If I wanted a 'radio-tuning' game I would have rather bought an old radio.

[Juniper]

I accept that you don't see a need for it, lots of people don't. But that isn't a reason to remove it. Others do want to use it.

You say you don't see how it could fit in yet the full functionality of the ADS is replicated in any system that is new to you but already explored (tagged) by another player. You get a populated sysmap & nav panel, and a bunch or targetable but [unexplored] bodies on the HUD.

It's still in the game Juniper

It is, so what's the issue?

Just been scanning through your posts in this (huge) thread, and it seems that your beef (correct me if I'm wrong?) is that 'First Discovered' tag is too cheap nowadays. I understand that, and agree up to a point. This is why we also have 'First Mapped'. Orange is the new black, or something.

Retrieving material composition of a body through purposefully examining it through the FSS is good though. It mirrors what we can do now with spectroscopy. We can tell the chemical make-up of any star through the light it emits, and soon (once we have the resolving power) we'll be able to do the same thing for exoplanets just by using spectroscopy on their atmospheres as they transit their star. 1300 years from now, the FSS is believable.

The DSS performs a different function now, and you can use that if flying to & eyeballing planets is your thing.

Given that, I don't see any need for the ADS. It would muddy the waters too much. FSS/DSS/Codex combination is all you need IMO.

 

[Burke]

"Dont fix what aint broken"

 

[Riverside]

It is, so what's the issue?

Just been scanning through your posts in this (huge) thread, and it seems that your beef (correct me if I'm wrong?) is that 'First Discovered' tag is too cheap nowadays. I understand that, and agree up to a point. This is why we also have 'First Mapped'.

Retrieving material composition of a body through purposefully examining it through the FSS is good though. It mirrors what we can do now with spectroscopy. We can tell the chemical make-up of any star through the light it emits, and soon (once we have the resolving power) we'll be able to do the same thing for exoplanets just by using spectroscopy on their atmospheres as they transit their star. 1300 years from now, the FSS is believable.

The DSS performs a different function now, and you can use that if flying to & eyeballing planets is your thing.

Given that, I don't see any need for the ADS. It would muddy the waters too much. FSS/DSS/Codex combination is all you need IMO.

I don't have any beef with the new process Juniper, although I can see ways in which it could better reward the effort the player puts in, yes.

My point is simple. The old stuff didn't need to be removed. There is an ongoing demand for features the new process does not replicate in virgin and partially explored systems. Putting the old modules back in would have no detrimental effect on any player, the benefit of adding one of these modules is only apparent with untagged bodies & systems.

Quite simply there was no need to remove the old stuff & I'd like to see them put back into the game. The time taken to remove them was wasted & I find that frustrating. I have gone over this many, many times now.

 

[M00ka]

"Dont fix what aint broken"

Exactly, hence why FD will hopefully not change the current FSS and DSS mechanics

 

[Riverside]

Exactly, hence why FD will hopefully not change the current FSS and DSS mechanics

Are you purposefully misunderstanding or does one of us need to explain this to you again?

 

[Stigbob]

I don't have any beef with the new process Juniper, although I can see ways in which it could better reward the effort the player puts in, yes.

My point is simple. The old stuff didn't need to be removed. There is an ongoing demand for features the new process does not replicate in virgin and partially explored systems. Putting the old modules back in would have no detrimental effect on any player, the benefit of adding one of these modules is only apparent with untagged bodies & systems.

Quite simply there was no need to remove the old stuff & I'd like to see them put back into the game. The time taken to remove them was wasted & I find that frustrating. I have gone over this many, many times now.

I'd say putting the old outdated stuff back would be time wasted, especially in funky new paid content year. They've better things to do.

 

[-VR- Max Factor]

You cant program peoples imaginations im afraid. I guess the livestream was a matter of perception.

Nope. Your imagination it entirely under your own control. Use it how you want to. But if you choose to use it in a way that make something feel rubbish when you could easily use it to not make it feel good, then the blame lays at your own feet.

We can all use our imaginations to make something feel rubbish. It is very easy to do. At the end of the day how you go about it is your choice.

 

[Riverside]

I'd say putting the old outdated stuff back would be time wasted, especially in funky new paid content year. They've better things to do.

Now this is the meat of the discussion, well done Stigbob for moving the conversation forward

 

[Stamford Rider]

I'd say putting the old outdated stuff back would be time wasted, especially in funky new paid content year. They've better things to do.

It's probably still in the codebase surrounded by;-
#ifdef USE_ADS
// code to populate the system map from a God honk


#endif


... wouldn't take long

 

[M00ka]

Are you purposefully misunderstanding or does one of us need to explain this to you again?

Since I replying to Cmdr Burke's comment, your unwanted intrusion and holier than thou attitude means you will 'explain' it anyway

 

[Burke]

Its all good i appreciated M00kas humour.

 

[Riverside]

Since I replying to Cmdr Burke's comment, your unwanted intrusion and holier than thou attitude means you will 'explain' it anyway

If you want to only address one participant you can use PM. This is a public forum Mooka.

