My detailed feedback after a week out

[shreddog]

After using the FSS since release this is my experience so far(and some ideas)...
I like the mechanic of the thing. I really do.
But.. Even good things become repetitive if you "overuse" them.

After scanning hundreds of systems with probably thousands of planets in total. And not finding anything special, other than geological POIs and some close orbiting binary planets. I have to admit it got tiresome, and quite a chore. And I started to realize that maybe the ADS commanders may have a point after all.

When things are so rare to find.. and I mean rare(thousands of planets scanned and I didn't even find a bark mound, lol) - then you really end up wanting to scan as many systems as you can as fast as possible. So you end up rushing the hell out of the FSS! Panning the scanner frantically -zooming in and right out, only keeping an eye on the surface location to see if anything pops up. You pay no attention to the bodies data because you ain't got time for none of that, missing out on potential interesting planets in the process. 'Zoom, next, zoom next, repeat'.

Wow. It got really tiresome. And I ended up fantasizing about bringing the ADS back from the dead, with a few adjustments. As a supplement to the FSS.

So what I would like to see is this:
-ADS module is back(yeh I know )
-ADS resolves the system automatically when exiting jump. No need to honk(I have an aversion for that sound now).
-All bodies and their orbital data are shown in the system map and orrery without needing to scan them.
-The bodies are not targetable unless scanned and resolved by the FSS.
-If any phenomena is present in the system a audio and visual alarm is played as soon as technically possible after arriving in system.
-Alarms are automatic and would play while in cockpit, or any mode 'Bio signs detected', 'Geological activity detected', 'Anomaly detected', etc.
-Alarms give no clue where signal is, just that there is something in the system. Then you deploy FSS to find it.

With this addition you would still use and depend on the FSS. But you would not have to use it constantly, only in select cases, and I think it would make for a much more enjoyable gameplay experience for many people.
It will kill the sense of unknown and not knowing what's in the system on arrival, but I find the spectrogram already halfway does this.


I know this is quite opposite of what I've said before. So yeah... *cough* But I have to be honest and say it how I feel.

 

[Sunyavadin]

After using the FSS since release this is my experience so far(and some ideas)...
I like the mechanic of the thing. I really do.
But.. Even good things become repetitive if you "overuse" them.

After scanning hundreds of systems with probably thousands of planets in total. And not finding anything special, other than geological POIs and some close orbiting binary planets. I have to admit it got tiresome, and quite a chore. And I started to realize that maybe the ADS commanders may have a point after all.

Yeah, it's something which can totally be fun in moderation.
The biggest issue being having to do it in as many systems as your average explorer is going to get through trying to find something they're interested in.
I love eating certain foods, but if I could only eat the same one of those every meal for a week, my enjoyment would certainly go down.

-All bodies and their orbital data are shown in the system map and orrery without needing to scan them.
-The bodies are not targetable unless scanned and resolved by the FSS.

Mmhmmm, this would definitely assist, and the FSS knows where they are and what types of signal sources are there before you look at them, so there's no real info being presented that isn't already known to the FSS before you focus the telescope on it to get the full pre-3.3 DSS info

 

[Rat Catcher]

That's odd marx, in my Codex entries they aer listed as T Class, but no issue

I assume the egg-shaped GG's with orbitals of 0.4/0.5 days are common too...

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

After using the FSS since release this is my experience so far(and some ideas)...
I like the mechanic of the thing. I really do.
But.. Even good things become repetitive if you "overuse" them.

I'm afraid that's where it went wrong for me as well.

In the beta I was enjoying the new FSS. Tested it on a 1,800 LY trip and at the end of it, the thought of jumping to a new system and having to go through it again didn't appeal to me. Which is why I immediately stopped playing the beta. Didn't want to have grown weary of the new feature before it went live. And I figured, in the live build they may have placed all kinds of new and interesting POIs which may be my reward at the end of going through the FSS motions. I had 12 KLY to test it getting back to the bubble. It took only 3 KLY for me to give up on it, straight line for the bubble, only scanning the credit rich bodies.

