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

[[Diplomacy] Carnegie]

Unfortunately ignore thread does not actually hide the damn thing so it constantly comes to the top when somebody posts to it. Have you tried my suggestion or is having a whine about it the limit of your actual engagement with the topic?

You mean your suggestion to do the honk and then fly to the bodies?
Did you try that outside the Bubble? If you'd tried it in an unexplored system you'd know that the honk doesn't populate the Nav Panel or System Map, leaving only the option of using parallax to locate the bodies so you can fly close enough for them to auto-resolve.

Leaving aside the fact that auto-resolve is another dumbed-down anti-exploration mechanic, if I wanted to do parallax exploration I'd have been doing it in v3.2.

As far as my engagement v. whining is concerned, you've clearly not been reading this thread.

 

[Jenner]

If a thread is unsalvageable the mods will close it. If it's just a couple people agitating for closure it's more likely those individuals will receive infractions instead. As always stay on topic please. If you feel the topic is not worthy of response then just don't post.

 

[LeoBartlet]

There must be a point where circular arguments that will never be resolved are a good enough reason for a thread lock? Alternatively, I am more than happy to spout off topic drivel, invoke Godwins Law or whatever it takes.

You don't like it, God knows we know you don't like it. You have droned on for 187 pages now. Frontier are not going to change it based on 3 people going on about it incessantly.

Final thought, I am pretty sure if you do the honk, you can still fly to the unexplored body and as you get closer the scan is invoked. That seemed to be happening for me the other day.

There comes a point where any thread will taper off but if they were to close it at the height of lolz then someone would only go and start a new one and the mods would have to play whack a mole all day long.

For my part I have nothing more to add on this subject, I stated the system is pants but then again so is ship transfer timers and that's still around. There will come a point for me though where the negative aspects of the game will outweigh the positives but by that point I will have stopped playing completely.

 

[Faded Glory]

Still waiting for the reasons why the FSS is lame. Nobody seems to have any facts to back it up, only subjective opinion which is easily countered with my own.

I want facts as to why it's bad and I have seen none so far.

Well, as you point out, it's all subjective opinion, isn't it.

The facts are that the FSS makes tagging systems quicker, makes revealing the existence of POI's possible, removes the need for potentially long SC cruise journeys unless you want to map a body and adds something active where before there was only passive. Whether these 'facts' make it good or bad will depend on what your exploration goals are and perhaps more importantly, whether you enjoy the interface.

That it provides a sense of 'discovery' is more on the subjective side. With 400 billion systems, IMHO dropping into a system to see whether there might be anything of potential interest there was also a sense of discovery, just on a different level - the galactic rather than the system. And if there wasn't anything that I felt piqued my curiosity I could move on to another of the essentially infinite amount of systems available for me to explore.

Those that don't like the FSS are simply asking for FD to consider re-instating an optional way to explore that doesn't involve having to use the FSS for the majority of their exploration game-play. Nobody is asking for the FSS to be removed or even changed, so honestly not sure why the hostility to that request exists.

Nobody is insisting that you (or anybody who enjoys the FSS) be obliged to have a system map reveal if you don't want it.

(As to the argument that it would take up too much dev time, that's also IMO subjective. Nobody from outside FD know how much time it would take to re-instate something that already existed, and that to an extent exists even now when you FSS a previously discovered system. And 'any dev time is too much dev time' is a pretty poor and selfish argument.)

 

[-VR- Max Factor]

Well, as you point out, it's all subjective opinion, isn't it.

The facts are that the FSS makes tagging systems quicker, makes revealing the existence of POI's possible, removes the need for potentially long SC cruise journeys unless you want to map a body and adds something active where before there was only passive. Whether these 'facts' make it good or bad will depend on what your exploration goals are and perhaps more importantly, whether you enjoy the interface.

That it provides a sense of 'discovery' is more on the subjective side. With 400 billion systems, IMHO dropping into a system to see whether there might be anything of potential interest there was also a sense of discovery, just on a different level - the galactic rather than the system. And if there wasn't anything that I felt piqued my curiosity I could move on to another of the essentially infinite amount of systems available for me to explore.

Those that don't like the FSS are simply asking for FD to consider re-instating an optional way to explore that doesn't involve having to use the FSS for the majority of their exploration game-play. Nobody is asking for the FSS to be removed or even changed, so honestly not sure why the hostility to that request exists.

Nobody is insisting that you (or anybody who enjoys the FSS) be obliged to have a system map reveal if you don't want it.

(As to the argument that it would take up too much dev time, that's also IMO subjective. Nobody from outside FD know how much time it would take to re-instate something that already existed, and that to an extent exists even now when you FSS a previously discovered system. And 'any dev time is too much dev time' is a pretty poor and selfish argument.)

