The ADS

[Morbad]

I object to your use of the word "objectively" when it comes to gameplay preferences, which are subjective to the subject playing the game.

The ADS honk was objectively superior in time to resolve a system and, if it was brought back, using the ADS would make exploration objectively faster.

Any time there are any potentially competitive aspects to a game, there is significant pressure to use the most competitive mechanisms. Exploration data acquisition, where the rewards are credits, tags, reputation, and influence, in a multiplayer only game with a persistent, shared, setting, certainly qualifies.

Two different approaches, neither of which is exclusive, and could indeed be complementary.

Which is the non-choice I'm talking about.

If the ADS came back, the most optimal way to collect data would almost always involve a honk with the ADS, then selective scanning with the FSS.

Any time there is a best choice, in a competitive setting, it's virtually the same as no choice. That's why balance is so important when there are supposed to be options.

 

[babelfisch]

ADS never gave discovery tags or body materials.
FSS does (though you do have to really enjoy clicking to make this happen )

They're two different functions, and deliver different "rewards".

Were the ADS to make a reappearance (which it won't), then you could have the choice of seeing the layout and colour of objects and then fill in the gaps by actually flying to them and getting them auto-scanned, or you could sit in place and swivel the FSS around, enjoying all the clicking and amassing tags and object material information in situ.

Two different approaches, neither of which is exclusive, and could indeed be complementary.

You could, for example, use the ADS to get the sysmap. fly out to survey all the nearby-ish objects and auto-scan them, then use the FSS to survey that sub-system that was 400K+ls away (though it might slide around a lot due to the still present FSS bugs)

Yes, I already understood that proposal 10 months ago... It's not what I was talking about though

 

[Old Duck]

That would be a combination of both systems. So you would use both of them rather than making a choice.

Were you asleep when this was debated for 400 pages back when 3.3 released? Me personally, I'd just stick with the FSS because the ADS takes up an extra module slot, and I actually enjoy populating the system map myself.

But what if I did choose to use both, what's wrong with that? I have a Conda on PS4 that has a fixed beam, turreted burst lasers, and seeking missiles all in one build. Using your logic, Frontier should get rid of all these choices and / or prohibit mixing them, because "choice is bad". I mean, surely my fixed beam is objectively better, seeing that it has the highest DPS of all my weapons. "When one choice is objectively superior, it stops being a choice." I guess it's time to start a petition to get rid of all these inferior weapon choices!

 

[askavir]

The ADS honk was objectively superior in time to resolve a system and, if it was brought back, using the ADS would make exploration objectively faster.

Any time there are any potentially competitive aspects to a game, there is significant pressure to use the most competitive mechanisms. Exploration data acquisition, where the rewards are credits, tags, reputation, and influence, in a multiplayer only game with a persistent, shared, setting, certainly qualifies.

The ADS didn't granted any planet discovery tags nor detailed surface scan credits, you had to go to each planet to obtain these, so in the terms you enumerate the ADS is actually objectively slower.

 

[Morbad]

The ADS didn't granted any planet discovery tags nor detailed surface scan credits, you had to go to each planet to obtain these, so in the terms you enumerate the ADS is actually objectively slower.

Unless taking the ADS excluded use of the FSS, the fastest way to scan would involve using both. There would be one "best" way to do things, which makes it not much of a choice.

 

[Kenneth McGrew]

Beats talking about Arx...

that will we next weeks forum meta, which reminds me i really do need to update my bingo card although 1.5 years on its still not far off

 

[marx]

First, they invited a select crew of community "leaders" to demonstrated the FSS in order to get their opinion and feedback on the FSS.

If I remember correct, none of whom were explorers.

From what I heard (I was not part of that), some small adjustments, improves and fixed were made to the FSS.

You can check the beta changelogs. The only changes to the FSS were bugfixes, added controller options. Oh, and after it was discovered that you can use the FSS while you don't have a Discovery Scanner fitted, the next beta fixed this by removing the module altogether.
These were during the open beta. As far as I know, the invited were shown demos, and didn't play with the game itself; but even if I'm wrong and they did, the first beta certainly launched with glaring bugs. (Especially in VR.)

During the beta, while the idea of the FSS generally received positive feedback

Yeahhh no. It was quite controversial from the moment it was revealed, especially after it was shown on a livestream, and trying it in the beta didn't really improve things. You can find lots and lots of posts on this matter. No matter which side your opinion falls on, the fact remains that it was - and still is - a controversial subject.

FDEV have ignored any suggested improvements to the FSS. They even haven't fixed all the bugs in the FSS to date (it's going to be a year soon).