The news of notable stellar phenomena gave me new hope. Those could be the target. And they are indicated clearly on the signal bar without any need for the FSS mini game. I did find one, but it took me around 3-400 systems. And that hit ratio is too low to keep me going.

So yeah, the fact it's mandatory to use the FSS in order to know what system you're traveling through each and every system kills it for me. A more direct approach where the FSS only is needed when you have found a system that warrants spending time in would have been better. But that ship has sailed, is over the horizon, met with terrible weather conditions and is now adrift on the ocean (and the award for most terrible analogy of the year goes to ...)

 

[WR3ND]

Still have around, oh, maybe 30K LY to make it back for DW2. Slow going as jump-honking doesn't seem to hold my interest for very long.

At least DW2 will have several waypoints.

 

[marx]

The way I see how the FSS works (or rather: meant to work) is an abstract representation of true scientific processes.

No offense, but in my opinion, you are overestimating the mechanics behind the FSS, and also the importance of realism and whatnot. Elite is definitely not a scientific representation of spaceflight, never was meant to be, so gameplay should always have precedence over realism whenever there's a conflict.

That's odd marx, in my Codex entries they aer listed as T Class, but no issue

Which ones are these? I just checked crystalline shards in five different regions, and they all say "In systems with star types: A, F, G, K, MS, S". Would you like screenshots? But if the Codex entries might be different for different players, so bugged, that would be... Well. The forum would censor out the words that come to my mind.

I assume the egg-shaped GG's with orbitals of 0.4/0.5 days are common too...

Why bring those up now?

 

[Sunyavadin]

The news of notable stellar phenomena gave me new hope. Those could be the target. And they are indicated clearly on the signal bar without any need for the FSS mini game. I did find one, but it took me around 3-400 systems. And that hit ratio is too low to keep me going.

Yeah, there's no clearer sign of the right and left hands being kept in some kind of separate rooms, with fake windows, each experiencing some kind of body transfer illusion with regards to their perceptions of what they think the other is experiencing, when neither is actually doing so, than the notable stellar phenomena and the FSS. Two additions clearly made for each other and yet wholly unconnected to each other ingame. (Something I remain grateful for, since I'm interested in finding the former, but not in using the latter if I can help it)

A more direct approach where the FSS only is needed when you have found a system that warrants spending time in would have been better. But that ship has sailed, is over the horizon, met with terrible weather conditions and is now adrift on the ocean (and the award for most terrible analogy of the year goes to ...)

I dunno, I may have just given you a run for your money, now i think about it.

 

[Sunyavadin]

No offense, but in my opinion, you are overestimating the mechanics behind the FSS, and also the importance of realism and whatnot. Elite is definitely not a scientific representation of spaceflight, never was meant to be, so gameplay should always have precedence over realism whenever there's a conflict.

I mean, on that front I always bring up the point of the game having FTL travel.
Because it'd be vastly more realistic, but boring as hell, without it.

 

[Orvidius]

The news of notable stellar phenomena gave me new hope. Those could be the target. And they are indicated clearly on the signal bar without any need for the FSS mini game. I did find one, but it took me around 3-400 systems. And that hit ratio is too low to keep me going.

I don't want to scare anyone off, and this is probably down to my own bad luck, but I think it's useful to add anecdotal data when possible (since we lack sufficient statistical data to draw any conclusions). I've mentioned this in other threads too, but it seems relevant here. Since 3.3 went live, my hit rate for "notable stellar phenomena" was far worse:

Ignoring the ones I sought out via the codex, and looking at just the ones I stumbled upon, here's what happened. I found one system with NSPs on the second day, and then not another again until I was returning to the bubble just a few days ago, and both were in the Inner Orion Spur. During this time, I traveled over 190 kly, 2300+ jumps, visiting some of the surrounding map regions, then up past Colonia, and across the core regions several times before returning. I visited 7 or 8 large nebulae along the way, checking out 20-40 systems in each, with no luck.