And I have nothing against that especially when it's requested with a well written post like this is.

It's when people crap on the new mechanics, makes it sound like they are attacking the people that do like it, and it just doesn't stop.

So basically if these people were polite and considerate instead of making up crazy conspiracy theories, attacking the new mechanics with outlandish claims which are just factually incorrect, attacking the mechanics in such a way that it insults the people that do like it I think there would be more reasonable replies and some sympathy, but to be honest I have very little anymore.

I have said from the very beginning that I am fine to have it reinstated as long as it is mutually exclusive. But as the FSS is built in I can't see it happening though. If the original BDS/IDS/ADS is to be added it needs to work with the FSS in some way and not completely replace it.

 

[Ambroza]

For the most part I like the FSS, but it is so STUPID to have the FSS take up the complete screen and you have to be at zero throttle to use it. Out in the black where you are completely alone this is fine, but it is not fine in the bubble. When you are in the bubble and using the FSS for whatever reason you are a sitting duck with zero operational awareness in regards to what is going on around you. I am tied of being in the FSS in the bubble and then suddenly getting interdicted by some pirate.

It is obvious that Frontier does not think things all the way through before they decide to implement changes.

This was a deliberate design choice. It actually harkens back to the old DDF proposal for exploration, where players were always meant to be more vulnerable when engaged with exploration scanners.

 

[Riverside]

This was a deliberate design choice. It actually harkens back to the old DDF proposal for exploration, where players were always meant to be more vulnerable when engaged with exploration scanners.

Can you provide a link for that? Might be an interesting read.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

If you feel the topic is not worthy of response then just don't post.

Indeed!

What?

Damnit! [mad]

 

[Faded Glory]

I have said from the very beginning that I am fine to have it reinstated as long as it is mutually exclusive. But as the FSS is built in I can't see it happening though. If the original BDS/IDS/ADS is to be added it needs to work with the FSS in some way and not completely replace it.

Right, the FSS is definitely here to stay. Outside of exploration it (alongside the codex and the DSS / probes) allow for future development of things to find on 1:1 scale planets, and I've little doubt that FD intend to use that capability.

Regarding an alternative to the FSS for exploration, all (IMO obviously) that is needed is an optional module that populates the system map when it is used. From the system map, bodies can be targeted and flown to and passively scanned by the FSS when in range.

As to mutually exclusive, I'm not sure I see the need. If a player wants to glance at a system map and then decide to investigate the system further based upon what they see, then why not let them use the FSS going forward?

However, as I've said before, targeting an object in the system map (or nav panel) does not target it in the FSS. If players want the advantages of the FSS then they use it as designed. Their telescope view opens up as it does now, nothing targeted or selected and they can search for bodies using the mechanics that exist now. (I will say that I dislike the FSS interface enough that I would rather fly my ship to the body and scan it passively.)

The main thing is not to impose a one size fits all mechanic on everybody. There are players now who have described how they love the slow reveal of a system using the FSS but still check their progress in the system map, so it's important that the reveal be optional so as not to negatively impact their game-play. Anyway, it's been said time and again that choices in how we play the game are surely good, so to bring back a system map reveal that is optional, physically disconnected from the FSS, just a complimentary way of getting a low level overview of a system to decide whether further investigation is warranted would seem (at least to me) to be a win win situation.

 

[Bryan K]

There must be a point where circular arguments that will never be resolved are a good enough reason for a thread lock? Alternatively, I am more than happy to spout off topic drivel, invoke Godwins Law or whatever it takes.

You don't like it, God knows we know you don't like it. You have droned on for 187 pages now. Frontier are not going to change it based on 3 people going on about it incessantly.

Final thought, I am pretty sure if you do the honk, you can still fly to the unexplored body and as you get closer the scan is invoked. That seemed to be happening for me the other day.

You’re missing the fun part though: watching the three people delude themselves to the point where they think a change will happen, only to later discover that no change will ever come, and then they spiral down into social self-destruction and rage-quit posts.

That’s worth its weight in Void Opals, if you ask me.

 

[Tarman]

Indeed!

What?

Damnit! [mad]

Oh, what sad times are these when passing ruffians can say "FSS" at will to old explorers. There is a pestilence upon this galaxy; nothing is sacred. Even those who pirate and steal cargo are under considerable economic stress at this period in future history.


Sry, the vast amount of my triggers are purely tangental and referential. >___>

 

[Franc Kaos]

This was a deliberate design choice. It actually harkens back to the old DDF proposal for exploration, where players were always meant to be more vulnerable when engaged with exploration scanners.

Well that's just stupid; vulnerable, yes - but completely dissassociated from the external world in a dangerous system is almost as poorly thought out as not allowing us a docking request button.

