This on a side. For I am new to being in space, I was only, for a short time, able to enjoy the stained cell project. Is there any chance of adding it to Project discovery again in future? I would be most excited by this. As it was, I feel, a different kinda of (dare I say) game.
I personally do not find my self drawn to poking at blips in a wave pattern as much as trying to discern what systems are involved in biological material.
I feel wile its nice we know the vastness of space has big planet rocks around it, witch I would say was known to be true from anyone with a rational brain in their heads. I my self am more concerned with understanding our human biology.
I have been taking part in project discovery for the past week and whilst there are still issues with some of the samples, there now appears to be a new issue: the isk rewards for completing each analysis have halved. What gives?
Yeah, I figured. I didnât touch PD again after realizing how much time it will take to grind to Level 250. Out of curiousity, how long did it take you to get to 134?
On a sidenote: I realized just mere days after PD started there were already the LVL 250 Glasses on contracts by some players. Was there some exploit?
Been doing it for about an hour or two each day since it released. As for people reaching 250 in a few days, I think what happened was some folks managed to glitch out the 2x daily reward system to give them a boost.
Also, to be fair, some people are beastly dedicated to grinding legitimately. Took Uriel 11 days to reach 250.
I mapped out some estimations and measured completion time for a few samples, which concluded in the whole grind to 250 will take about a month with 8 hours a day, taken 10s per sample and low accuracy. Make that 14 days of 8 hours with near 100% accuracy and 10s per sample (which is very fast as an average) and 11 real life days become somewhat realistic. Not sure about the glitch, but double-points should half the time needed, so that might be only a part of the explanation.
Not sure whatâs changed lately, but since my last post the eval samples are much easier, leaving me now at mid-80s accuracy, and hardly ever missing any of them (though still occasionally missing samples that I could still tell were an obvious oversight on my part, and thus understandable).
Has the difficulty of the eval samples now been scaled to match the accuracy rating, so that you only really start seeing truly difficult ones once youâre up in the 90s?
Also, it seems to me that now Iâm in a state where â because Iâm taking more time with each sample, but the accuracy rating is higher â I earn less ISK, but advance in rank faster. Anybody else experiencing this? I kinda prefer it, since the ISK/hr isnât great anyway, and Iâm really more in it for the SKINs/goodies anyway.
Also, handy tip: on my keyboard, the AltGr key opens a zoom window on the main graph, allowing you to zoom in on key parts of the curve without re-scaling the lower window. This zoom window has a fixed y-axis, which is much easier to read as a result.
There is a reddit thread created where people submit samples they find are impossible to figure out by normal means. Iâm assuming they started removing those from the database.
I have noticed twice today that when I have successfully completed an analysis my accuracy has actually dropped. Was just wondering if anyone else has encountered this issue.
I missed the first PD experience. I was actually looking forward to this one and trying to do good in the name of science (and help my favorite game and maybe get some swag at the same time). However, I am now around level 15 or so, oscillating between 54% and 69% accuracyâŚand I have completely given up on this. There are too many bad slides (imo) to continue. Dozens (hundreds) that simply do not appear to have any recognizable patterns to them and so you mark them no transit and submit only too see âlol no, thereâs a transit every .5 daysâ. Or the patterns that look eerily similar to the aforementioned example so you mark some transits hoping youâre not going overboard and submit and find that âthis time there actually are no transitsâ.
Itâs just not worth the time investment for the seemingly random sample plates with no rhyme or reason as to why (or why not) a transit was found.
Itâs just you being bad. There are some bad evaluation samples (bugged or whatever), but some of those I previously thought of as âimpossibleâ, Iâm solving now.
Or was, as accuracy increases you get harder samples.
Speaking of the first PD, I tried it for two days and failed every time, never launched it again. This new thing I got 70% accuracy on first day and continuing. I guess not everything is for everybody.
happened to me also⌠wasnt sure of what i saw the first time it happened⌠but it happened again few other time and i clearly saw the accuracy rating drop on a successfull analysis.
I have yet to try âProject Discoveryâ out yet but I did notice that when everyone in my corp was starting to play with it i heard a lot of complaints about this. Comparing and wondering why their overall Accuracy levels were so âInaccurateâ makes sense after reading and finding out it was a problem with early difficulty stages.
Itâs not four planets in the same orbit, itâs one planet. As far as the analysis being âcorrectâ, it only cares about having markings on the transits and doesnât seem to care if you call them different planets or not. Co-orbital planets arenât a thing.
makes sense after reading and finding out it was a problem with early difficulty stages.