It's probably my own bad luck, plus I suspect that I ruined my own chances with a lot of neutron boosting, since I don't think that the neutron systems are as likely to have them. However right now, < 0.1% hit rate seems a bit discouraging. But we don't know how rare they're intended to be either. Rarity can be a good thing too, as we've discussed previously. So I'm not writing this off as something that's not worth the effort to look for. But I understand why it can be frustrating.

 

[marx]

Ok then, just let's pretend I could follow you up to this point. But what has the former one-click-reveals-all mechanic of the ADS had in common with "gameplay"? And isn't a weak symbolic representation of science not better than nothing after all? I'm sorry, but I just can't follow the often cited stance that if something is weak and boring, then shrinking it to unrecognizability would be the better 'solution'. And last not least, ED when you compare it to other existing space games, is a lot closer to physics and science than any of these games so far. Feel free to prove me wrong and show me that space game. Not talking about true simulations here, which is true that ED never wanted to be one.

Let's see. First question: I didn't say that I want the ADS back, so this is irrelevant. Second "question": if the gameplay attached to it is worse, then no, it isn't. The ADS magic honk was about as scientific as the FSS's magic POI survey is though, so if we want to split hairs, then there are plenty to pick. Third: I don't think I cited that stance, and I'm not sure how it's relevant here. Fourth: I don't know what you're referring to with "any of these games so far", because I didn't mention any other games. However, even if I did, such comparisons would be irrelevant anyway.

It's probably my own bad luck, plus I suspect that I ruined my own chances with a lot of neutron boosting, since I don't think that the neutron systems are as likely to have them. However right now, < 0.1% hit rate seems a bit discouraging. But we don't know how rare they're intended to be either. Rarity can be a good thing too, as we've discussed previously. So I'm not writing this off as something that's not worth the effort to look for. But I understand why it can be frustrating.

However, bear in mind that your systems visited weren't all in the same region. So, it would be a <0.1% galactic hit rate. Which leads to an interesting question: would chances for the same kind of phenomena be the same across all regions (if they are present in them), or are there variations?
Personally, I'd hope that Lagrangian clouds and whatnot would spawn under the same circumstances regardless of region, and only their contents might vary by region, but so far, it's hard to tell. You'd expect such clouds to form all over the galaxy, after all. But this update is so buggy so far that I wouldn't rule out generation bugs in the Forge either.

If we are to assume that your estimates to date are good, though, then is such a low rarity for carbon-copied objects really a good idea? I don't think so, but maybe it would be if we could have deeper interactions with them.

 

[Rat Catcher]

Which ones are these? I just checked crystalline shards in five different regions, and they all say "In systems with star types: A, F, G, K, MS, S". Would you like screenshots? But if the Codex entries might be different for different players, so bugged, that would be... Well. The forum would censor out the words that come to my mind.


Why bring those up now?

The Codex is 'interesting' in its reporting... I was tempted to post a screengrab of that particular entry when I'd discovered the Lagrange with the Crystals in but didn't feel it worth the effort. I am also to blame in misrepresenting - in the same cloud as 3 types of Crystals I found Albulus Gourd Molluscs - they have an entry of found in T Class systems

The GG's are something that is visible only in the FSS in its obloid state, the sysmap shows a nice uniform sphere (I've only taken notice recently) and are another uncommon (to me) part of exploration, made obvious by the FSS.

Your detailed feedback OP explicitly stated that you didn't want the typical "I Like/Hate it" posts that abound here so I added some of my own feedback within the topic as something I'd 'missed' using the previous tools. If this is not the type of accompanying information you wish to see here I will happily remove the comments.

 

[marx]

I am also to blame in misrepresenting - in the same cloud as 3 types of Crystals I found Albulus Gourd Molluscs - they have an entry of found in T Class systems

Ah, so it was something else then. I looked at it now, and it still says "in systems with star types: T", so it wasn't a bug, just a misunderstanding; and more importantly, the place reported in the Codex has a class M dwarf as its main star. Of course, I would have filtered that one out as well, but M main stars' systems still tend to be more interesting than T-s.
That said, hm... I wonder if I shouldn't. Will have to look at what kinds of non-handcrafted systems the clouds have been found in so far.

