![[Diplomacy] Carnegie](https://forums-cdn.zaonce.net/data/avatars/m/123/123809.jpg?1553527149){kind=avatar}
Can you explain why?
I've been criticizing the FSS as being a tool for surveyors rather than explorers, so I'm curious as to why you're not enjoying it.
Why the FSS is better than the previous system.
- Thread starter Miko
- Start date
Can you explain why?
I've been criticizing the FSS as being a tool for surveyors rather than explorers, so I'm curious as to why you're not enjoying it.
Exploration - the search for the unknown, visiting undiscovered and unknown places.
As you pointed out quite nicely, the new FSS tells you what an object exactly is - this makes it known and traveling to that places not exploring anymore.
From all the threads about the new FSS I got the impression that the "haters" considered finding out what the planets/moons are to be exploration while the "lovers" considered seeing the system map to be exploration.
This difference in definition of what exploration is results in the heated debates - in my opinion.
I like to fly circles around the star while scooping. Makes fuel scooping feel like something difficult or exciting (would look much cooler in a movie than just parking in a save distance from a star).
Since I like my DBX that agile and large scoop are not part of the description(I would like a more agile DBX with a c5 scoop - or better a Core Dynamics fast, agile and big scooped small combat explorer)
I see, so with the Old ADS you pretended you didn't know what the system map showed you. And now you're trying to say the FSS gives too much information? You guys really need to get your story straight. Does the FSS hide the system map and makes you work harder? Or is it "easy mode" exploration? When you claim the porridge is both too hot and simultaneously too cold, it just makes it sound like you're complaining just to complain.
Where does he say that?
I've been saying that the FSS gives too much information all along.
The ADS gave too much information too, but significantly less than the FSS does, so there was at least some room for exploration gameplay beyond using the tool. With the FSS there is only the tool. It would be somewhat better if the tool was actually challenging to use, but it isn't so it's just a pointless timesink.
When you misquote people and willfully misrepresent their arguments, it just makes it sound like you have no actual argument yourself.
Yes, that's also what I'd prefer.
Likewise
Exploration - the search for the unknown, visiting undiscovered and unknown places.
As you pointed out quite nicely, the new FSS tells you what an object exactly is - this makes it known and traveling to that places not exploring anymore.
From all the threads about the new FSS I got the impression that the "haters" considered finding out what the planets/moons are to be exploration while the "lovers" considered seeing the system map to be exploration.
This difference in definition of what exploration is results in the heated debates - in my opinion.
I like to fly circles around the star while scooping. Makes fuel scooping feel like something difficult or exciting (would look much cooler in a movie than just parking in a save distance from a star).
Since I like my DBX that agile and large scoop are not part of the description
The FSS tells you what the body is, it'll even give a hint as to whether there's Geo and/or Bio PoI's on said body.
What it won't give you is specific information on the exact type of Geo or Bio PoI. For this, you have to fly to said planet, and Probe Map it. There. There's your exact reason for going to explore a given body.
I've just enjoyed about 4 hours playing the game, and have explored a few systems in a nebula where I found Geo and Bio PoI's. I investigated them and found Bark Mounds and it was awesome.
I vehemently disagree that the FSS stops one from visiting and exploring bodies within a system - that's not its purpose. Its purpose is to give you initial information, from which you then decide to go and explore said body. FSS is for surveying. Probe Mapping is for surveying more thoroughly, but then it can give you information that "there's something down there to explore".
You have to take what FDEV have done to exploration as a whole, and not just single out the FSS and only consider that, which is what people seem to be focusing on.
Last edited:
You've said it yourself - the changes are all about surveying. Each of the tools provides you with all the information, via a minigame, leaving nothing unknown, and no decision-making to be done.
The FSS minigame tells you exactly which planets have POIs and the probe minigame tells you exactly where they are. There's no player agency left, we're just robots performing repetitive tasks to tick boxes in the Codex.
I get that some people are perfectly happy with that, and I'm glad they're having fun with the new tools, but for others playing minigames isn't our idea of fun exploration gameplay, so we'd like to have some version of the ADS back (with whatever penalties FDev feels the need to apply) so we can have fun again.
Blackcompany
Banned
This makes the FSS even dumber than I thought it was. I figured it would at least fully explore the planet it found.
As it is now though...its just a time sink. If you need to fly out and probe the planet to explore it, just let the honk reveal it like it used to. Then we fly out and fire off probes to map. I would propose:
-Honk: Reveals all bodies in a system
-Probes: Can be fired from the cockpit and will map out a planet. If manually fired using the (frankly fiddly and tedious) mini game, nets a credit bonus for detailed mapping.
There. No FSS. No need for it. I mean, if the only thing it does, is reveal the location of the body...without granting exploration data...the honk could do that, and be a lot less tedious.
You’re either deliberately or mistakenly taking two separate positions held by two separate groups, but pretending like one singular group is saying both things at once.
For most part, each side to this issue are politely debating why they do or don’t like the new FSS. But Let’s break that down using your analogy, ok?
Pro-FSS group is saying porridge is hot.
Anti-FSS group is saying porridge is cold.
