Airship Guide

[Nyalia]

I've added an "items reported elsewhere" column to the sector list. Nothing references it though, it's just there for reference. I'll make it publicly editable.

For those who are using the sheet to record voyages - please don't forget to include the rating for your final sector! A few people have been forgetting to do so. I can use their exp totals to deduce what their rating had to have been, but it's still nice not to have to.

EDIT: I have now made the spreadsheet, at least for now, highlight sectors that do not have a rating entered. It's the most commonly missed piece of information. I will not be copying over logs that lack ratings to the master log until they're added - the ratings are important for determining what actually influences your rating. Since rating has a huge impact on experience, that information would be very good to figure out, and it's hard to mine out that data with incomplete logs.

[Arcticharm]

This was a triumph.
I'm making a note here:
HUGE SUCCESS.
It's hard to overstate my satisfaction.

Airship Guide Forums.
We do what we must because we can.
For the good of all of us
Except the ones who are dead.

But there's no sense crying over every mistake.
You just keep on trying till you run out of cake.
And the science gets done and you make a neat ship.
For the people who are still alive.

I'm not even angry.
I'm being so sincere right now.
Even though you broke my heart and killed me.
And tore me to pieces.
And threw every piece into a fire.
As they burned it hurt because
I was so happy for you!

Now these points of data make a beautiful line.
And we're out of beta, we're releasing on time.
So I'm GLaD I got burned.
Think of all the things we learned
For the people who are still alive.

Go ahead and leave me.
I think I prefer to stay inside.
Maybe you'll find someone else to help you.
Maybe Bluegartr...
THAT WAS A JOKE. Haha. FATCAT.
Anyway, this cake is great.
It's so delicious and moist.

Look at me still talking when there's science to do.
When I look out there it makes me GLaD I'm not you.
I've experiments to run there is research to be done
On the people who are still alive

And believe me I am still alive.
I'm doing science and I'm still alive.
I feel FANTASTIC and I'm still alive.
While you're dying I'll be still alive.
And when you're dead I will be still alive.

Still alive
Still alive

These are edited lyrics of Still Alive by Jonathan Coulton

Waiting for airships to return is hard guys...

[BonzaiFerroni]

For those who are using the sheet to record voyages - please don't forget to include the rating for your final sector! A few people have been forgetting to do so. I can use their exp totals to deduce what their rating had to have been, but it's still nice not to have to.

EDIT: I have now made the spreadsheet, at least for now, highlight sectors that do not have a rating entered.

That's awesome XD I know I forgot to enter mine once but I caught it.

This was a triumph.
I'm making a note here:
HUGE SUCCESS.
It's hard to overstate my satisfaction.

Can't fully describe how awesome that was XD

Bad news...

Ship returned from 6->5->2 with A rating and bonus in every sector(6 =150%, 5= 50%,2 = 100%) but neighter 11 or 7 was found. :/.

I was starting to get curious about the theory too, the first few data points seemed to suggest there was some promise. Since then I've also found some disconfirming data as well. It was a good theory! We've been able to conclude that proximity is important. Beyond that, my best guess is that Forecastle improves the odds of finding a new sector, as we've been speculating about for some time now. We've had at least one person say they got as high as sector 6 on just the bronco forecastle but there might still be some RNG too it.

Sector 5 where i expected a discovery, got bonus but rating was abysmal with replacement of parts recommended message...

This is a message you got in your flight log? :O I hadn't seen that yet, can you do a screenshot?

Sorry to hear that! We personally had the same result last night, we had sent out to only sector 5 to try to discover 7 but were unsuccessful. We got a substandard rating which I think I’ve seen other people get AND still discover areas. Upon closer review the line about violent turbulence says “Airship surveillance levels unaffected, but EXPLORATORY CAPABILITIES may be significantly hindered.” so maybe that has something to do with it. We sent it back out on the route to 5 -> 6 so I'll know some more this evening. We haven't been able to complete our invincible forecastle yet but I'm thinking that we might need to lean hard on it and get it done just to advance :-/ Banzai, we may have found one of the walls Will keep updating with findings.

Looking at the spreadsheet, it appears that all entries that have found new sectors (so far) have mostly had satisfactory end results(except possibly line 5) from the Sector of interest AND have seen violent and high winds, with high winds being the 2nd entry before discovery of the new sector, so perhaps slight hindrance still allows for discovery of new sectors while significant hindrance does not?

At the very least it is consistent with reports! Seems worthwhile to keep recommending the forecastle upgrade then for unlocking sectors, although keep us updated! \o/

As for the wind conditions, you raise another really interesting theory, lets keep an eye on the data!

[Yarem]

This is a message you got in your flight log? :O I hadn't seen that yet, can you do a screenshot?

Complete last trip: Album
Picture with messageReplacement of parts recommended

Exploration of sea of clouds - sector 5 finished. Performance of the airship was rated as insufficient/ unsatisfactory. The the replacement of airship parts is recommended.

But it seems its just a normal rating in german, i got this sometimes at the beginning.