Disclaimer: I Like the idea of the FSS (a thousand times better than honk, juice 'n jump), but the implementation could do with some work, like a curved screen (ala the station market) overlaid on the ships console and at least some situational awareness of what's going on outside the ship.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

Oh, what sad times are these when passing ruffians can say "FSS" at will to old explorers. There is a pestilence upon this galaxy; nothing is sacred. Even those who pirate and steal cargo are under considerable economic stress at this period in future history.


Sry, the vast amount of my triggers are purely tangental and referential. >___>

Well, exploreries are my trade. I am an explorer. My name is Ziggy the Explorer. I arrange, design, and sell exploreries.

Ni!

 

[IndigoWyrd]

Well that's just stupid; vulnerable, yes - but completely dissassociated from the external world in a dangerous system is almost as poorly thought out as not allowing us a docking request button.

Uh, I have a Request Docking button. It's "G20" on my Logitech G13 pad. One press, one docking request.

 

[Flimley]

Disclaimer: I Like the idea of the FSS (a thousand times better than honk, juice 'n jump), but the implementation could do with some work, like a curved screen (ala the station market) overlaid on the ships console and at least some situational awareness of what's going on outside the ship.

Agreed, like this...

Flimley

 

[-VR- Max Factor]

Right, the FSS is definitely here to stay. Outside of exploration it (alongside the codex and the DSS / probes) allow for future development of things to find on 1:1 scale planets, and I've little doubt that FD intend to use that capability.

Regarding an alternative to the FSS for exploration, all (IMO obviously) that is needed is an optional module that populates the system map when it is used. From the system map, bodies can be targeted and flown to and passively scanned by the FSS when in range.

As to mutually exclusive, I'm not sure I see the need. If a player wants to glance at a system map and then decide to investigate the system further based upon what they see, then why not let them use the FSS going forward?

However, as I've said before, targeting an object in the system map (or nav panel) does not target it in the FSS. If players want the advantages of the FSS then they use it as designed. Their telescope view opens up as it does now, nothing targeted or selected and they can search for bodies using the mechanics that exist now. (I will say that I dislike the FSS interface enough that I would rather fly my ship to the body and scan it passively.)

The main thing is not to impose a one size fits all mechanic on everybody. There are players now who have described how they love the slow reveal of a system using the FSS but still check their progress in the system map, so it's important that the reveal be optional so as not to negatively impact their game-play. Anyway, it's been said time and again that choices in how we play the game are surely good, so to bring back a system map reveal that is optional, physically disconnected from the FSS, just a complimentary way of getting a low level overview of a system to decide whether further investigation is warranted would seem (at least to me) to be a win win situation.

That's just my opinion and will stick with it unless they are reworked in some way that works with the FSS.

I would have range limits on them. The BDS has a 1000ls range, the IDS has a 10000ls range and the ADS has a 30,000ls range. The more powerful the scanner the more space and power it uses.

Or don't have the Scanners back at all. Have the system map populated with untargetable blobs which give you a rough idea of the system layout.

These are what I would have happy to have and think both of them are a reasonable compromises. It can replace the FSS, but it may take a bit longer depending on the system and what scanner you have on board. It can complement the FSS too, but there are negatives. The FSS should be the main scanner, with the other scanners as an upgrade bit with negatives such as power usage, size and weight.

 

[-VR- Max Factor]

I would also like to see this in the game:

 

[Stigbob]

Well that's just stupid; vulnerable, yes - but completely dissassociated from the external world in a dangerous system is almost as poorly thought out as not allowing us a docking request button.

Disclaimer: I Like the idea of the FSS (a thousand times better than honk, juice 'n jump), but the implementation could do with some work, like a curved screen (ala the station market) overlaid on the ships console and at least some situational awareness of what's going on outside the ship.

Would that not apply equally to things like the galaxy and system map ?.

 

[IndigoWyrd]

Agreed, like this...


Flimley

Just need it to be a bit bigger, and not bent. Can't stand the bent thing. How much bigger? Well, if the left side went over to the left edge of the screen, and the right side went over to the right side of the screen, we'd be almost there, just need the tops and bottoms to match up... oh, wait... that's what it does already. Yeah, I like that.

NOW, that said... if the background were more transparent, so we could see things like active ships flying around us, that would be an improvement of monumental proportions. Or, rather than the blue background, if it were left black, looking like the normal view out of our canopies, but with the tune-able fish-finder frequency range and the interactive rings, dotted rings, orbital plane lines, and fuzzy signal-source indicators active on it, then it would be right about perfect. I could even quite easily live with panning around moving space outside of my view while leaving me facing the same direction - it would be a little awkward at first, I know, but we'd adapt, or join the Elite: Amish and complain about it.

 

[Franc Kaos]

Agreed, like this...
Flimley

Perfect - with maybe a nice little shrubbery around the bottom, nothing too expensive mind...