NO ONE is saying “simultaneously” as you allege that it is hot and cold. These TWO things are being said by TWO completely different sets of people, on opposite sides of the debate.
I haven’t read a single person on either side of issue say what you are claiming - which equates to ‘I hate the FSS, but oh by the way I love it as well’.
That would indeed be confusing to FD - for any sizable group of people to say simultaneously they love the FSS but by the way also hate it. Fortunately FD won’t be confused here because other than you, they will read that one group likes the FSS just fine, while another separate group dislikes.
No.
The old ADS showed a visual representation of the object on the map and offered a audio clue to what it might be. To get more specific information a detailed surface scan was needed.
The FSS combines the the visual representation of the object with a precise detailed surface scan and an indication of surface POIs are available.
The FSS combines the ADS with the DSS and adds information if surface POIs are on a planet/moon. That's simply factually more information than the ADS provided.
The FSS removed the requirement to fly to the object to perform a detailed surface scan.
The old ADS had very little if any ambiguity in the visual representation, so what you saw was what you got 99.9% of the time. The FSS similarly has ambiguity in the form of overlap between spectral ranges. The FSS however is only unambiguously accurate about 95% of the time, so it has far more pleasant surprises and hence more mystery.
Ok. Glad to see you're taking a stance, and that the stance is that the FSS is functionally superior tech to the ADS. This is an accurate representation.
Last edited:
I am deliberately pointing out that there are groups of people complaining that the FSS is simultaneously "too much work" and "too easy". Hence the only logical conclusion that is that these two extremes are the outlier positions, and the consensus lies in the middle. You can't please everyone, hence, the FSS must have hit that goldilocks sweet spot of just the right amount of effort for the reward.
Last edited:
Or they could listen to the feedback and implement something that makes the majority of explorers happy. Personally I'd take ANYTHING that allowed me to target a body and fly to it instead of playing the minigame and I guarantee that every other player who wants some form of ADS mechanism will be equally happy.
They could even have a forum for focused feedback on their ideas, before they implement them. Not sure what they'd call that though.
Last edited:
They did, during the feedback on the scanners two years ago. This is the system that resulted. You can pretend to represent a "majority of explorers" but the reality is that the majority of the players are too busy playing and enjoying 3.3 to come here and talk about the FSS. The forums right after a patch are mostly a few bored malcontents, and some others taking a break from playing to try give Frontier a slightly more representative view of the player feedback. Hence the vast majority of 1-time posts about the FSS are positive. I think that says everything.
OK, so with all the feedback here I'm going to resort to acknowledging that some people simply do not like the new FSS. The arguments against it are somewhat flawed and some outright lack any logic whatsoever.
As an explorer, if your thing was to honk then travel to the planet to do the surface scan, then the FSS isn't stopping you. You do NOT need to use it at all. Use the honk then view the system map and travel to the planet that captures your curiosity. Travelling within range, similar to the old method of having the surface scanner will scan the planet likewise. The FSS is there as an option to make an informed decision on travelling to a planet for whatever purpose and mapping it if you so desire. If you don't like it, don't use it! Just use the honk function.
I really am at a loss with some of the arguments against with that in mind. The fact some call the FSS tedious whilst arguing they liked the old method of travelling for hours in a single system, well, see above paragraph! Do it the old way if you have the patience.
Calling it too easy versus the old method is equally absurd, in my opinion.
I'm going to touch upon this in the OP.
As an explorer, if your thing was to honk then travel to the planet to do the surface scan, then the FSS isn't stopping you. You do NOT need to use it at all. Use the honk then view the system map and travel to the planet that captures your curiosity. Travelling within range, similar to the old method of having the surface scanner will scan the planet likewise. The FSS is there as an option to make an informed decision on travelling to a planet for whatever purpose and mapping it if you so desire. If you don't like it, don't use it! Just use the honk function.
I really am at a loss with some of the arguments against with that in mind. The fact some call the FSS tedious whilst arguing they liked the old method of travelling for hours in a single system, well, see above paragraph! Do it the old way if you have the patience.
Calling it too easy versus the old method is equally absurd, in my opinion.
I'm going to touch upon this in the OP.
Last edited:
Could be 49 ELW's and 1 Amonia World
Only one way to find out now [up]
I'm not reading through all the replies, but you do realise that you can tell if there are any ELWs in FSS without manually going to the bodies, right? The scanner at the bottom of the screen has certain patterns that always correlate to the type of body. It even tells you what they are in the bottom right of the screen.
Get out of the bubble where everything has been scanned a bazillion times to a completely unmapped system and fire off the FSS, then open the system map and look at the utter blankness.
The FSS IS stopping people from doing exactly what you say it isn't stopping people from doing.
OK, so if the honk isn't revealing such systems, and if you still wish to enjoy the travel time, go probe and be the first to do so.
There was also a remark here that the DSS revealed too much. So what next? Actually drift around looking for the stars? If an explorer wants to feel special then they can choose to use their eyes and patience to discern any bodies from the backdrop stars in Space, since distance and time will cause them to move. I've done that before even in a system with 100k ls bodies and stars. It was fun once.