And what happens if the majority don't want a compromise, they are quite happy with the FSS and don't want the ADS back in any way shape or form?
If I wanted a 'radio-tuning' game I would have rather bought an old radio.
- Thread starter Spline
- Start date
- Status
And what happens if the majority don't want a compromise, they are quite happy with the FSS and don't want the ADS back in any way shape or form?
Say what?
![[Diplomacy] Carnegie](https://forums-cdn.zaonce.net/data/avatars/m/123/123809.jpg?1553527149){kind=avatar}
The Exploration forum wasn't filled with post complaining about beige planets either. I guess problem that was 'fake news' too.
I think it's important that this point is clearly understood and accepted: There was no need to remove the old stuff.
Every time someone questions this, or misinterprets this statement to mean anything about the new stuff being affected, someone is clarifying the position.
So when someone complains that the same thing is being repeated, it's simply because those same misinterpretations keep happening. I have put a proposal in the suggestions section which describes the situation clearly here:
A More Advanced Discovery Scanner
If anyone has an opinion on the two working together or independently (either to support or oppose the idea) then please add your thoughts.
If anyone wants to have a go at justifying why the ADS cannot work together with the new stuff the thread is now closed but they had the opportunity here:
Anti ADS people JUSTIFY your no compromise stance here.
And if you fancy your chances at punditry or want to troll people who think almost exactly the same way you do but differ on a minor detail then maybe just get a grip & think about all those offensive people who play other games and are stealing stuff you could have had if only you'd had the time.
And maybe consider the phrase 'dog in a manger'.
Every time someone questions this, or misinterprets this statement to mean anything about the new stuff being affected, someone is clarifying the position.
So when someone complains that the same thing is being repeated, it's simply because those same misinterpretations keep happening. I have put a proposal in the suggestions section which describes the situation clearly here:
A More Advanced Discovery Scanner
If anyone has an opinion on the two working together or independently (either to support or oppose the idea) then please add your thoughts.
If anyone wants to have a go at justifying why the ADS cannot work together with the new stuff the thread is now closed but they had the opportunity here:
Anti ADS people JUSTIFY your no compromise stance here.
And if you fancy your chances at punditry or want to troll people who think almost exactly the same way you do but differ on a minor detail then maybe just get a grip & think about all those offensive people who play other games and are stealing stuff you could have had if only you'd had the time.
And maybe consider the phrase 'dog in a manger'.
Last edited:
Yes there was a need to remove the old stuff! FD decided it wasn't required - that is enough proof for me since they own the rights to the game and can do whatever they want to do with it. You don't have a say in how the game is developed, you don't dictate to the developers, and most importantly you are not held responsible by the shareholders of Frontier Development.
As for that inane post on justifying why some don't want compromise - the way the OP worded his demands was akin to asking if they still beat their spouse/significant other. Any answer would be wrong. For starters the OP admitted he didn't care what compromise and since there are many different ones put forward, the type of compromise would be inherent to whether someone supported it or now. The OP continually belittled anyone who posted an valid answer, normally calling them selfish, yet that is the exact reason on why those that want a compromise - selfishness. They want their old familiar system back and screw anyone how dares have an objection about it.
So, the people who are happy with the new system and don't want a compromise at all, in any shape or form are being reasonable, while those who are unhappy with the new system and would prefer to continue using the older and less efficient method of exploration and are perfectly willing to compromise (by not forcing anyone to use their preferred way of exploring and not asking for the new system to be changed in any shape or form) are being unreasonable?
I think it's important that this point is clearly understood and accepted: There was an absolute need to remove the old stuff.
Pro ADS people JUSTIFY your endless demands here.
See, I can mindlessly repeat stuff while ignoring hundreds of pages of 'discussion' too. Cool!
This is what's so frustrating. I can understand people not wanting to lose what they've got, that's the same for both pre- and post-3.3 proponents. I don't want either to lose anything, and as it turns out there is a way for this to happen.
But this dispute is between people who want everyone to be happy and people who want some to needlessly be denied something optional. It's weird.