This are the german rating texts i got so far:

worst -> best

Unersuchung von Zielort <Destination> mit äußerst wenig zufriedenstellender Leistung abgeschlossen (0%)
Unersuchung von Zielort <Destination> abgeschlossen. Die Leistung des Luftschiffs wurde als nicht ausreichend bewertet. Der Austausch von Bauteilen empfiehlt sich(50%)
Untersuchung von Zielort <Destination> abgeschlossen. Die Leistung des Luftschiffs wurde als zufriedenstellend bewertet. (100%)
Untersuchung von Zielort <Destination> abgeschlossen. Die Leistung des Luftschiffs wurde als gut bewertet. (150%)

[BonzaiFerroni]

Exploration of sea of clouds - sector 5 finished. Performance of the airship was rated as insufficient/ unsatisfactory. The the replacement of airship parts is recommended.

Wow, I've never seen that message, I wonder if there are differences between the translation or it just isn't a common message?

[Arcticharm]

It looks like the Rubber Ducky disproved my wind theory :O

ship looks like it got turbulent wind twice in a row and STILL managed to discover SC08. It might just be left to RNGesus

[BonzaiFerroni]

It looks like the Rubber Ducky disproved my wind theory :O

ship looks like it got turbulent wind twice in a row and STILL managed to discover SC08. It might just be left to RNGesus

I think RNGesus plays a role but Forecastle gives him extra reason to bless you =) She had been to sector 7 twice before:

• Rank 17 with 76 Surveillance (Invincible forecastle)
• Rank 20 with 62 Surveillance (Bronco forecastle, had downgraded to make room for another enterprise part)
• Rank 22 (found it) with 76 Surveillance (Invincible forecastle re-attached)

[BonzaiFerroni]

It seems sector ratings are not as straightforward as I first proposed. I had pretty much been thinking of them as an "average" of your retrieval ratings. However, here is one case where there was a satisfactory rating (+100%) from two Normal retrieval results.

There is something else in these screenshots that is significant, I had seen it a couple times before this as well. For the deep red crystals instead of the standard "High-quality deep red crystals discovered" it says "Several high-quality deep red crystals discovered." And instead of the usual 2-3 crystals I retrieved 11 of them and they were HQ. This seems to be an upgraded version of "High-quality" retrieval. Whenever I have seen this, the items were actually HQ.

It may also account for the higher sector performance rating.
Edit: Well I have found another case where I got the "Several High-quality" message but an abysmal rating....

[BonzaiFerroni]

But it seems its just a normal rating in german, i got this sometimes at the beginning.

This are the german rating texts i got so far:

worst -> best

Unersuchung von Zielort <Destination> mit äußerst wenig zufriedenstellender Leistung abgeschlossen (0%)
Unersuchung von Zielort <Destination> abgeschlossen. Die Leistung des Luftschiffs wurde als nicht ausreichend bewertet. Der Austausch von Bauteilen empfiehlt sich(50%)
Untersuchung von Zielort <Destination> abgeschlossen. Die Leistung des Luftschiffs wurde als zufriedenstellend bewertet. (100%)
Untersuchung von Zielort <Destination> abgeschlossen. Die Leistung des Luftschiffs wurde als gut bewertet. (150%)

Thanks for following up on that!

Having some way to know which reports had the potential to unlock a sector is important, but I'm wondering if listing all previously unlocked sectors will get a tad unwieldy (especially as we unlock more sectors). I've been trying to indicate in my own reports which trips actually had a potential to unlock a sector.

It might also be inferred using the name of the ship, if they've kept a steady log and reported their sectors previously unlocked. I suppose we could just include the steady reporters in the sector unlock analysis. But you are the spreadsheet wizard, this is your call!

After entering a few, I don't find them unwieldy at all, seems it is easy to shorten to something like SC03 - SC09, SC11 like I've seen people doing.

[Nyalia]

After entering a few, I don't find them unwieldy at all, seems it is easy to shorten to something like SC03 - SC09, SC11 like I've seen people doing.

Doing this is totally fine. You can even do just "3-9,11" if you want. In any case, I'll expand it on the master sheet for consistency so it's easier to compare, but don't mind doing that at all.

On the master sheet, I've started using "____" to space out gaps where unfound sectors are in the sequence. I feel this makes it easier to notice who is missing what when looking through where they've been.

So far, looking at the data we have, there does appear to be RNG involved with unlocking things, unfortunately. It's a bit hard to tell if higher surveillance helps, or a higher rating, or a certain wind value (though wind really doesn't seem to matter given how many unlocks were double turbulence), or a better overall rating. Comparing a trip where I found sector 06 and one where I didn't (which I totally forgot about when I made that comment about finding it first try!), very little was different. The only notable difference was I had more range.

It's clear though that there's a specific sector that you have to go to in order to unlock a given sector. 07 always unlocks from 05. 08 always unlocks from 07. And so on.



Also, I've added an Airship Roster to the spreadsheet, just because. Feel free to list your airship there! If you choose a log color from the Log Color dropdown menu, all of your log entries in the Master List will be highlighted in that color. This will hopefully make it easier to see which logs go together when we're comparing them. If any supported color combos hurt your eyes, let me know and I'll edit them.