qjzd Too true, nice work.
Skuggis Systembolaget	Posted - 2010.06.16 10:14:00 - [12] I'd have to agree with it being fairly useless for the time spent training. I'd also have to agree with the people who think there should be some additional benefit of having them trained.
Tau Cabalander Caldari	Posted - 2010.06.16 12:06:00 - [13] I have Advanced Planetology 4 on four characters. Everyone in our small w-space corp is training it after we compared it with Advanced Planetology 2: extractors were _WAY_ off target resulting in an average loss of 20%. It doesn't take that long to train either.
Snabbik Shigen	Posted - 2010.06.16 13:19:00 - [14] They should've made Adv Planetology result in a yield bonus (5% per level would've been sufficient).
Cyniac	Posted - 2010.06.16 15:55:00 - [15] Edited by: Cyniac on 16/06/2010 15:55:05 Originally by: Lefty Twotimes I have Advanced Planetology leveled up to 3. I'm in WH space and my lowest extraction rate is 1800. Average is 2000 and my highest is in the 2300's on the 23 hour cycle. You just convinced me! Won't be training advanced planetology. I have just Planetology 3 - yields from 1700 to 2300 on a 23 hour cycle. And that's in lowsec.
Reyna Neens	Posted - 2010.06.16 19:37:00 - [16] The way I see it (because I haven't trained the skill yet), it really depends on the planet. If you have the scanning bar on full and you still can't find the exact best hotspot, you need better skills. If you need to lower the scanning bar, your skills are fine for that resource on that planet.
minerboob Gallente LG Industries Intrepid Crossing	Posted - 2010.06.17 14:04:00 - [17] I'm kinda torn if I should train up palaeontology and adv palaeontology to 5 to get the better resolutions. Its going to take a month of training time but my installations will probably be there for years and should probably be placed with max skills. The main question is how far will the hot spots move from palaeontology and adv IV to V I don't really mind waiting for the training but would hate to train for a month only to realize that the scan resolution provided me no benefit as the hot spot did not move but just became more clear. The screen shots in this thread are not high enough resolution. Quote: Radioactive cats have 18 half lives
Tau Cabalander Caldari	Posted - 2010.06.17 15:55:00 - [18] Edited by: Tau Cabalander on 17/06/2010 15:56:47 Originally by: Reyna Neens The way I see it (because I haven't trained the skill yet), it really depends on the planet. If you have the scanning bar on full and you still can't find the exact best hotspot, you need better skills. If you need to lower the scanning bar, your skills are fine for that resource on that planet. I also have a theory based on observation that the higher the resource concentration is (white horizontal bar), the more accurate the scan seems to be.
Alpha Constructor	Posted - 2010.06.17 16:01:00 - [19] Originally by: minerboob I'm kinda torn if I should train up palaeontology and adv palaeontology to 5 to get the better resolutions. Its going to take a month of training time but my installations will probably be there for years and should probably be placed with max skills. The main question is how far will the hot spots move from palaeontology and adv IV to V Props for misreading the skill's name in a sophisticated manner, but it is "Planetology" - what you want to train is for finding old rocks and fossils Also I'd recommend 4/3 for anyone really interested in PI, as it gives you a REAL advantage
minerboob Gallente LG Industries Intrepid Crossing	Posted - 2010.06.17 19:23:00 - [20] Originally by: Alpha Constructor Originally by: minerboob I'm kinda torn if I should train up palaeontology and adv palaeontology to 5 to get the better resolutions. Its going to take a month of training time but my installations will probably be there for years and should probably be placed with max skills. The main question is how far will the hot spots move from palaeontology and adv IV to V Props for misreading the skill's name in a sophisticated manner, but it is "Planetology" - what you want to train is for finding old rocks and fossils Also I'd recommend 4/3 for anyone really interested in PI, as it gives you a REAL advantage LOL oops, thats my spell checker fing up. I didn't read well enough. I already have 4,4 I was wondering how much 5,5 will really help. Quote: Radioactive cats have 18 half lives
Clansworth	Posted - 2010.06.17 19:31:00 - [21] Originally by: Lutz Major A picture says more than thousand words: https://docs.google.com/View?docid=dhnp447p_9cb32qjzd By looking at those shots, it seems apparent that it's not about seeing the finer bands, as it is about some artificial noise and blurring that is added at lower levels. This would make more sense as a method of generating the various levels anyways. Because of this, it actually DOES potentially hide hotspots that no amount of bar-dragging could reveal with low-end skills. Do you need to max them? I don't think so, but they really don't take that long to train, so I'd think about going up to IV/III or so... Intel/Nomad
Nuadi	Posted - 2010.06.17 19:41:00 - [22] In my experience, Advanced Planetology is worth it. The book costs 7.5 million ISK. It's not terribly difficult to raise that. I finished training Advanced Planetology level 2 yesterday. As a result, I have moved one colony to increase extraction. It resulted in a 10% gain. However, that cost me 1.2 million. I already have two more colonies slated for relocation. That's 3.6 million I could have saved had I known what degree this skill would affect the scanned concentrations.
