Allow use of pre 3.3 Advanced Discovery Scanner

[MadDogMurdock]

Let me tell you a story...

Once upon a time, a game released with a 1-1 representation of the galaxy.
Awed by this staggering achievement, intrepid explorers set out to see what was out there.
They quickly established a routine that covered vast distances very quickly, discovering awesome sights that were shared far and wide.
But a small niggling doubt crept in to the hearts of some explorers - the ADS does maybe too much and the DSS adds very little - is this all we get?

Fear not brave travellers, behold!! The surface of planets and a vehicle to explore it in.
Awed by this, intrepid explorers set out to see what was there.
Even with the odds stacked against them, and few tools to use, these determined wanderers found many wonders, alien lifeforms, geological oddities, dead civilizations, and of course, awesome race tracks.
But they found these things all too soon.

That niggling doubt grew bigger - the ADS does maybe too much and the DSS adds very little - and it's really hard to find stuff on planets - is this all we get?

Fear not brave travellers, visit the Engineers, make your ships better.
The rate of discovery slowed, and exploration waned, dominated by distance records, extreme fringe exploration, and the odd crowd love-in at the far reaches of the galaxy.

Erm, the ADS does maybe too much and the DSS adds very little.

Look!! Thargoids!! What, wow, awesome!! What wait, this is combat content with extra grind.
Look!! Guardians!! What, wow, awesome!! What wait, this is bugged to hell.
Look!! Guardian modules!! What, erm ok, an extra 10ly is nice but hey you know, the ADS is feeling kind of old, any chance of some new tools?

Fear not brave travellers, we're going to spend a year fixing all the things.

Ok, sounds good.
Don't worry guys, Q4 is going to be awesome.
No seriously, this stuff is great.
Ok, I've had my doubts but we'll give you the benefit of the doubt.
I'm kind of excited, after all this time the tools of the exploration trade are going to get some love.

Here it is guys - what you've been waiting for all this time - awesome new exploration tools.

OMG, what have you done!! !!
We were getting pretty sad about the ADS being all there was, but seriously what!?

Moral of the story - be careful what you ask for.

 

[-VR- Max Factor]

Those saying the proposed module should be mutually exclusive with the FSS have absolutely ZERO good reasons to back why that should be the case.

There is also no good reason for the original ADS being completely removed either but that is a topic for another thread.

The simple fact of the matter is there have been numerous good justifications for re-adding an optional module (the primary one being to allow the more leisurely exploration experience that some have enjoyed since V1.0 and may actually prefer) that allows population of the map with unexplored and unreported bodies BUT not a single good reason to counter this being done nor even one good reason make it disable the FSS capability either.

It is a total fallacy to refer to the module as either an easy mode module nor I-win type button.

So disregard anyone's opinion which isn't the same as yours.

 

[MadDogMurdock]

So disregard anyone's opinion which isn't the same as yours.

Alternatively, perhaps your opinion was regarded, considered to have little merit, and discarded as 'not a good reason'.

Crazy, but that kind of stuff happens.

 

[Skip Rockbounder]

F DEV...... I think the Auto translate for the visually deaf has stopped working

 

[-VR- Max Factor]

Alternatively, perhaps your opinion was regarded, considered to have little merit, and discarded as 'not a good reason'.

Crazy, but that kind of stuff happens.

Crazy as it sounds, but I can do exactly the same to your reasons.

Here you go.

I have read your reasons and I find them of little merit for Fdev to put the effort of putting the old style ADS back. There you go.

You disgard my opinions, everyone can do the same to yours.

Personally I would have thought that getting the more people on your side the better. Alienating people and disregarding everyone's opinion which is not the same as your is not going to win you any fans, and to be honest to get what you want or something close to what you want, you will need all the friends you can get.

Well done. Slow clapping here. Talk about shoot yourselves in the foot.

 

[lenna]

Just because you repeatedly insist to ignore these reasons doesn't mean they don't exist.

The usual anti-honk moans and groans are anything but valid objective reasons.

 

[-VR- Max Factor]

The usual anti-honk moans and groans are anything but valid objective reasons.

Real classy.

Still waiting on your objective reasons.

 

[Shinji Ikari]

Real classy.

Still waiting on your objective reasons.

I have given one...

 

[MadDogMurdock]

Oh Max, I hate to break it to you but neither your opinion or mine have any influence on FD whatsoever.

Seriously, if I actually thought there was any chance that FD might fix this, I'd be far better served posting about it on Reddit than here.
And if It was fans I wanted, maybe Instagram or Snapchat.

 

[-VR- Max Factor]

I have given one...

No you haven't. That was purely subjective.

 

[-VR- Max Factor]

Oh Max, I hate to break it to you but neither your opinion or mine have any influence on FD whatsoever.

