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

[tafkabb]

How many of those players would have their game affected by the old modules being retained?

You have no idea how annoyed I was when planet surfaces were removed from the sysmap after an 'advanced' discovery scan. There was no reason whatsoever I could see to justify that. I was shouting at a brick wall though. It was changed and that was that.
I see your point and I sympathise, but the chances of you getting what you want are as good as mine were.

 

[Ian Skippy]

So to know whether a system is worth my time, all I have to do is FSS the thing.

Gee, thanks! Why did no one tell me? [uhh]

Yes, like pirates have to scan each potential target and miners need to prospect each asteroid, explorers need to explore every unexplored system they want to know stuff about.

 

[Ian Skippy]

Why. You are still not tell us why they would not find that system with the new mechanics?

Of course people will find stuff, people are stoked about dwe2 and using the FSS.

 

[-VR- Max Factor]

Of course people will find stuff, people are stoked about dwe2 and using the FSS.

Yup and I am one of them. Looking forward to it.

 

[[Diplomacy] Carnegie]

So for those wanting a little more evidence of FD's dissatisfaction with the old expiration mechanics, here are some comments from Michael Brooks

https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showt...d-the-latest-interview-with-MB-on-Exploration

It's a long video and I'm not going to watch it all again, but just read the summary here and the discussions.

From Ziljan's summary of the stream:


So there's some evidence to back up the claim that exploration in the old ADS system was not what FD intended.

So FDev's only stated problem with the ADS was that it had infinite range?

That explains why they limited the FSS so that it doesn't suffer from that problem.

Oh. Wait...

 

[Riverside]

I see your point and I sympathise, but the chances of you getting what you want are as good as mine were.

This is not a reason not to try

I have established over these past few weeks that at every level of the decision making process the removal of the old modules was not justified.

We are left with two potential reasons for their removal and one objection to their being reinstated.

The two potential reasons are that it was an oversight or that it was done on purpose (or through apathy). To either purposefully frustrate a part of the playerbase when another option that frustrates no one is available, or to simply not care is a step change compared to previous behaviour, where possible FDev have always taken a path that adds to the game. In circumstances where something is rebalanced it is understandable that some will lose out & some will gain, and probably the majority will gain in these cases.

This isn't one of those cases. There is an option available where no player is worse off and yet it was not taken.

The objection to their being reinstated is simply Dev time and priorities. None of this can be resolved without further information, no matter how many other contributors want to brush this under the rug.

I have put up a proposal which does not fall between two stools here:

A More Advanced Discovery Scanner

All feedback is welcomed, including having no objection.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

So FDev's only stated problem with the ADS was that it had infinite range?

That explains why they limited the FSS so that it doesn't suffer from that problem.

Oh. Wait...

Oh snap! These butterfingered developers!

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

From Ziljan's summary of the stream

the properties of a system are based on the mass, age, and location of the system in the Galaxy

As was made clear in one of the best livestreams, the one about the Stellar Forge.

Also nicely debunking the misconception that there's no reason to venture more than a couple of thousand LYs from the bubble. Something explorers already knew, but news for non-explorers.

 

[Stigbob]

This is not a reason not to try.

I have established over these past few weeks that at every level of the decision making process the removal of the old modules was not justified.

We are left with two potential reasons for their removal and one objection to their being reinstated.

The two potential reasons are that it was an oversight or that it was done on purpose (or through apathy). To either purposefully frustrate a part of the playerbase when another option that frustrates no one is available, or to simply not care is a step change compared to previous behaviour, where possible FDev have always taken a path that adds to the game. In circumstances where something is rebalanced it is understandable that some will lose out & some will gain, and probably the majority will gain in these cases.

This isn't one of those cases. There is an option available where no player is worse off and yet it was not taken.

The objection to their being reinstated is simply Dev time and priorities. None of this can be resolved without further information, no matter how many other contributors want to brush this under the rug.

I have put up a proposal which does not fall between two stools here:

A More Advanced Discovery Scanner

All feedback is welcomed, including having no objection.