Don't forget that the same goes for the Codex. It still has plenty of severe bugs. The cherry on top being that almost ten months later, we've still yet to see any rumours there, despite Frontier saying that they'll be adding them with Chapter Four.

 

[-VR- Max Factor]

The ADS didn't granted any planet discovery tags nor detailed surface scan credits, you had to go to each planet to obtain these, so in the terms you enumerate the ADS is actually objectively slower.

The FSS does not give you surface scan credits either, well not all of them. It gives more then an ADS scan but less then a DSS scan. To get the good credits, you still have to fly there to map the planet and to get the first mapped by tag which really should be considered the most important one as it takes more effort and gives more cash. The first discovered by tags should really be considered the secondary tag, the not so important one, the one with the least kudos.

These days if I see someone that has mapped a planet well over 100,000ls away, I take my hat off to them and say well done.

 

[Morbad]

Using your logic, Frontier should get rid of all these choices and / or prohibit mixing them, because "choice is bad".

Choice is great. False choices, not so much.

I mean, surely my fixed beam is objectively better

It's not.

There are vastly more permutations to combat scenarios than exploration ones, and far more variables to consider. Fixed beams are pretty awesome, but there are plenty of situations where they will not be as useful as something else.

Are there any situations where revealing everything with a honk would not be useful in exploration?

 

[Shinji Ikari]

Nah, while a lot of people do mining people do other things beceause not everone wants to mine. Give everyone the ability to just honk and a vast majority will honk.

But still, it's an example of an old mechanic staying in place after a new one, whether you are forced to mine or not is irrelevant.

 

[Old Duck]

Unless taking the ADS excluded use of the FSS, the fastest way to scan would involve using both. There would be one "best" way to do things, which makes it not much of a choice.

For a normally smart person, you sure are talking dumb today. This whole game is built around choice - I choose what ship to fly, I choose what modules to equip, what engineering and special effects to apply to those modules, I choose what cargo to haul and where to haul it, etc. Why is exploration somehow exempt from this in your view?

 

[babelfisch]

Were you asleep when this was debated for 400 pages back when 3.3 released? Me personally, I'd just stick with the FSS because the ADS takes up an extra module slot, and I actually enjoy populating the system map myself.

But what if I did choose to use both, what's wrong with that? I have a Conda on PS4 that has a fixed beam, turreted burst lasers, and seeking missiles all in one build. Using your logic, Frontier should get rid of all these choices and / or prohibit mixing them, because "choice is bad". I mean, surely my fixed beam is objectively better, seeing that it has the highest DPS of all my weapons. "When one choice is objectively superior, it stops being a choice." I guess it's time to start a petition to get rid of all these inferior weapon choices!

Imagine you had one weapon that would blow up ships instantly and one weapon which blows up a ship after you clicked 45 times.
I'd rather have a combination of the FSS and ADS than two ways of achieving the same thing while one is considerably faster and the other a waste of time. That happens to be the opinion of several people posting in the 400 pages thread as well, which is why some people came up with the idea of a compromise.

 

[Old Duck]

Are there any situations where revealing everything with a honk would not be useful in exploration?

YES. I have argued vehemently NOT to reintroduce the "reveal everything" honk into the FSS like the ADS has, because as a beachcomber, I used the unpopulated system map to quickly discern whether a system had been fully explored or not. This allowed me to find unexplored planets in previously visited systems only a dozen light years outside of the Bubble, which for me greatly improves beachcombing.

And let's not forget that the FSS does reveal everything in the system via the histogram. Seeing a system map gives no advantage over the histogram when it comes to this competitive "make credits while exploring" gameplay that you seem so worried about. It just gives people who explore for different reasons (like Ziggy looking for cool sights to see) a different tool to do that, just like the absence of a system map gives me a unique tool for beachcombing.

Dude, just tap the mat, you're not winning this argument.

 

[Mengy]

The ADS provides information. That's it. What I do with that information is the start of my gameplay loop. Without that information, I have no gameplay loop.

Yep. The ADS, while boring and simplistic, gave us the quick ability to make gameplay choices. The main problem with the FSS is those same choices now require a much longer minigame to be conducted first, and THEN we can get back to making those choices. It slows exploration down and railroads it into a very narrow style of play.

Now, I like the FSS concept and I think Frontier did a good job with it, BUT I still feel Frontier missed the mark and botched the exploratoin gameplay loop rather than ultimately improve it. After a ton of time with the FSS I still feel the best solution is the one I proposed during the beta: allow the honk to still show the old ADS system map, and then use the new FSS to detail scan and explore that system. The FSS would do the actually scanning for credits, detect volcanism, place tags, and provide all data on objects, while the honk would provide the flat system map with orbital geometry. It's a simple compromise of design which provides the best features and gameplay loops of both exploratoin features in my opinion. More importantly it allows choices of gameplay via quick information rather than force players to do it one slow way over and over again ad nauseum.

