Anti ADS people JUSTIFY your no compromise stance here.

[kpmop]

I'm not anti-ADS, well aside from the fact that I'm glad it's gone, but:

"2) Liking the new FSS mechanic is NOT a valid reason" - this is my reason - I like the FSS, and that it allows me to explore systems in a respectful amout of time and discover whatever there is to be discovered with a little effort (albeit "make work" type effort). Some of the suggestions have been about nerfing/compromisng the FSS and making optional modules and whatever - NO!! (to quote Old Duck).

By all means stick the ADS back in as an additional optional module - I don't care - but leave the FSS alone (UI improvements aside!).

 

[Aashenfox]

ONLY if those reasons are selfish. i.e. "I don't want it because I don't like it" <-- text book selfish reasoning. Because "compromise" is unselfish, I've been smacking my head against a brick wall fighting for compromise (I love FSS by the way).

Yeh, but I don't like brussel sprouts, it's entirely personal. Therefore I have every right to ask you not to put them on my plate, unless you want to wear them. Just playing Devil's Advocate and trying to explain for you why you will be defending yourself non stop in this topic.

Peraonslly, I feel FD should focus on things that are actually broken right now and not things that 'could be better'.

 

[Leper Messiah]

Since exploration is so devoid of risks, modules are dirt cheap for explorers. You don't need HRPs or MRPs, you don't need cell banks, you don't need high class shields (and if you don't have Horizons or don't intend on landing on planets a lot, you don't even need shields at all)... and with the FSS rework, you don't even need a discovery scanner anymore so the only modules of significant use for explorers are the DSS, the AFMU (if you are particulrly careless or plan on staying out in the black for a year or more) and the SRV bay (not really needed either, but good to have). Modules are not a good currency to make explorers spend.

And since the ADS was already taking up a slot and was still considered overpowered and just plain bad gameplay by Frontier, I'm sorry but you would have to give up a lot more than just a module to get back its functionality.

I mentioned that because it is a slight extra disadvantage to having the ADS back as a module.
FSS is FAR more overpowered than the ADS, so by your reasoning should be got rid of? If you disagree then say why.

 

[da_wae]

I suggest that they bring back the old ADS functionality, but make it exclusive to a brand new ship - the elusive ASP Explorer: K Edition

It comes with handy planetary-assist-wheels for those rough landings.

 

[Stigbob]

I mentioned that because it is a slight extra disadvantage to having the ADS back as a module.
FSS is FAR more overpowered than the ADS, so by your reasoning should be got rid of? If you disagree then say why.

Total waste of dev time for no gain.

 

[Leper Messiah]

I'm not anti-ADS, well aside from the fact that I'm glad it's gone, but:

"2) Liking the new FSS mechanic is NOT a valid reason" - this is my reason - I like the FSS, and that it allows me to explore systems in a respectful amout of time and discover whatever there is to be discovered with a little effort (albeit "make work" type effort). Some of the suggestions have been about nerfing/compromisng the FSS and making optional modules and whatever - NO!! (to quote Old Duck).

By all means stick the ADS back in as an additional optional module - I don't care - but leave the FSS alone (UI improvements aside!).

I havn't read a reasonable post about nerfing the FSS. but I forgot to add the note about it! But yes I agree the FSS should be left alone (well tweaked as it would be over the years).

 

[M00ka]

Okay I will answer this bias thread, but wondering where your thread "Anti FSS people JUSTIFY your failure to adapt here'

To answer your question: Yes I am against compromise. FD made the decision to deem the ADS obsolete, in their view the FSS does everything the ADS was capable of doing with the additional benefit of the FSS being tied in to many other aspects of the game, I consider it part of the core gameplay for not only what we currently have been given but strongly suspect it will be required for future expansions, i.e. atmospheric landings. I believe that FD felt that having both the old ADS and the FSS would lead to problems down track, in that they will expect all players to have access to certain tools, in this case the FSS (and new DSS). If they bought back the ADS in any form it may lead to calls for dilution of the current capabilities of the FSS which may cause problems.

I know all of what I have just said is speculation, and that you and others will belittle what I have said, but you asked a question and I answered!

 

[Leper Messiah]

Yeh, but I don't like brussel sprouts, it's entirely personal. Therefore I have every right to ask you not to put them on my plate, unless you want to wear them. Just playing Devil's Advocate and trying to explain for you why you will be defending yourself non stop in this topic.

Peraonslly, I feel FD should focus on things that are actually broken right now and not things that 'could be better'.

Yup and the compromise is to make it a module to enable you to do so.

 

[Leper Messiah]

I suggest that they bring back the old ADS functionality, but make it exclusive to a brand new ship - the elusive ASP Explorer: K Edition



It comes with handy planetary-assist-wheels for those rough landings.

Sort of like this idea, but those preferring the ADS out in the black would be negatively affected.

 

[Factabulous]

 

[Vardaugas]

It would create redundant game mechanics which only eat maintenance resources. Second method of exploration as alternative choice would need to be significantly different enough to justify its existence.

 

[Villeruff]

The first three are all valid reasons. We're all here to have fun wasting time in a game, which itself is selfish and useless. Complaining about selfish reasons for a selfish activity is pretty silly.

But I'll play: the FSS adds gameplay and verisimilitude to a system that had none before. Keeping the old ADS for the sake of familiarity and convenience undermines that. It improves the game overall, and if the price is a few players feel inconvenienced, it's worth it.

