News Chapter Four - Exploration Reveal

[Marc_Hicks]

Not really- think about it: large ships have large radars for no real reason, A grade sensors do what exactly to justify that weight?

You could have utility boosters that augment scanners in various ways, and hunters who are wanted by the cops could hide in plain sight, Das Boot style. It would add a gigantic chunk of rewarding depth to SC that currently is A to B. Traders might tune ships to be stealthy, or simply go for broke with an old bucket.

Small ships might be harder to spot, making newbies less obvious, and make smaller ships more useful.

I have been saying for so very long that we need to add greater depth to our Super-cruise interactions. Variable levels of ship visibility, based on size & heat output, that impact how visible ships are on our SC scanners (& out to what range). Give players the ability to use heat management & even a SC variant of Silent Running to reduce the visibility of your ship. KW & Manifest Scanners that can reveal limited amounts of info based on the range & power level of the scan, but with the downside that more powerful scans will make the scanning ship more visible. ECM units & other devices that players can use in Supercruise to try and break a "scan in progress". Who knows, if manifest & KW Scans could be done in SC-even in a limited fashion-then players without cargo or bounties might have to endure far, far fewer interdictions. Also, the "all that juicy cargo" line might finally become meaningful .

 

[Marc_Hicks]

I agree that the current integration of Exploration needs to be deeply expanded in order to give it true longevity. The current tie to the BGS (same value per honk, regardless of scans or value) could stand to be updated and would go a long way towards giving targeted exploration both structure and meaning. And it would be awesome to have more integration generally into the rest of the mechanics of the game, especially for future colonization expansions (fingers crossed). At the very least, adding Exploration missions that rely on finding specific types of things, like mining but for planet data instead of rocks.

Well yes, BGS integration would be excellent. However, if they just manage to integrate the Exploration & Mining mechanics, then I think that would be a huge step forward.

 

[-VR- Max Factor]

You consider the UI minigame as depth?

lol

Compared to what we have now it's a massive step up.

What would you call mechanics with depth?

Unfortunately there seems to be a call to make it even more shallow and worthless then what it is now. Words fail me.

 

[LeoBartlet]

Leo, do try & use some level of listening & comprehension skills-& do try to be less obnoxious.

Right back at ya buddy.

 

[who?]

Well yes, BGS integration would be excellent. However, if they just manage to integrate the Exploration & Mining mechanics, then I think that would be a huge step forward.

I made a suggestion some time ago (which was near universally ignored - sniffles!) about tying exploring, mining and combat together in a system to build new stations & colonise new systems:

Basically:
- FD hand-seed a small number of systems with a large, fixed amount of a rare material ("unobtainium") which is essential for building new stations (but don't disclose where).
- Explorers try to find these deposits (now, presumably, using the new sensor mechanism). If they scan a deposit, they can sell the data to the faction of their choice.
- Selling that data triggers a community goal at that faction's station. Mine enough of that 'unobtainium' and you get to build a new station in that system, with tiers for the station type & facilities, from lowly outpost to fully kitted out Coriolis. Maybe even a megaship.
- Combat obviously also comes into play, as you'll need to protect your miners, while also disrupting any opposing factions also trying to mine it.

I'd love something like that. Gives explorers something meaningful to find, miners a long-term goal other than grinding credits, and a reason for all 3 roles to play together as part of a faction.

 

[LeoBartlet]

Compared to what we have now it's a massive step up.

What would you call mechanics with depth?

Unfortunately there seems to be a call to make it even more shallow and worthless then what it is now. Words fail me.

As Eagleboy said in reply to what I said the views on this update are pretty subjective but for me I would prefer something more engaging that a minigame UI.

As for calls to make it shallow I cannot speak to those views because I don't share them but I do hold the opinion that the exploration mechanics suggested should be optional.

I mean the game pretty much have sub-categories for combat (pvp/pve/non-combat) and trading (A-B trade, rares, even mining) so why not exploration (netflix and honk and UI minigaming)?

 

[Cobra1984]

Basically:
- FD hand-seed a small number of systems with a large, fixed amount of a rare material ("unobtainium") which is essential for building new stations (but don't disclose where).
- Explorers try to find these deposits (now, presumably, using the new sensor mechanism). If they scan a deposit, they can sell the data to the faction of their choice.
- Selling that data triggers a community goal at that faction's station. Mine enough of that 'unobtainium' and you get to build a new station in that system, with tiers for the station type & facilities, from lowly outpost to fully kitted out Coriolis. Maybe even a megaship.
- Combat obviously also comes into play, as you'll need to protect your miners, while also disrupting any opposing factions also trying to mine it.

This is an example of meaningful gameplay attached to exploration. It's also in the same ballpark as the goldrush mechanic described by David Braben.

This is still at the forum theorycrafting stage despite what I took to be a commitment from Frontier to revisit core gameplay during this season, particularly exploration gameplay.

For me, I'd love to know if anything of the sort is still envisaged or planned.

