How would you have implemented the FSS?

[amadeus1171]

Some people like the FSS. Some people hate it. Others adore it, while the rest despise it.

You can't please everyone.

Personally, I'm not, not in love with it. If that makes any sense.

How would I do it? First, I'd look at the underlying technology.

The first necessary thing would be a detector or detectors.

A telescope array that can detect visible, infrared, and ultraviolet light, and other spectra like radio waves, etc...

And with the advent of gravitational interferometers, such as LIGO, a gravitational wave detector (miniaturized) can also get fitted. This can give an idea of where to point the telescope.

Other detectors such as a neutrino detecting tank, particle radiation from the sun, suns, or other bodies, and others can be fitted, but that might make the FSS overly complex.

Let's just start with a multi-spectral telescope, to cover EM radiation, and a gravitational wave interferometer to tell where significant masses exist.

The process would go as such:

• Let the interferometer run for a bit so that it can detect and orient where waves originate. This should be an automatic process that is run every time you jump into a system.
• Use the telescope(s) to point at wave sources to get a visual or spectral observation of the gravitational wave source. The longer the telescope is focused on the source the more data you gather until the complete object is resolved. This can also become a multi-crew process to cut down scan time.
  Note: The closer you are to an object the more light you can collect (depending on the star's brightness as well), and the faster you can get details about the object.
  And because you're only seeing one side of the object you can only gather data for that one side. If you want to get data on the other side, which might be completely different, or give you more information about the object, you have to travel so that you can see the other side of the object. There just is no way of getting around that. Pun not intended.
• At a later time, the data can be further processed to discover new findings. You shouldn't have to be in the system to do this. You can be docked at a station or even floating in space.

Well, that's just my idea. Yours may vary. What do you think?

 

[Jaggid Edje]

I hated the FSS when I was brand new to the game about 2 months ago. Literal hate...but I had no frame of reference for how it used to be. It just feels too old fashioned to me to fit into the game well and I didn't like how it took me out of the cockpit to the FSS interface.

At this point, I've gotten used to it. I am ambivalent about the whole thing.

I haven't put a lot of thought into how I'd do it differently other than wishing it was something that was done from the cockpit and could be done while in motion.

 

[[Diplomacy] Carnegie]

I'd prefer it if finding the bodies was automated, but determining their composition and identifying POIs required some skill and/or intellectual involvement. Basically the opposite of what we have now.

 

[[Diplomacy] Carnegie]

Another fss thread, how original.

It's almost as if there are lots of people who aren't happy with it.

 

[Vedmo]

Doubt I ever would have dreamed up anything like it, but I'm pretty happy with it as is.

I probably would've added some beeps and boops and maybe some whirling sounds (not sure if that would be going overboard).

 

[babelfisch]

I am pretty much happy with it, could be better but also worse. The only thing that really annoys me is the need to throttle down.

 

[Schmack]

Lots of people not happy with a lot of things.

You seem unhappy about FSS threads, for example. Surely you saw the title and could have just not clicked the thread?

As for the OP - I like the FSS better than the honk, look for ELW or WW and only scan those.. rinse and repeat mechanics. I mean, if your honk can determine an ELW and produce the image, why can't it simply say "ELW" instead you needing to scan it. If the honk produced generic planet symbols you had to actually fly to in order to scan, that would be different, but we'd still be discovering the bubble. So the current FSS is good for me because I prefer to scan specific planets. If I was an explorer, I'd still want the ability to use something similar, but the repetitive actions of the drawn out FSS process would grate on my soul after the 10th or so time if not sooner. But I am not built like some are, to watch the jump sequence 5 thousand times and consider it challenging content. To those folks, the drawn out FSS mechanics repeated ad infinitum should be pure gold. It's like the Navy SEALs of grinding on the galactic scale.

 

[[Diplomacy] Carnegie]

Lots of people not happy with a lot of things.

And shockingly they come to the Discussion forum to discuss it. The nerve of some people!

 

[Schmack]

Yes and sadly people talk endlessly about the same subject in the hope that A) Frontier gives a toss B) Frontier will listen.

The history of this game seems to indicate that neither is very likely.

I don't see it that way. I see it as the poster has something on their mind and they want to discuss it with people who play the same game and could have relevant thoughts on it.