At this point I doubt Frontier will ever change anything. I think we are stuck with the FSS as it is today, and I feel that it's hurt exploration as a whole. Some things are better, yes, but exploration gameplay feels slower and more plodding to me now. The FSS is neat but sadly I miss the feel of how exploration gameplay was in the ADS days. For the record I did not like the God Honk ADS, yet I feel it played better than the current FSS does. There is room for a middle ground solution.

Just my two cents, for what it's worth.

 

[Old Duck]

I'd rather have a combination of the FSS and ADS than two ways of achieving the same thing while one is considerably faster and the other a waste of time.

Which one is faster and which is the waste of time? You people keep using "objective" while making up things about tools you obviously don't even understand. It's like arguing with children over the existence of the tooth fairy.

 

[[PS4] Lorenzo Waringos]

that will we next weeks forum meta, which reminds me i really do need to update my bingo card although 1.5 years on its still not far off

LOVE this.

 

[-VR- Max Factor]

Yep. The ADS, while boring and simplistic, gave us the quick ability to make gameplay choices. The main problem with the FSS is those same choices now require a much longer minigame to be conducted first, and THEN we can get back to making those choices. It slows exploration down and railroads it into a very narrow style of play.

Now, I like the FSS concept and I think Frontier did a good job with it, BUT I still feel Frontier missed the mark and botched the exploratoin gameplay loop rather than ultimately improve it. After a ton of time with the FSS I still feel the best solution is the one I proposed during the beta: allow the honk to still show the old ADS system map, and then use the new FSS to detail scan and explore that system. The FSS would do the actually scanning for credits, detect volcanism, place tags, and provide all data on objects, while the honk would provide the flat system map with orbital geometry. It's a simple compromise of design which provides the best features and gameplay loops of both exploratoin features in my opinion. More importantly it allows choices of gameplay via quick information rather than force players to do it one slow way over and over again ad nauseum.

At this point I doubt Frontier will ever change anything. I think we are stuck with the FSS as it is today, and I feel that it's hurt exploration as a whole. Some things are better, yes, but exploration gameplay feels slower and more plodding to me now. The FSS is neat but sadly I miss the feel of how exploration gameplay was in the ADS days. For the record I did not like the God Honk ADS, yet I feel it played better than the current FSS does. There is room for a middle ground solution.

Just my two cents, for what it's worth.

For me that wouldn't work.

1. It would be logic fail. If the ADS honk has found the precise co-ordinates of each planet why do you have to find them all again in the FSS. It makes no logical sense.

2. It would destroy some of the ways I go exploring. Sometimes I only scan a gas giant, go to the system map select it and go and find whats there. If the system map is fully laid out, that will destroy it for me as tells me exactly whats there anyway.

 

[Shinji Ikari]

Given that it took 5 years to get any updates to Exploration at all, are you surprised?

Well yes, 5 years is a long time to polish the update especiallly given the last year (Beyond) had two small (from the horse's mouth) updates.

 

[Shinji Ikari]

So if you could either explore a system by using the ADS (instant) or the FSS (lots of clicking) you would chose the FSS because you really enjoy clicking?

I'd use both for different things, the ADS to get a glance and the FSS to detail scan given their strenghts at those tasks.

 

[Morbad]

For a normally smart person, you sure are talking dumb today. This whole game is built around choice - I choose what ship to fly, I choose what modules to equip, what engineering and special effects to apply to those modules, I choose what cargo to haul and where to haul it, etc. Why is exploration somehow exempt from this in your view?

Much of the game is built around the illusion of choice. In many areas the number of competitively viable options is only a tiny fraction of the immediately apparent options. These sorts of imbalances result in narrow 'metas' that harm the ability to make actual choices.

If I have to chose between the one optimal thing and a bunch of others, this is a crappy choice.

Which one is faster and which is the waste of time?

Both.

Using the FSS to locate or categorize objects would be a waste of time in the presence of the ADS, and using the scanning methods on an object is a waste of time when the FSS is on hand.

If I'm after a certain quantity of data (to sell for profit or BGS purposes), or trying to find certain bodies, and both the ADS and FSS can be used on the same ship at the same time, there isn't going to be any method faster than the ADS honk (which takes the same time as the FSS one) followed by a quick glance at the system map, followed by selective scanning with the FSS. Only if I'm just pinging and jumping, or doing complete scans of a system, would it be more efficient to omit one or the other.