Well yeah. 1/2 the discussion is about the game, and 1/2 the discussion is forum trolling pvp. Sadly its occurring on one topic.
If a proposed solution wont effect you in any way shape or form, its simply trolling other people.
No it isn't. You just refuse to acknowledge the opinions and arguments from others, and then slander them. People have explained to you over and over and over why your simplistic ideas dont 'make everyone happy', but you just ignore it. Just think about what you are saying:
1) You suggest something.
2) People tell you they dont want that.
3) You say your idea makes everyone happy.
Can you really not see how ridiculous your logic is? Your idea doesnt make everyone happy, and they literally told you over and over. Stop pretending you want to make everyone happy, it is stupid. Some people want something. Others dont want that to happen. No solution will please everyone. Deal with it.
Last edited:
Can't we all just get along?
No, the "majority" has decided that the interests of the "minority" doesn't matter.
Luckily this is a forum about a game. Let them have their "victory".
I'm not libelling anyone. I'm offering a solution in a thread started by someone who doesn't like the FSS.
Not liking it is fair comment. So is liking it, and comparisons of strengths & weaknesses of the pre- and post-3.3 processes are interesting. This has been happening since September.
The proposal isn't simplistic, it's simple because virtually all of it is in the game already. Having no use for it isn't a reason to argue against it, having it affect you in some negative way is a good reason to argue against it.
Plenty of people has put forward reasons why they think it wouldn't work, yet not one of those counterpoints, when tested have been a dealbreaker.
We have some people who have been needlessly frustrated, and a few people who seem delighted by this.
I am not pretending I want everyone to be happy, I do want everyone to be happy. FDev generally does too, which is why I'm confident this was just an oversight. In balancing situations some will gain & some will lose. This isn't a balancing issue. It was when the concept was announced in September, it was when beta started, but it wasn't when beta ended and it isn't now because all justification for removing the ADS (the most OP of the old modules) was removed by beta changes.
This is what I want people to understand. There was no need to remove them. Play the game, consider how the two processes handle each step of the discovery process, where they differ and how the various steps are achieved. There is no incompatibility, there is no advantage offered by having an ADS that isn't an edge case (eg green gas giants) and therefore outweighed by just the slight reduction in jump range of a ship equipped with one, there is no financial factor since the new honk pays out the same as the old honk, there is no tagging factor because the ADS honk isn't what gets you the tag, there is no psychological issue with not wanting to use the FSS to find things because using the FSS to scan distant binaries is so compelling an option, there is no downside.
If the proposal I put forward were to go ahead, the meta (the most effective way to either tag a thing & get back to sell the data or to earn credits per hour) is still going to be not fitting one and making better use of that spare slot and slight jump range improvement. And for those not in a hurry (ie most people) they can choose to fit one or not depending on how much room they have just like people choose whether to take an SLF bay or a refinery.
You saying there is a downside without backing that up doesn't convince me, it is just an attempt to suppress my perceived 'attack' on the Devs. I am presenting arguments and overcoming objections, and this has been going on for a long time now so patience is wearing thin. I am not attacking anyone, but I am defending my statement: The old modules did not need to be removed. And I think they should be put back in because there is an ongoing demand for them that can be satisfied without having to compromise any other player.
There is no need for any animosity, because there is no need for any player to lose out. There is a desire for people to lose somehow, but not from me and hopefully not from FDev either.
Last edited:
Not a dealbreaker for you. It is for them. If you don't care about their opinion, that is cool with me. Just dont pretend otherwise, it is cheap.
"Ignoring everyone who disagrees with my idea, everyone wins with my idea!"
Last edited:
Ha ha ha, really, that's your take on it? You've addressed all the points? Ha ha ha ha!
Ok then, have it your way. Good luck with it all!
Yes, because what matters is the case as presented to FDev. I'd like you to understand of course. Probably just as much as you would like me to be a pushover and accept the status quo.
Haha, again, no. I dont want you to be a push-over. I just would prefer, but dont care that much, if you could accept that people simply prefer different things. People arent mistaken, they just dont agree with you. I dont expect you to agree with them, I just expect you to accept they dont agree with you.
- Status