 

[drty]

At first I would fix current version of FSS. It's buggy and laggy as hell right now.

 

[Chaparral]

Energy profiles detailing different world classifications exist in game.

Requiring a backwards step to "not see" planets already understood to exist after the honk and then spend time resolving those images makes very little sense.

The big "miss" in my opinion is the failure to add additional information to the bodies.

We have access to geologic and biologic poi's which is an enormous improvement for landable bodies - and hotspots for mining - which are also amazing, but ZERO bonus information /mechanics about atmospheric bodies or gas giants.

There is often information about life or atmospheric composition - but that was completely ignored in the update to exploration. Would you ever probe a water world, ELW, or gas giant? There should be the same gold rush possibilities for this kind of scan data as there is for core mining. So many options, lost civilizations, colonies, shipwrecks, mineral concentrations, atmospheric scooping for mats, probes that collect and return with samples, EM signal scans from lost colonies or pirate bases,etc. etc.

My final huge concern is visual design and interest. We're running rigs capable of rendering millions of polygons but we get daggers and rings. Epic fail.

 

[Drelthar]

Just stop forcing you to have the throttle at zero to use it plz.

 

[Iskariot]

Some people like the FSS. Some people hate it. Others adore it, while the rest despise it.

You can't please everyone.

Personally, I'm not, not in love with it. If that makes any sense.

How would I do it? First, I'd look at the underlying technology.

The first necessary thing would be a detector or detectors.

A telescope array that can detect visible, infrared, and ultraviolet light, and other spectra like radio waves, etc...

And with the advent of gravitational interferometers, such as LIGO, a gravitational wave detector (miniaturized) can also get fitted. This can give an idea of where to point the telescope.

Other detectors such as a neutrino detecting tank, particle radiation from the sun, suns, or other bodies, and others can be fitted, but that might make the FSS overly complex.

Let's just start with a multi-spectral telescope, to cover EM radiation, and a gravitational wave interferometer to tell where significant masses exist.

The process would go as such:

• Let the interferometer run for a bit so that it can detect and orient where waves originate. This should be an automatic process that is run every time you jump into a system.
• Use the telescope(s) to point at wave sources to get a visual or spectral observation of the gravitational wave source. The longer the telescope is focused on the source the more data you gather until the complete object is resolved. This can also become a multi-crew process to cut down scan time.
  Note: The closer you are to an object the more light you can collect (depending on the star's brightness as well), and the faster you can get details about the object.
  And because you're only seeing one side of the object you can only gather data for that one side. If you want to get data on the other side, which might be completely different, or give you more information about the object, you have to travel so that you can see the other side of the object. There just is no way of getting around that. Pun not intended.
• At a later time, the data can be further processed to discover new findings. You shouldn't have to be in the system to do this. You can be docked at a station or even floating in space.

Well, that's just my idea. Yours may vary. What do you think?

I like the current FSS, but I definitely like your suggestions too.

 

[amadeus1171]

Just stop forcing you to have the throttle at zero to use it plz.

Yeah, throttling to zero is annoying. What, the FSS can't track bodies at speed?

 

[amadeus1171]

Energy profiles detailing different world classifications exist in game.

Requiring a backwards step to "not see" planets already understood to exist after the honk and then spend time resolving those images makes very little sense.

The big "miss" in my opinion is the failure to add additional information to the bodies.

We have access to geologic and biologic poi's which is an enormous improvement for landable bodies - and hotspots for mining - which are also amazing, but ZERO bonus information /mechanics about atmospheric bodies or gas giants.

There is often information about life or atmospheric composition - but that was completely ignored in the update to exploration. Would you ever probe a water world, ELW, or gas giant? There should be the same gold rush possibilities for this kind of scan data as there is for core mining. So many options, lost civilizations, colonies, shipwrecks, mineral concentrations, atmospheric scooping for mats, probes that collect and return with samples, EM signal scans from lost colonies or pirate bases,etc. etc.

My final huge concern is visual design and interest. We're running rigs capable of rendering millions of polygons but we get daggers and rings. Epic fail.

Makes sense.

 

[-VR- Max Factor]

Some people like the FSS. Some people hate it. Others adore it, while the rest despise it.

You can't please everyone.

Personally, I'm not, not in love with it. If that makes any sense.