 

[Rick Bravo]

I am cautiously optimistic about the overall changes to exploration even though I have deep concerns regarding some of the other Q4 changes. Staying on point, I asked this before but didn't see a response, so If I missed it, my apologies. Regarding USSs and the thargoid content. I think the NHSSs should be removed from USSs and be available through automatically, possibly through the datalink scanner. These are ships after all, I would suggest the same change for distress calls, weapons fire, CZs and even Rez sites. All of these are based around moving ships and not static signals denoting wreckage.

Separately, some consideration needs to be given to the non-explorers when making the exploration changes. Players taking missions should be able to complete their mission without having to find the destination planet. The current system puts a kind of mission bookmark on the planet even if it is undiscovered by the player. The new system should do something similar. Also, I am not sure what the discovery scan will do in the new system but it should provide at least the same amount of information. Location of bodies, type of bodies (star, planet, moon etc) based on mass. The details are for surface scanning but you should know the location and mass of each body in a system from the discovery scan.

 

[-VR- Max Factor]

As Eagleboy said in reply to what I said the views on this update are pretty subjective but for me I would prefer something more engaging that a minigame UI.

As for calls to make it shallow I cannot speak to those views because I don't share them but I do hold the opinion that the exploration mechanics suggested should be optional.

I mean the game pretty much have sub-categories for combat (pvp/pve/non-combat) and trading (A-B trade, rares, even mining) so why not exploration (netflix and honk and UI minigaming)?

All parts of the game are UI mini-game even combat. As that is the only real way to play the game because our commanders are stuck in their seats. So if we do not use the user interface, how else are we going to interface with the game world.

There are no sub categories of combat, you aim using the UI and fire. That is all you can do in combat.

 

[-VR- Max Factor]

This is an example of meaningful gameplay attached to exploration. It's also in the same ballpark as the goldrush mechanic described by David Braben.

This is still at the forum theorycrafting stage despite what I took to be a commitment from Frontier to revisit core gameplay during this season, particularly exploration gameplay.

For me, I'd love to know if anything of the sort is still envisaged or planned.

Maybe to some not for me. I have no interest in that kind of gameplay.

 

[Cobra1984]

If Frontier are still following this and haven't gone completely mad, I'd like to know what their plans are for this, if any, beyond the new scanning mechanic.

 

[mossfoot]

This is an example of meaningful gameplay attached to exploration. It's also in the same ballpark as the goldrush mechanic described by David Braben.

This is still at the forum theorycrafting stage despite what I took to be a commitment from Frontier to revisit core gameplay during this season, particularly exploration gameplay.

While I'm not opposed to this scenario playing out, per se, why does everything have to eventually boil down to community combat?

"Hey, I found this neat thing."

"Let's fight over it!"

It should be one possible event, sure. But I'd like to see an example of what you think is meaningful gameplay attached to exploration that doesn't tie into money or combat.

 

[Dbrn47]

If Frontier are still following this and haven't gone completely mad, I'd like to know what their plans are for this, if any, beyond the new scanning mechanic.

Last thing said:

Hello everyone,

Just wanted to give you an update on where we are on the topic of Exploration.

We’ve been reading through your feedback and taking it on board. Currently, we’re discussing and exploring a few options based on your feedback, but we don’t have anything to announce just yet.

Thank you for all of the comments so far.

 

[Mengy]

Yes, Mengy fantasizes quite a lot, but that's basically a fluff, they are mostly not mechanics, or even not anything related with exploration mechanics in first place.

Dude, WOAH, hold on there, not to toot my own horn but my suggestion thread was focused on revamping exploration's core into a system of interactive mechanics which support each other. I wanted a combination of solid mechanics coupled with content for those mechanics.

Go on, hit the link in my signature to my suggestion thread, really read it paying particular attention to my proposed core loop at the beginning of the post, and tell me just how many of my ideas are practically mirrored in what Frontier has proposed for 3.3.

Then tell me I was "fantasizing".

 

[Arsen Cross]

So, while I have doubts that FD are continuing to collect feedback from what has become a threadnaught wrought with discussion instead of feedback, I'm going to post my two cents.

First off I just want to say, I love the new mechanic; but there are some things I feel can be done better.

The new Discovery Scanner mechanics need to be built in to the ship like the Data Link Scanner

The new mechanic is much more involved than the existing ADS/DSS combo as far as user input is concerned. It's also likely going to be much more satisfying. Because of these two reasons it is my opinion that the new scanning mechanic should be built into all ships. My primary concern here is that I'm honestly sick and tired of being forced to waste a module slot on a Discovery Scanner. Back in the day this wasn't a huge issue but now we have a significantly large portion of modules and finally having a built-in tool for exploration on all ships makes sense and would give players more flexibility in fitting. Something that is sorely needed as is evident by the massive amount of requests to combine the ADS/DSS or allow us to split internal compartments to fit more smaller modules.​

It doesn't make sense to remove the current ADS mechanics

The introduction of a new technology in life doesn't invalidate or remove older technologies. More importantly introducing a new game mechanic should not force players to stop using an existing one. Instead the new mechanic introduced should intertwine with the current method of play.