Oh I completely agree. But if there is a large number of people supporting what you want, Fdev maybe my be inclined to listen. But as this thread has turn into a seething mass of toxicity, they will very likely completey ignore it. Shame really.

Seriously, if I actually thought there was any chance that FD might fix this, I'd be far better served posting about it on Reddit than here.
And if It was fans I wanted, maybe Instagram or Snapchat.

Reddit is mostly full of fans of the FSS from what I have seen, so I doubt that would have helped. Just a few that don't like it the last time I looked, which was admittedly a while ago so it could have changed.

 

[ThatSmileyGuy]

Gentlemen, I must remind You that we have already been warned by moderators. I once again appeal to You to remain civil in this thread. Thank You.

Those saying the proposed module should be mutually exclusive with the FSS have absolutely ZERO good reasons to back why that should be the case.

While i advocate bringing ADS back i can see, as i stated in one of my posts before, the motivation behind mutual exclusivity.
And i must admit it's quite a delicate matter to touch. On one hand FSS feels like native, proper-ish scanner to operate in-game. On the other, equipping both ADS and FSS would leave players not doing so at a disadvantage. Then again such was the case with Surface Scanner pre 3.3. We had two tools for exploration and those who did not equip Surface Scanner were at certain disadvantage compared with those who did. But FD were somehow fine with this and i don't recon people being against such state of the matter back then(if they were please feel free to correct me).
I can see where both sides are coming from and I admit that so far it's hard to me to pledge allegiance to any of the sides. However the initial map reveal is the key, i'd somehow stomach not being able to use the FSS if i had the ADS equipped since it adds little to nothing to my preffered exploration gameplay besides additional time investment.

It's just pointless.

Then so is Your contribution. You may leave.

 

[Skip Rockbounder]

I've seen a good few objective reasons why the ADS could/should be returned but no objective reasons why it shouldn't.

 

[-VR- Max Factor]

I've seen a good few objective reasons why the ADS could/should be returned but no objective reasons why it shouldn't.

I have seen none. They have all been subjective. Objective reasons need to be certifiable with facts to back them up. So far, it's all been ones personal opinion over anothers.

For it to be objective it needs to be devoid of any bias and that isn't possible with something like a computer game.

 

[ThatSmileyGuy]

I am glad to have heard ideas from those who did include possible ways of implementing it back.
Glad to have heard those initially against it either change their mind or put forward a condition under which for them it would be viable.
I'm glad we've made it this far having have heard from both seasoned veterans and new players.

What i'm not glad about is that many posts in this thread come down to "waste of time" or "get over it" arguments which to say the least are, in my opinion, childish and more naive than to those posters the request itself.
There is no "waste of time" in telling the developer that some people dislike new feature, new GUI or anything for that matter. Feedback is crucial. Deny it as much as You want. Furthermore it's "Suggestions" subsections not "do it now" subsection. We are not in position of power by any means. We are here to simply make a suggestion. Coming so far as to open a conversation with both sides as to how They see it we could see it happen.
"Get over it" is not really an argument either. Or it is, but to an extent. Certain people in this thread, myself included, do still play the game. We have gotten over it and are playing. But it's our right to say "Hey, FD, You know what You could do to make things better?". And i'm not talking only about the subject of this thread. If You notice on the front page of a subsection there is a blue button saying "Post Thread". Everyone here is allowed to make a suggestion. Instead i see a crowd of people who are here being apparently even more dissatisfied with me even daring to start such thread than they accuse us of being dissatisfied with currently implemented mechanic. To which also i could say "get over it, it's my right to start such thread. I want to hear what people have to say regarding questions of the first post in this thread".

Maybe it's my fault? Maybe i should have posted it in feedback section but as You might presume i am new to forums and Suggestions was the subsection which i found most fitting.

To everyone in this thread who had something constructive to say, i say Thank You.
And hopefuly the right people will know who my thanks are aimed at.

 

[lenna]

equipping both ADS and FSS would leave players not doing so at a disadvantage.

How precisely? FSS players get to explore a system far faster (unveiling the map as part of the honk with unexplored body markers does not provide any tangible benefits in itself - a near body or FSS scan would still be required for discovery/reporting rights). The proposed ADS replacement module does not give any advantage to the FSS scan, no extra credits and merely would allow players that do fit the ADS-replacement to execute the more leisurely near-body scan exploration technique.

There would be no actual tangible disadvantage for those that just have the FSS at their disposal and if they do not have the ADS-replacement then they can fit other things that may give them other benefits - e.g. extra fuel or cargo space or a (spare) AFMU.

The reverse is however true, someone without the FSS but just the ADS-replacement would miss out on the clear tangible gains that access to the FSS can provide. Also since the FSS is integrated into every ship there is ZERO rationale for it to be disabled either.