How would I do it? First, I'd look at the underlying technology.

The first necessary thing would be a detector or detectors.

A telescope array that can detect visible, infrared, and ultraviolet light, and other spectra like radio waves, etc...

And with the advent of gravitational interferometers, such as LIGO, a gravitational wave detector (miniaturized) can also get fitted. This can give an idea of where to point the telescope.

Other detectors such as a neutrino detecting tank, particle radiation from the sun, suns, or other bodies, and others can be fitted, but that might make the FSS overly complex.

Let's just start with a multi-spectral telescope, to cover EM radiation, and a gravitational wave interferometer to tell where significant masses exist.

The process would go as such:

• Let the interferometer run for a bit so that it can detect and orient where waves originate. This should be an automatic process that is run every time you jump into a system.
• Use the telescope(s) to point at wave sources to get a visual or spectral observation of the gravitational wave source. The longer the telescope is focused on the source the more data you gather until the complete object is resolved. This can also become a multi-crew process to cut down scan time.
  Note: The closer you are to an object the more light you can collect (depending on the star's brightness as well), and the faster you can get details about the object.
  And because you're only seeing one side of the object you can only gather data for that one side. If you want to get data on the other side, which might be completely different, or give you more information about the object, you have to travel so that you can see the other side of the object. There just is no way of getting around that. Pun not intended.
• At a later time, the data can be further processed to discover new findings. You shouldn't have to be in the system to do this. You can be docked at a station or even floating in space.

Well, that's just my idea. Yours may vary. What do you think?

I probably wouldn't have an FSS at all. I think I would have preferred some kind of management game, sending probes out to other places while I Investigate other places. Then managing those probes as they go from planet to moon to planet. That could be a good use of the orrery map.

I would likely have the honk produce blank spheres in the system map of the main planets, moon signals are obscured by the main planet, you will need to visit them or send a probe out to see whats there. Possibly the better the system you have the more probes you can launch and control. Also the probe launcher should be a hardpoint. The bigger, the more probes it can hold.

I don't mind the FSS and have learnt to enjoy it and use it in a way thats good for me, it manages to cater for many different exploration styles. It's not the best system, but it's far from the worse system.

Unfortunately, what I would have added would slow down exploration even more and the travel type exploration would disappear. But I was never a fan of that type exploration, even though I did and still do it. I do have it because I can, but I personally think that type of exploration should have never been in the game. Exploration should take time in my view.

This is just my personal opinion and not an attack on others playstyles or trying to spite people, even though I am sure some will see it as such.

 

[MadDogMurdock]

Make the FSS visualization the cockpit view in Analysis Mode.
Then you are flying your ship while exploring instead of steering a camera.

A much more integrated experience.

Combine that with an ADS that returns a black body map and populates the Nav Panel and the FSS becomes a valuable addition to the game instead of a blocker to my exploration gameplay.

 

[VR Morgan Grimes]

Make the FSS visualization the cockpit view in Analysis Mode.
Then you are flying your ship while exploring instead of steering a camera.

A much more integrated experience.

Combine that with an ADS that returns a black body map and populates the Nav Panel and the FSS becomes a valuable addition to the game instead of a blocker to my exploration gameplay.

This for certain, would actually make supercruise handling a factor in choice of ships for exploration too, albeit a minor one.

 

[-VR- Max Factor]

Make the FSS visualization the cockpit view in Analysis Mode.
Then you are flying your ship while exploring instead of steering a camera.

A much more integrated experience.

Combine that with an ADS that returns a black body map and populates the Nav Panel and the FSS becomes a valuable addition to the game instead of a blocker to my exploration gameplay.

I like the UI stuff and the black body system map, but not the nav panel. They shouldn't be selectable until you have scanned them in the FSS otherwise the FSS makes no sense.

 

[MadDogMurdock]

I like the UI stuff and the black body system map, but not the nav panel. They shouldn't be selectable until you have scanned them in the FSS otherwise the FSS makes no sense.

It makes a great deal of sense if you solely think of the FSS as a body scanner integrated into your cockpit, and that the mechanism of 'finding' a body is the previous select, steer, and scan.

That is pretty much what I wanted. An extra tool to put in my existing exploration method, not a tool that completely invalidated it.

Finding a planet in the FSS is not a skill, it's a time sink.