You haven't established anything, you've just repeatedly said you don't like how they did it. Which I can counter by saying "good riddance".

 

[Old Duck]

This is not a reason not to try.

You'll attract more flies with honey than vinegar. Well, "you" is more "they", as in the people trashing the FSS using the most derogatory terms available. I think "bag of diarrhea" is the latest such description I've read.

I'm very tolerant of "descriptive adjectives" for things like bugs, but the FSS is actually beloved by many, including the developers who spent a year working on it - watch the livestream it's demonstrated in and you'll see their pride. Insulting it like so many of you they are is not going to entice FDev to cave into your demands requests.

 

[Riverside]

So FDev's only stated problem with the ADS was that it had infinite range?

That explains why they limited the FSS so that it doesn't suffer from that problem.

Oh. Wait...

Indeed I stated this earlier in the thread, providing a timestamped link to that same vid (13:30 on for the ADS thing). It is not a factor in the decision to remove the ADS simply because the FSS also has infinite range. Neither the IDS nor BDS have infinite range but they were also removed. Arguably no one used those modules, this information is not available to customers AFAIK.

 

[Riverside]

You haven't established anything, you've just repeatedly said you don't like how they did it. Which I can counter by saying "good riddance".

You found that citation yet Stigbob?

 

[Stigbob]

Indeed I stated this earlier in the thread, providing a timestamped link to that same vid (13:30 on for the ADS thing). It is not a factor in the decision to remove the ADS simply because the FSS also has infinite range. Neither the IDS nor BDS have infinite range but they were also removed. Arguably no one used those modules, this information is not available to customers AFAIK.

Why would they make that information available and why would customers want it ?.

 

[Stigbob]

You found that citation yet Stigbob?

Yes the scales are thousands to one against FSS deniers.

 

[Riverside]

You'll attract more flies with honey than vinegar. Well, "you" is more "they", as in the people trashing the FSS using the most derogatory terms available. I think "bag of diarrhea" is the latest such description I've read.

I'm very tolerant of "descriptive adjectives" for things like bugs, but the FSS is actually beloved by many, including the developers who spent a year working on it - watch the livestream it's demonstrated in and you'll see their pride. Insulting it like so many of you they are is not going to entice FDev to cave into your demands requests.

I am not objecting to the new process, it has a lot going for it. The old modules simply didn't need to be removed. Others may trash either old or new, this is fair comment either way. My proposal allows both to be happy as you know.

I have stated repeatedly to clarify this position each time it is questioned or misinterpreted. The new stuff is fine, but the old stuff didn't need to be removed.

 

[Riverside]

Why would they make that information available and why would customers want it ?.

Why remove them if infinite range is the justification as Jenner stated?

 

[Riverside]

Yes the scales are thousands to one against FSS deniers.

Not seeing a link Stigbob. People liking the new stuff is great, and has no relevance to my argument that there was no need to remove the old stuff.

 

[Blackcompany]

Yes i think it’s awful. Stopped playing ED as I was out exploring but tuning that stupid 2d blob hunt has put me right off.

Agreed.

The only positives about the FSS are:

It's not needed in the bubble

Its forever cemented NMS as the go to space game for actual, involved exploration.

 

[-VR- Max Factor]

Agreed.

I don't.

The only positives about the FSS are:

It's not needed in the bubble

That depends what you are doing.

Its forever cemented NMS as the go to space game for actual, involved exploration.

For you maybe, not for me. NMS is awful compared to ED in my view. But each to their own.

 

[[Diplomacy] Carnegie]

You have no arguments, all I see is an endless stream of repetitions. Are you going for some sort of record or what, like 100,000 times repeating the sentence "was no need to remove the ADS", now spiced up with some brilliant variations like "old stuff"? Or do you by any chance expect someone would be so daft and confuse 100,000 statements from one person with one statement coming from 100,000 different persons? I wonder when you'll reach the state where you start to vomit from typing your own words... I simply can't read this crap anymore and have to pull the rip cord now. :x

*PLONK*

I'm reliably informed that you always have the option to not play.