ETARC - New Discoveries Questionnaire


#1

New Discoveries for Dummies

As I’m sure most of you are aware at the moment, things are a little messy while everything is being decided upon and sorted out. Everything from the name and the logo and who does what and when are all still in the discussion phase. I thought to myself that by the time anything gets decided, there will be a wealth of explorers data lost and un-captured, wrongly named tags and places you visit that are just not interesting enough or too dangerous to visit again.

If like me, you are raring to go and start claiming in the name of ETARC…read on.

Myself and @sir_oops have been developing a handy-dandy questionnaire/survey-thing for you all to use for your new discoveries. The most glaring problem we have right now is a lack of standardisation and this sheet will be the first step in, (hopefully) achieving this. This is for the lost and the new, those that wish to contribute even in some small way.

If you play on PS4 and do not have ready access to a PC, or would rather spend more time exploring than typing this will come in quite handy.

The first sheet relates to new systems, the second sheet deals with planets and the idea is that you print these off or have it open on a PC while playing, and simply complete the sheet. The goal is that it is then transferred to a database like Athena, at your leisure, (yet to be finalised so hold fire on this part for now.)

Anyway, take a look at it, it’s very much a work in progress and by no means a, “Final Version” so if there is anything that you feel needs adding or removing, please speak up! This isn’t Reddit, you will not be flamed for sharing your ideas!

New Discovery Questionnaire (NDQ)

A word on Tagging…

For those who are new and want to get started straight away but don’t wish to tread on any toes, may I humbly suggest tagging the System with ETARC, the individual planets you discover can be named according to your division (if you have one) if you feel this is necessary. The way I see it, if a Frontiers person discovers a planet in a new system, it could then look thus:

ETARC Diasian System, CSFD Diasia, (Diasia being located in the Diasian System and a totally random name I just thought of, of course)

I’m sure people already have their own methodology for tagging and I am by no means forcing this or suggesting my way is better, this is more for people who don’t have their own system in place for tagging. Think of it as a, “Minimum Tag” an option for those that haven’t yet started using tags. I hope it still allows for freedom within the community; a system with a few planets for example, named ETARC Diasian System, then within the System you would have planets named CSFD Diasia, CSHD Gallangalor also highlighting which group discovered them first.

I can see the threads of the future on this board being created by CSFD people advising others that they have found a new System that needs deeper exploration, (cause those Frontiers people just can’t sit still for long enough!) Coordinates/Portal glyphs are shared and along comes the Hub group en masse to categorise and maybe even colonise the System; all under the umbrella of ETARC.

Tagging in itself is a minefield of problems as I’m sure everyone has invested time into their way of doing things. I have tried to tackle this objectively and as mentioned above, there has been no standardisation so improvisation and, “This is how I do it, we should all do it this way” has taken over as no one wants to see their labours rendered obsolete by a new way; which I completely understand. Instead I am proposing a “Minimum Tag” to be adopted by those that haven’t got their own method in place.

This way the system gets the general ETARC tag which is what we are all part of, and each planet within that system can be named by the “Division” if you like, hopefully keeping everyone happy as this is hopefully a basic and least offensive naming convention that will be sturdy enough for future discoveries and not hinder any future decisions on tagging.

I would advise against the naming of planets with numbers and abbreviations that relate to resources etc. Universe Re-seeds make all this redundant so just be imaginative and creative with your names. Using Star Wars as an example, does Endor, Tatooine or Hoth tell you anything about the planets biome?

Players name planets for resources because they don’t have this sheet :wink:

So just to summarise…

  • Please reply with suggestions and improvements to the Discovery Sheet
  • The tagging is there to be adopted if you want to
  • I’m not trying to replace your tried and tested ways
  • This is all suggestion and aimed as a help, (hopefully) to those that are new here.

Thanks all
Osh


[ETARC HUB]: Citizen Science Frontiers Division CSFD
Etarc Hub Is Open
#2

At quick glance, that looks great! Excellent idea!! I’m already tagging my systems and planets in that fashion. Will be using the form now also!


#3

Well said. I like the form, I’ll give it a go.


#4

Can we use a abbreviations for recourses if we want? For our own refererence if nothing else


#5

I think this still holds true, we could add a table, then you just have to check off planet type.