Jowen Datloran Caldari Science and Trade Institute	Posted - 2010.06.18 13:24:00 - [23] I have a pretty good feeling the the Planetology skills work like exploration related skills. Meaning, that when you place your four probes in a certain setup, they will always pinpoint a cosmic signature site to a certain location no matter how many times you scan. But we all know (or should) that it does not mean that the site is in fact located there: there is an error. Like Astrometric Pinpointing reduces this error of a single cosmic site, so does Planetology reduce the error of you planetary scans. So if you feel having no problem setting your extractors according to an erroneous resource scan, essentially placing them way off the location of the real hot-spots, then do not bother training the Planetology skills. I will train them though. ---------------- Mr. Science & Trade Institute - EVE Online Lorebook
Captain Boomer People's Commissariat	Posted - 2010.06.18 15:20:00 - [24] I have found a handful of 2.4 -2.5k Reactive Gas hotspots on a Gas planet in 0.0 since training to Adv. Planetology 4, before that best I could get was around 1.8-2.1k on Planetology 4 -- having said that on other planet types with apparently much higher overall resource abundance I've struggled to find hotspots over 2.0 -2.1k ... which I found wierd. So in the end, perhaps it comes down to the peculiarities of the chosen planet, e.g. maybe the radius/size of the planet alters the equation along with how widely distributed the resource is over the whole surface i.e. a smaller gas planet with moderate reactive gas abundance in narrower bands/smaller areas may yield a few better hotspots than another much larger gas planet with apparently higher reactive gas abundance spread all over the place in really broad bands. More experimentation over the next few days will attempt to prove this...
Lord Popnfresh	Posted - 2010.06.19 04:34:00 - [25] Behold the difference between advanced Planetology 3 and 4 Linky I took this 2 hours before and 2 hours after getting AP 4 on a planet that had 100% micro-organism. So either the 100% makes it pointless to train AP4 or I don't know. I have the same sadness on another planet with a 100% heavy metal. (guess i should of tried a non-100% one too) FYI, I checked that same planet with my P3 character and his map DID look radically different.
Mateer Boshette Gallente Center for Advanced Studies	Posted - 2010.06.22 01:05:00 - [26] You need to narrow the scan bar to the narrowest possible first, then slide the bar from the right to the left till spots start showing up. That is the only way to get accurate results and the best hotspots. You pic shows that the scan bar is set very wide. With higher planetology skills you will see more hotspots or hotspots in areas that you simply can't see with lower skills.
Lord Popnfresh	Posted - 2010.07.01 05:30:00 - [27] This brings up a question I'm having caused by another thread I saw. What is more important, the general planetary scan bars, the heat bar, or a combination of both? I.E given 3 random lava planets A) has felsic magma at 5% on the general scan bar, but it has a white dot at 95% B) has felsic magma at 95% on the general scan bar, but it's highest white dot is at 20% C) some combination of the both (aka, screw it they multiply each other to some rate which makes conclusively saying which you should look for more of a pain and you'll only really know by randomly placing CC's and extractors) I'm wondering if the preliminary scans I did of some systems where I recorded the general bars was pointless since I should have been noting the highest white spot. If it is B, then would http://www.eve-ivy.com/wiki/index.php?title=Good_Planets be relatively useless?