The GG's are something that is visible only in the FSS in its obloid state, the sysmap shows a nice uniform sphere (I've only taken notice recently) and are another uncommon (to me) part of exploration, made obvious by the FSS.

Ah, so that's why you brought them up. Thanks, I didn't really see your point, hence why I asked why you brought them up.
The system map certainly showed them before, as it has always rendered things according to how they look, and I've found oblate giants and planets via it. I haven't checked if this still is the case, but I have no reason to assume otherwise. However, because it doesn't start zoomed-in, unlike the FSS view, it's a bit more difficult to notice if one's oblate. (On the other hand, it was much quicker to look at all the gas giants in the system.) I think I have noted though that in my opinion, the zooming-in part of the FSS is good - and even if I haven't, I should have. It's a pity though that the system in general incentivises zooming in and out quickly, as even shown by the developers on the reveal livestream.

 

[Rat Catcher]

I've gone through quite a lot of systems since 3.3 went live, most of the notables I have found were less than 10Kly from the bubble (bar Colonia ) and have a low 'find' ratio in comparison to number of systems visited.

The same with BIO POI's, very scarce in comparison to the number found in/around the bubble, but they are there (apparent from the Codex having entries for each sector) even though for the most part the commonest (understandably) find is GEO.

Outside of KGBFOA (as you already know) most of the bodies found are snowballs so finding something interesting in those systems is rare I don't filter my route so spend a lot of time in M class and other lower class systems, so the odd gem makes it more of an adventure for me.

 

[marx]

Well, looking at Qohen Leth's repository, the "plot" areas - the two bubbles, and the nebulae containing distant Guardian ruins - certainly seem to have the best numbers. So far. On the other hand, it could also simply be that they were the first areas to be searched because of this special interest.

Also, for the record: I've only restricted my filter to KGBFOA after the FSS, before it, I either did KGBFOAM on some ships, or on my Clipper (so most of the time), no filter at all. The KGBFOA filter I mentioned was because of the new changes, and I think it was the first time I used it.

Oh, and don't forget that the complex lifeforms only appear to be present in the "colourful clouds", meaning those which aren't Proto-Lagrange Clouds. These in turn are only found around nebulae (as noted in the Codex as well), which means you'll almost certainly only ever find the little critters near nebulae.

 

[Rat Catcher]

Just in case... I wasn't aiming any criticism against you marx, more a train of thought in support of your initial post.

I've yet to do more than pass through nebulae pre-3.3 and not spent any time exploring in one since - although I am currently in Eagles Landing so have a good 'starter' to do some exploration. I'll spend a couple of play sessions eco-jumping here and see if anything nice happens.

 

[Allitnil]

I'm really not sure that detailed feedback is either useful or welcome as far as FDev is concerned. After all, the main criticism of the ADS was that it was an over powered God honk. But the favourable comments for the FSS mostly boil down to how it makes it easier and quicker to find things.

Reading though threads like this just makes me view the proponents with ever less credibility. They are very happy to be able to dismiss systems as "not interesting" based on a 2 second view of the FSS but they decry that we could do similarly with the ADS. They love that the FSS shows them stuff that they would have needed to actually work at to find with the ADS. But their overriding complaint against the ADS was that it made things too simple. And if you dare to argue that the FSS isn't the be all and end all of exploration then they resort to the "you cannot learn or adapt" argument even though they are admitting to not being able to learn or adapt to the ADS way of exploring.

At the end of the day, if the FSS didn't give first discovery tags or scanning credits so trivially, it is very hard to believe that more than a small percentage of CMRDs would welcome it. It is the ultimate God honk, just temporarily hidden behind a rather obvious make work mechanic. Give it the same number of "quality of life" passes the ADS / sysmap had and even it's most ardent supporter will turn against it. And, whether you want to believe it or not, that is where we will end up since any logical analysis cannot help but notice that the FSS already "knows" all that we are forced to make it reveal.