[ETARC HUB]: Waking ETARC HUB
#6

This list is helpfull for the non english language players when we need the correct translation of an item.
https://hhrhhr.github.io/luaNMS/


#7

Very nice work. Very dedicated.
Can totally agree that there needs to be a bit of standardisation for the ETARC community. I think the naming and classification method you guys have made will be excellent, particularly in a hub arrangement where individuals are seeking particular requirements.

I’m currently using my own new tag being; “ECSD”. E stands for ETARC/Explorer.
I call it my Quick Cluster Method for naming small partially explored star clusters located in single regions.
ECSD goes on every system name (end) and on interesting planets (end) only. These planets are often only partialy explored, leaving oportunities for visitors to make some finds of their own. As yet there are no portal addresses so access is via warp only.
By using creative names I hopefully leave a suggestion of what features a vistor might expect. Dead and crappy planets don’t get a tag at all but their name will suggest their crappiness :smile:
No futher documentation other than my own reference on PS4. It would be fairly easy for the finer details and portal addresses to be acquired and filled in later and perhaps added to your database as “to be studied”.
I don’t ask others to adopt my very basic condensed method but if they wish to, they are welcome to. Yours however is far more comprehensive.
I’m guessing there are many similar naming methods to mine being used and there is no reason the finer details and portal addresses for all couldn’t be filled in later via the descoveries menu.

If I find myself in a hub or among other systems using your methods, I will absolutely join in to keep things neat. I may in fact move to the your official ETARC naming method later on, once it’s all worked out.
I would suggest reserving an aditional name for hub SYSTEMS only (ie ETARC-HUB) as it will help people know when they have arrived
…that’s just an idea.

Good work guys.


#8

Google doc might have a translator, I’ll try later and post a link for a French versions. If you would let us know how it worked.


#9

Do as you like, you discovered it.:smile: Osh was just giving a suggestion.


#10

ya who wants to walk in that STUFF!!! :laughing:


#11

I have also been using ECSD on the systems I find. I like the idea of a Hub specific name so I would know if I have made it there and I too would conform to whatever is decided. Since I am totally on my own for now, I have been naming planets according to conditions but with much artistic license since all could change again in the future. For ‘crappy planets’ I use dead, empty, void, etc in the title.


#12

Thank you, I merely wanted to try and start the ball rolling a little and hope that the sheet more than anything else catches on. I do not profess to be an authority or ‘the last word’ on the tags, I’m merely helping out so my suggestions for tags are just that, like I said, if you have your own system in place and it works for you, carry on :slight_smile:

My own way of naming planets has been to use popular culture and twist it a little. For example, a desolate wasteland planet in my early game with very little life, I have named Mordora. A twist on Mordor from Lord of the Rings, I’ve found a few of these types so once I’d used Harad from Tolkien for a desert world (well there must already be a hundred Tatooine’s and Jakku’s right?) and others I had to get creative; using other words, Arid becomes Aridor, Desolate becomes Desolaria, Barren becomes Barona for example.
Conversely, lush planets have complimentary names, one planet had yellow grass, I named it Saffrona, (my starting planet actually) one system had only one planet, I named the system Soleth and the planet, Soleth Prime.

I was actually drunk one night while playing and I found a planet and moon with the strangest life, I named the planet Derp, and the moon, Moon of Derp, I know, not my greatest discovery!

I agree the Hub should have it’s own, quite unique tag, ETARC-HUB sounds great. We also first need to find somewhere in each Galaxy where we are going to set up shop, so to speak but this is a little further down the line in planning terms I would imagine. There’s plenty of places to choose from and I believe all that’s been decided on so far is, “somewhere near the centre, but not too near”


#13

That’s hilarious!!! :rofl: I love that one!
The more creative the better.


#14

For my own use, I have composed some forms for recording data on planets and systems I visit. For anyone who is interested in seeing it here is the link to the Google document.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B8DJ_9GLT1PkOGRNVk9oLTQ0Y00/view?usp=sharing

I have an example copy at:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B8DJ_9GLT1PkS1o4MU1HZWc2NmM/view?usp=sharing

adapt these as you wish if you find them useful


#15

I tried out @Nivek and Op form yesterday. A hybrid of these two ideas would be nice.