 

[Marra Morgan]

If you want to only address one participant you can use PM. This is a public forum Mooka.

But then I wouldn't have seen it and would've missed out on a chuckle!

 

[M00ka]

If you want to only address one participant you can use PM. This is a public forum Mooka.

So when you quote a post, like you just did in your reply to me, why didn't you take your own advice and use the PM function? Please understand this, if I feel the need to reply to someone's post I will, if that upsets you then I sincerely think you need to re-evaluate how you use the forums if you can't differentiate between private and public communication protocols.

 

[Juniper]

I don't have any beef with the new process Juniper, although I can see ways in which it could better reward the effort the player puts in, yes.

My point is simple. The old stuff didn't need to be removed. There is an ongoing demand for features the new process does not replicate in virgin and partially explored systems. Putting the old modules back in would have no detrimental effect on any player, the benefit of adding one of these modules is only apparent with untagged bodies & systems.

Quite simply there was no need to remove the old stuff & I'd like to see them put back into the game. The time taken to remove them was wasted & I find that frustrating. I have gone over this many, many times now.

OK, but as I said, it's a big thread with over 650 posts - so you'll forgive me if I've not read every line.

It's all a matter of States. There has been a new State added (Discovered AND Mapped) and an old one removed (Not Discovered AND Not Mapped). The latter gave you a bit of money in the old system. Now in order to get that, you have to go through the manual process of scanning each body through the FSS (giving a State of "Discovered AND Not Mapped").

Personally, I am fine with this change. The removed State serves no purpose, it actively confuses things now the second variable Mapping is in the game, and needed to be dropped.

It would be a waste of time to try and shoe-horn that back in IMO.

 

[Riverside]

So when you quote a post, like you just did in your reply to me, why didn't you take your own advice and use the PM function? Please understand this, if I feel the need to reply to someone's post I will, if that upsets you then I sincerely think you need to re-evaluate how you use the forums if you can't differentiate between private and public communication protocols.

I am not complaining that my posts should only be responded to by the contributor quoted Mooka. You did.

 

[Burke]

OK, but as I said, it's a big thread with over 650 posts - so you'll forgive me if I've not read every line.

There is another couple hundred pages at least that didnt make it. The arguments are pretty much done. It appears to me (pls do correct me if im wrong) that there are two sides. One side doesnt like the FSS, the reasons why differ. The other side wants to prevent the old way being put back into the game. I cant understand why this might be. I think neutral observers mostly agree that a good compromise would be to let the people who liked the old way keep it and the FSS can get by perfectly well with what it is.

 

[Riverside]

OK, but as I said, it's a big thread with over 650 posts - so you'll forgive me if I've not read every line.

It's all a matter of States. There has been a new State added (Discovered AND Mapped) and an old one removed (Not Discovered AND Not Mapped). The latter gave you a bit of money in the old system. Now in order to get that, you have to go through the manual process of scanning each body through the FSS (giving a State of "Discovered AND Not Mapped").

Personally, I am fine with this change. The removed State serves no purpose, it actively confuses things now the second variable Mapping is in the game, and needed to be dropped.

It would be a waste of time to try and shoe-horn that back in IMO.

Nothing has been removed in terms of functionality Juniper. If you visit a system you have not been to before that has been 'discovered by' another player you will see a bunch of [unexplored] bodies just like before 3.3. You can then use the FSS to resolve them or just target them & fly closer.

If you enter an untagged system there is no [unexplored] state as you say. But it hasn't been removed, it works in tagged & partially tagged systems. Fitting an ADS would replicate that for untagged bodies.

 

[-VR- Max Factor]

Nothing has been removed in terms of functionality Juniper. If you visit a system you have not been to before that has been 'discovered by' another player you will see a bunch of [unexplored] bodies just like before 3.3. You can then use the FSS to resolve them or just target them & fly closer.

If you enter an untagged system there is no [unexplored] state as you say. But it hasn't been removed, it works in tagged & partially tagged systems.

Except you keep ignoring the fact that it is different. In the old way you did the god honk and you got every planet every star and every asteroid belt in the system shown to you. With the new system if someone has been there you only get what they have scanned and handed in. So you can come across many systems that have the initial star scanned and a few planets. I have even found some like that in the bubble.

So no, it is not the same even in pre 3.3 scanned systems.

 

[LeoBartlet]

There is another couple hundred pages at least that didnt make it. The arguments are pretty much done. It appears to me (pls do correct me if im wrong) that there are two sides. One side doesnt like the FSS, the reasons why differ. The other side wants to prevent the old way being put back into the game. I cant understand why this might be. I think neutral observers mostly agree that a good compromise would be to let the people who liked the old way keep it and the FSS can get by perfectly well with what it is.

The arguments being had here are similar to the arguments had with the original engineering system v the current one.

Some just despise the idea of people making more "progress" than them which is why you see so many nerf credit threads.