Edit: spelling

 

[Leper Messiah]

Okay I will answer this bias thread, but wondering where your thread "Anti FSS people JUSTIFY your failure to adapt here'

To answer your question: Yes I am against compromise. FD made the decision to deem the ADS obsolete, in their view the FSS does everything the ADS was capable of doing with the additional benefit of the FSS being tied in to many other aspects of the game, I consider it part of the core gameplay for not only what we currently have been given but strongly suspect it will be required for future expansions, i.e. atmospheric landings. I believe that FD felt that having both the old ADS and the FSS would lead to problems down track, in that they will expect all players to have access to certain tools, in this case the FSS (and new DSS). If they bought back the ADS in any form it may lead to calls for dilution of the current capabilities of the FSS which may cause problems.

I know all of what I have just said is speculation, and that you and others will belittle what I have said, but you asked a question and I answered!

Because those Anti FSS are happy for those who like it to continue to use it, havn't seen a post calling for it to be removed. At the very least having a compromise solution suggested to any calling for that would surely placate all but the most rabid Anti FSSer?

(forgot to answer the rest) a concern for dilution of the FSS mechanics is valid. Pretty certain a compromise could be reached to ensure that doesn't happen! I'm sorry if you think I belittle, but things could be worked out so that both sides are happy, this is the point of the thread, a place for you to express your concerns. I'm not a bad guy.

 

[OBYOZ]

Deleted

 

[Aashenfox]

Because those Anti FSS are happy for those who like it to continue to use it, havn't seen a post calling for it to be removed. At the very least having a compromise solution suggested to any calling for that would surely placate all but the most rabid Anti FSSer?

I really hope you're not suggesting there be two methods of scanning a system just because some people are resistant to change or it's a little less convenient for them now?

 

[Stigbob]

Because those Anti FSS are happy for those who like it to continue to use it, havn't seen a post calling for it to be removed. At the very least having a compromise solution suggested to any calling for that would surely placate all but the most rabid Anti FSSer?

No, it would make them think their next demand stood better chances.

 

[-VR- Max Factor]

As I've been getting overly involved in the disc...er arguments about the ADS I thought I'd try a thread where those against it's return can justify their reasons. Can we ALL try to be civil here? (and yes I AM looking at myself )

caveats:

1) Not liking the ADS is NOT a valid reason
2) Liking the new FSS mechanic is NOT a valid reason
3) Not liking others to have a choice is NOT a valid reason

all those above are purely selfish reasons and thus why I class them as not valid. Please try to not be selfish.

please also realise that:

a) The ADS does not make exploring faster or easier or more lucrative.
b) You HAVE to use the FSS in unexplored areas to get planet locations.
c) no one pro ADS is asking for a complete roll back.


The ONLY valid reason I have heard so far over the threads has been of Dev time. That I agree is a valid concern.

How about justifying having the ADS back in the game, but with some caveates (these caveate are just the same as yours but the other way round, the third one is irrelavent:-

1) Liking the ADS is not a valid reason.
2) Not liking the FSS is not a valid reason.

Please also reaslise that:
1) Using the FSS is actual gameplay as opposed to a 5 second press of a button with the old ADS.
2) The old ADS was the single worst mechanic in the game, IMHO.
3) No one pro FSS is not open to a compromise that I can tell, whether it's something built into the FSS (my preference) or an add on module.
4) Some pro ADS folks do not want a compromise in the slightest, but just want to have their cake and eat it.
5) The ADS discovers every single planet in a 5 second press of a button. The FSS does not and takes longer and considerably longer depending on size of the system.

 

[DaveB]

The process of "completely unknown system" to "populated system map" was always a hole in the gameplay. A one-click placeholder, and one that was never going to be entirely replaced quickly because of all the "other stuff" that could tie into it that also existed only as placeholders. Something like this change was always going to happen.

Now, the problem with placeholders is that folks get used to them. Hence threads like this one. But being used to the placeholder is not an argument for never replacing it. If it had been this way at release instead of having the placeholder, nobody would be griping.

 

[Leper Messiah]

THANK GOD multi quote has kicked in! LOL (then I post it too early)

It would take developers off other new projects.

Yup a valid point and one I mentioned in the original post.

It would create redundant game mechanics which only eat maintenance resources. Second method of exploration as alternative choice would need to be significantly different enough to justify its existence.

not 100% sure what you're getting at here, "maintenace resources"...you mean the devs?

The first three are all valid reasons. We're all here to have fun wasting time in a game, which itself is selfish and useless. Complaining about selfish reasons for a selfish activity is pretty silly.

But I'll play: the FSS adds gameplay and verisimilitude to a system that had none before. Keeping the old ADS for the sake of familiarity and convenience undermines that. It improves the game overall, and if the price is a few players feel inconvenienced, it's worth it.

Edit: spelling

Selfish reasons are NEVER valid to circumnavigate a reasonable compromise.

Agreed it adds gameplay, I like it. But even though the old way had no gameplay OTHERS built gameplay around it. So you're saying "I like it sod the others"? There's a compromise you know, bring it back as a CHOICE!

I really hope you're not suggesting there be two methods of scanning a system just because some people are resistant to change or it's a little less convenient for them now?

I'm just pro choice, if that's what they think then why resist compromise?

 

[Bigmaec]

I don't like the mechanic of "honk" and then having a complete map.

I'd agree to a compromise where the ADS gives you blacked out planet locations without sounds
(i.e. not being able to discover a ELW or waterworld by view/sound).

What about that OP?