 

[ThatSmileyGuy]

How precisely?

Then again. It's rather hard for me to either side with the mutual exclusivity vs non-exclusivity. I only want to have the map revealed post-honk and would be happy with either.
As i explained in my post it's the same situation with ADS and Surface Scanner. There was little to no reason to not equip it. So this seems like the best analogy to me.
We had two modules and if someone didn't equip Surface Scanner it was their choice.

However as it's clearly visible in this thread system map is seen as a reward to some and would not like to have it given away for free. Therein lies the problem. For me the map was a tool. Screenshots were the reward. Having seen the system was a reward.
I don't also care about surface temperature and other such virtual data FSS spits out as i can't for now do anything with those(maybe later when we get atmospheric landings these will matter).

We could argue about this arguably indefinitely. But without FD's reaction we won't know what we stand on.
I take it that You would like to have map revealed and then decide if You want to use FSS to scan the system right?

Also since the FSS is integrated into every ship there is ZERO rationale for it to be disabled either.

Indeed, but as we have seen with the recent update when ADS has been magically turned into FSS on every ship i don't think FD care about rationale.

 

[lenna]

As i explained in my post it's the same situation with ADS and Surface Scanner. There was little to no reason to not equip it.

Not even close - the surface scanner was required for a certain level of information to be unveiled from the body scan and you would lose out on tangible rewards from that level of information by not having it fitted.

In the case of the ADS-replacement, there is no such rationale since the map in itself lacks tangible value and would not grant bragging/reporting rights directly - the closest equivalent might be a docking computer or auto-pilot - i.e. no tangible gains, just QOL gains.

Any claims that the topological map is a reward with tangible value are unfounded. It has operational value from an exploration gameplay perspective but that is another matter and certainly does not qualify as a reward since you (a) get it for free with the FSS scan and (b) would require a near-body scan to get the same level of information/tangible reward as the FSS scan.

 

[ThatSmileyGuy]

In the case of the ADS-replacement, there is no such rationale - the closest equivalent might be a docking computer or auto-pilot - i.e. no tangible gains, just QOL gains.

That's what i meant. Surface Scanner provided several very important informations about scanned body. So those who did not equip it were at a certain loss compared to those who did equip it. But back then it was Your choice to do so and i don't know if people were unhappy with this.

Then again, i am biased towards seeing ads back, i'd much rather listen to what Max_Factor responds so i have a better understanding of both sides before i say anything, if i may inquire.

 

[lenna]

That's what i meant.

Just to check we are on the same page.

• pre-3.3 Exploration Outfitting Options
  • No xDS/DSS - essentially no exploration
  • xDS fitted/No DSS - allowed for exploration, rewards were ok, near body scan required for discovery bragging rights
  • DSS fitted/no xDS - pretty pointless
  • xDS+DSS fitted - honk provided the same information with/without the DSS, DSS improved near body scan rewards and level of information, near body scan still required for discovery bragging rights
• 3.3 Exploration outfitting options
  • No DSS - exploration as standard, rewards standardised, no space-golf, legacy near body scanning approach not feasible in virgin systems, Near-body scans possible in explored systems
  • DSS fitted - space-golf enabled, no improvement to exploration rewards (except additional rewards from playing space-golf), legacy near body scanning approach not feasible in virgin systems, Near-body scans possible in explored systems
• Proposal (tangible rewards unchanged across the board)
  • No DSS/SMC - exploration as standard, no space-golf, legacy near body scanning approach not feasible in virgin systems, FSS scan required for rewards in Virgin systems, Near-body scans possible in explored systems
  • DSS fitted/No SMC - space-golf enabled, no improvement to exploration rewards, legacy near body scanning approach not feasible in virgin systems, FSS scan required for rewards in Virgin systems, Near-body scans possible in explored systems
  • SMC fitted/No DSS - exploration as standard, no space-golf, legacy near body scanning approach feasible in virgin systems, rewards available from either FSS or Near Body scans in all systems (FSS notionally quicker on average)
  • SMC+DSS fitted - space-golf enabled, legacy near body scanning approach feasible in virgin systems, rewards available from either FSS or Near Body scans in all systems (FSS notionally quicker on average)

Terminology​

• xDS = The 3-legacy Discovery Scanner options (mutually exclusive with each other - BDS/IDS/ADS - removed as of 3.3)
• FSS = Radio-Telescope themed mini-game discovery scanner (integrated in all ships as of 3.3)
• DSS = Detailed Surface Scanner (changed in function as of 3.3)
• SMC = Proposed Module (System Mapping Computer)

From the above - no downside for those that would not fit the SMC other than being unable to near body scan with any reliability in virgin systems (FSS is notionally quicker anyway from a tangible data discovery and reward perspective).