To that end, keep the ADS with its function existing exactly as it is. If you have the basic scanner built in to the ship as proposed above the ADS becomes an optional add-on that speeds up the process of discovering bodies. For dedicated explorers this means that they will have the option to use a module slot to speed up their process by eliminating the need to locate the bodies by using the ADS, and then use the built-in scanner to perform the new detailed scans through the interface.

The net effect of this approach is that those wishing to expedite their exploration process can, to a great extent; while everyone else gets a huge quality of life improvement in terms of more flexibility in fitting by opting out of the ADS in favor of only using the built in scanner in exchange for a little more time investment on scanning. Over all this would make all aspects of exploration and fitting for it more satisfying for everyone.

I personally would take the approach of ditching the ADS in favor of only using the new scanner because like I said, I'm sick and tired of wasting my smallest class 3 internal on a size 1 module!​

The new Detailed Surface Scanner "surface impact" probes don't make sense

At least with modern technology it's obvious that mapping the surface of a planet and locating things is with satellites in orbit. While I appreciate the Imperial Probe Droid-esque approach to finding things on the planet surface, it doesn't make sense to me when you approach things with logic. I hope this is well explained in the codex.​

Planetary Static POI's versus "Random" POI's

The listed changes don't lend much insight into how the random POI's will be handled by the new system. When we scan a planet with the ADS are they going to show as potential sites in the right hand column at the top of the scanner? Will random POI's (ground based USS') be differentiated from persistent POI's? These are things that should be done and considered.​

 

[Dbrn47]

The new Detailed Surface Scanner "surface impact" probes don't make sense

At least with modern technology it's obvious that mapping the surface of a planet and locating things is with satellites in orbit. While I appreciate the Imperial Probe Droid-esque approach to finding things on the planet surface, it doesn't make sense to me when you approach things with logic. I hope this is well explained in the codex.
​

Yea, that bit is probably just to create some sort of economy within the loop, something with finite resources that you need to replenish. Limpets didn't need to consumed on use either, but they are.

 

[Dbrn47]

Planetary Static POI's versus "Random" POI's

The listed changes don't lend much insight into how the random POI's will be handled by the new system. When we scan a planet with the ADS are they going to show as potential sites in the right hand column at the top of the scanner? Will random POI's (ground based USS') be differentiated from persistent POI's? These are things that should be done and considered.​

Random POIs are going to stay as they are. You'll cruise at the proper altitude looking for search areas and then use appropriate search patterns within that area to eyeball the randomly generated site.

 

[Arsen Cross]

Random POIs are going to stay as they are. You'll cruise at the proper altitude looking for search areas and then use appropriate search patterns within that area to eyeball the randomly generated site.

I'm OK with that, no issue there and assumed they would stay that way. What I'm referring to however is being able to see what types of random POI's are on the planet should I actually have a desire to seek out that type of gameplay. Unlikely, but it should be there.

I'm thinking "random" POI's could be indicated by "Scattered Signs of Human Activity" and "Scattered Signs of XXX", "scattered" being an example of a term indicating that random POI's are present on a planet.

...Or, just get rid of the random POI system as it doesn't make sense to be 20,000+ ly away from the bubble and literally see scattered human junk in every "unexplored" system.

 

[Arsen Cross]

Yea, that bit is probably just to create some sort of economy within the loop, something with finite resources that you need to replenish. Limpets didn't need to consumed on use either, but they are.

Even if we used satellites instead of surface impacting probes you'd still have a consumable based mechanic. Since the probes are fired while at cruise speeds its logical that they would be irretrievable if they are satellites.

 

[Dbrn47]

I'm OK with that, no issue there and assumed they would stay that way. What I'm referring to however is being able to see what types of random POI's are on the planet should I actually have a desire to seek out that type of gameplay. Unlikely, but it should be there.

I'm thinking "random" POI's could be indicated by "Scattered Signs of Human Activity" and "Scattered Signs of XXX", "scattered" being an example of a term indicating that random POI's are present on a planet.

...Or, just get rid of the random POI system as it doesn't make sense to be 20,000+ ly away from the bubble and literally see scattered human junk in every "unexplored" system.

I don't see why not since USS will all be generated at once and you can then choose which ones to go to. Maybe it'd make too much of a mess on planets, maybe it's a step too far revealing too many mysteries. Not a bad suggestion though. It doesn't have to be too vague either, they could be labelled a bit like USS are now and require us to narrow down the location much like the search area missions are. Maybe it'd be giving us too much information, maybe it needs to be done in a way that it attaches probe use, then again we're already expected to use the SRV wave scanner for that. I prefer to eyeball those by ship since I like to stay out of the SRV as much as possible, so labeling would be just fine for me.