Fritz Ionar Minmatar LifeLine Solutions	Posted - 2010.07.01 06:26:00 - [28] Originally by: Lord Popnfresh This brings up a question I'm having caused by another thread I saw. What is more important, the general planetary scan bars, the heat bar, or a combination of both? I.E given 3 random lava planets A) has felsic magma at 5% on the general scan bar, but it has a white dot at 95% B) has felsic magma at 95% on the general scan bar, but it's highest white dot is at 20% C) some combination of the both (aka, screw it they multiply each other to some rate which makes conclusively saying which you should look for more of a pain and you'll only really know by randomly placing CC's and extractors) I'm wondering if the preliminary scans I did of some systems where I recorded the general bars was pointless since I should have been noting the highest white spot. If it is B, then would http://www.eve-ivy.com/wiki/index.php?title=Good_Planets be relatively useless? I'd say it's A. The "general scan bar" as you describe it only tells you how much is on the planet, not how it is distributed. It can be very high but distributed evenly acros the entire surface resulting in very poor extraction rates no mater where you place extractors. On the other hand a very small amount on a planet might be concentrated to just a few spots giving good extraction rates there.
Elijah Craig	Posted - 2010.07.01 12:33:00 - [29] This is a funny situation for me actually as I spent all of my free 100k skill points on Planetology III, IV, AdvP I, II and III. So I went from meta level 3 to 7 in one go. I went back to the 3 colonies I had set up at meta 3 and I could see all my extractors where in totally the wrong places! I extract optimally, whereby all extractors are bunched up together with minimal space in between on specific white hotspots (adjust the slider so it reveals the highest white hotspot on the planet). At meta 3, I nailed the extractors on top of the white hotspots I had scanned and got (what I felt at the time were) reasonable extraction rates. However, as soon as I jumped to meta 7 (i.e. AdvP III), I scanned again and my extractors were WAY off the white hotspots and I trashed and repositioned my 3 colony's extractors. I would say the repositioning on the more acurate scan hotspots bought me a 50% increase in yield per cycle. (i.e. 800->1250 or 1000->1500 at 23hr in lowsec). That let me either get the same yield but with less extractors and use my freed up PowerGrid on another P1 line, or I could add another Processor to handle the extra 50% output. TL;DR - OK, so I basically increased the output of ALL my PI colonies by 50% in one go by going from meta 3->7. (that is a weeks training I think?). Over the next year of passive income, that is a huge win. Don't train it, fine. Have non-optimally placed extractors every day and miss out on free ISK
KevLor I	Posted - 2010.07.01 12:58:00 - [30] A couple of comments on PI placement and planetology skills from my perspective: 1 - You can get close and then reposition your extractors to find the hot spots by 'touch', so to speak. This is a bit of a PITA to me, though, and training the two skills to level 4 is worth minimizing this. Also, I seem to have found some hotspots shifted significantly enough that it would take quite a while to 'crawl' there and you also might see decreases before increases, which would probably cause most people to stop heading that way. 2 - I have also found that (at least in these early days) I have altered the type of production several times to address market hot spots. I can quickly redeploy a surface operation very quickly and for a pretty low cost, and if the change is well thought out I can recoup losses in a day or so. 'Crawling' to hot spots is lost revenue, both in expenses and lost extraction, during a window of opportunity. 3 - With all that said, I don't see going to level 5 in either skill. I am in WH space and am getting 2400 - 2600+ on the 0:30/23:00 cycle. Making P2 items, that has allowed 5/5 extractors, 4/4 basic processors, and 4 adv processors, with all fully supplied and a slight excess of P0 materials. I am already at the point were I am having to upgrade links to handle P0 material and it is not worth producing extra P0 anyway, since it is relatively low value and annoying to move out of the WH. Level 5s would just move the production further beyond what I can use. This may not hold true in hi-sec, low-sec, or null, I have no experience on extraction rates.

Pages: [1] 2 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.