 

[Riverside]

I'm really not sure that detailed feedback is either useful or welcome as far as FDev is concerned. After all, the main criticism of the ADS was that it was an over powered God honk. But the favourable comments for the FSS mostly boil down to how it makes it easier and quicker to find things.

Reading though threads like this just makes me view the proponents with ever less credibility. They are very happy to be able to dismiss systems as "not interesting" based on a 2 second view of the FSS but they decry that we could do similarly with the ADS. They love that the FSS shows them stuff that they would have needed to actually work at to find with the ADS. But their overriding complaint against the ADS was that it made things too simple. And if you dare to argue that the FSS isn't the be all and end all of exploration then they resort to the "you cannot learn or adapt" argument even though they are admitting to not being able to learn or adapt to the ADS way of exploring.

At the end of the day, if the FSS didn't give first discovery tags or scanning credits so trivially, it is very hard to believe that more than a small percentage of CMRDs would welcome it. It is the ultimate God honk, just temporarily hidden behind a rather obvious make work mechanic. Give it the same number of "quality of life" passes the ADS / sysmap had and even it's most ardent supporter will turn against it. And, whether you want to believe it or not, that is where we will end up since any logical analysis cannot help but notice that the FSS already "knows" all that we are forced to make it reveal.

I think there have been a lot of processes in the game that were initially very challenging & have been made easier to open them up to a greater part of the playerbase. Engineers is a good example, jump range is another.

The benefits of the FSS allowing automatic star tagging, automatic DSSing of nearby bodies and DSSing from a distance to reveal interesting things are all good for encouraging more players to get out there. And extra cash is a strong incentive too of course.

I'd be happy to have the choice to make use of the best of both old & new processes and the new one will undoubtedly be improved over time to overcome most objections.

 

[Orvidius]

I'm probably the odd one out, in that I like the new FSS, but I also liked the old ADS honk. For me, the problem that needed fixing was just the long supercruise + slow artificial scan timer. If we had the FSS for scanning/tagging and the old honk together, I'd be quite happy.

But getting back to the space biology for a moment, it does seem that it's almost entirely in nebulae so far, but it's not all nebulae. They only appear to be in specific nebulae, so if you don't investigate the right ones, you probably won't find them. Some of the "anomalies" seem to appear elsewhere though. But even then, the proto-L-clouds are still pretty rare in open space, and rarer still to have those within.

It was probably obvious to the devs that the codex would quickly populate with the things that are near the main bubbles, and the nebulae closely associated with them, and thus would quickly turn into a checklist of interesting things to see. It's probably a misunderstanding on our part, that we thought it might be more dynamic than that. I'm still trying to decide on what my overall opinion of it is. Since I didn't find much after 190 kly, which is more exploration than many players do in their entire career, we probably just have to understand that making our own discoveries is meant to be a rare event, and otherwise the Codex will make it easy to do simple tourism as an alternative to that.

 

[Straha Yeagar]

I think some here know that I am not exactly a scan for credits type of explorer, and that I do tend to go about exploring differently than many. That said, threads like this kind of leave me wondering what the hell must be wrong with me because I do really enjoy the new mechanics far more than the old, when a number of prominent explorers don't.

With the addition of the orrery, I do find myself wishing it was built just from the initial honk, but also know I only want it for fast track ease. FSS'ing a moderate system of say 40 bodies does not really take me all that long, so building the orrery, is not really that big of an inconvenience for me.

So I guess for myself, the best blending of the old and new would simply be have the initial honk build the orrery without anything being selectable, just to give the basic diagram. The orrery for me is far better at showing the layout than the system map ever was to actually visualize what the system looked like, rather than having to paint the picture mentally based on the displayed numbers.

I still would love to have a sextant.

 

[Orvidius]

I still would love to have a sextant.

I think this right here wins the thread.