Could or should Frontier enhance the FSS or add in and incorporate an optional ADS-like expansion module?

[Shinji Ikari]

I think Bryan K is confusing mapping with exploring.

 

[Bryan K]

I see you keep pushing your pathetic definition of exploration, also, Columbus wasn't exploring by your own account given America had already been found by Vkings not to mention the fact that it had been settled for thousands of years.

Arguably most of the Earth-likes, water worlds, Guardian worlds, Thargoid worlds, and gas giants with Ammonia-based life have been discovered by their own inhabitants.

Your hostile tone amuses me, though.

 

[Shinji Ikari]

Arguably most of the Earth-likes, water worlds, Guardian worlds, Thargoid worlds, and gas giants with Ammonia-based life have been discovered by their own inhabitants.

Your hostile tone amuses me, though.

It's your argument, not mine but thanks for helping the reductio ad absurdum.

 

[Soron Silin]

I actually realised something which debunks one of the criticisms of adding a mechanism for exposing unexplored planets' locations prior to scaning with the FSS when I just dropped into a previously scanned system.
Specifically the argument that you could point your nose at something targeted via the navpanel, switch to the FSS, and immediately scan it directly ahead of you.

Many seemed to be operating on an assumption that the FSS is always pointed directly ahead of your ship when you enter it, but that's not the case, as I just discovered when I selected an unexplored landable in this system to begin flying to it and DSS it, but halfway there, decided to throttle to zero, hop into the FSS and see if I could scan it.
It wasn't there ahead of me when I went into the FSS. I had to rotate the FSS view a good 120 degrees or more to find it, tune to it, and scan it.

I just experimented. Every time FSS opened with the object in front of the ship in the cross-hairs. I could not reproduce your results.

 

[Soron Silin]

The problem is lack of resolution - not too much of it, already tried it

FTR - with kit I have to hand and have tried

1. Thrustmaster Warthog (Throttle unit) - 14-bit Throttle, 10-bit Trim, 10-bit Mini-stick
2. Logitech G X56 (Throttle unit) - 10-bit Throttle, 4 x 8-bit Rotary, 8-bit Mini-stick
3. Thrustmaster T-Flight HOTAS X - 10-bit Stick primary axis, 8-bit Twist, 8-bit Throttle, 8-bit Rocker

The 10-bit Trim control on the Warthog is not really good enough for absolute control of the tuner, 14-bit might be sufficient for absolute control but the overriding point is that it still would not address the underlying problems of lack of tuning memory and control re-use.

[EDIT]As for the stability of input from ADCs of varying resolution ALOT depends on the implementation and higher-resolution devices need not be that unstable (there are means to avoid this). The main factors will be line noise on one hand (stability of voltage being key) and mechanical construction on the other. Where hall-effect devices are concerned, there is the additional complication of stability of the surrounding magnetic field which can be affected by other powered electrical equipment near by. The EMC regulations help to moderate this effect but it can not be completely avoided - the nominal counter being calibration.

Overall though, the upshot of this is that ensuring tuning memory is properly and consistently implemented at the software level is the right thing for FD to do - special or custom hardware should not be required.[/EDIT]

Really? I use the large cheap plastic turning things on the x56 throttle for tuning and have no problems with it. There's quite a bit of allowance where it will still work, you don't need precision?

The act of tuning like the rest of the fss though feels like filler. There's no sense of accomplishment from doing it.. its about as complicated as walking to the door.

This might be the problem:

Try putting the tuning sensitivity around here.

 

[Soron Silin]

Three in a row. Sorry.

I've just found a nice counter-example. I wasn't exploring at the time, just coming back from collecting Guardian materials. But when there's a planet showing a significant disk while you're fuel scooping, it's rather hard to miss.

So far, so good. I imagine if I had an ADS I could just fly the 8.11 ls to it and scan it (although of course in this case the automatic scanner had already caught it.) It's a class III gas giant with an orbital period of one day.

But in running FSS on the whole system, EDDI alerted me to another fascinating feature. Every single element is available as surface deposits. All of them are boring ice worlds.

It's Synuefe OP-F b44-5 if anyone is interested.

 

[Red Anders]

I mean, it makes sense from a sightseeing perspective, but exploration?

I see the problem here. You're making up names for things according to your own definition of gameplay styles and then applying value judgements to what other people enjoy in a computer game based on which category you feel they fall under. There is one problem with this. Nobody outside your house cares.

By the way, no matter what you may think, you aren't actually channeling Magellan just because you get your fun from scanning endless snowballs in endless near-identical systems. At the end of the day we're all sat on our couch/gaming chair trying to get a little fun into our lives, snobbery about the way other people do that just makes you look like a bit of a sad case to be honest.

But carry on, it's exactly what I've come to expect from every other thread about this topic.

 

[[Diplomacy] Carnegie]

I see you keep pushing your pathetic definition of exploration, also, Columbus wasn't exploring by your own account given America had already been found by Vkings not to mention the fact that it had been settled for thousands of years.

Columbus was looking for an alternative way to get to somewhere that had ALREADY been explored.

Columbus was all about CHOICES*

*for white people

 

[Bryan K]

I see the problem here. You're making up names for things according to your own definition of gameplay styles and then applying value judgements to what other people enjoy in a computer game based on which category you feel they fall under. There is one problem with this. Nobody outside your house cares.

By the way, no matter what you may think, you aren't actually channeling Magellan just because you get your fun from scanning endless snowballs in endless near-identical systems. At the end of the day we're all sat on our couch/gaming chair trying to get a little fun into our lives, snobbery about the way other people do that just makes you look like a bit of a sad case to be honest.

But carry on, it's exactly what I've come to expect from every other thread about this topic.

ex·plo·ra·tion
/ˌekspləˈrāSH(ə)n/

noun

1. the action of traveling in or through an unfamiliar area in order to learn about it.

sight·see·ing
/ˈsītˌsēiNG/

noun

1. the activity of visiting places of interest in a particular location.

 

[Bryan K]

I’m always amazed by the seething hatred I manage to accidentally trigger from people I thought were more mature here. I’m also amazed by how much the forum doesn’t like copypasta-ing definitions and their format.

 

[Shinji Ikari]

ex·plo·ra·tion
/ˌekspləˈrāSH(ə)n/

noun

1. the action of traveling in or through an unfamiliar area in order to learn about it.

sight·see·ing
/ˈsītˌsēiNG/

noun

1. the activity of visiting places of interest in a particular location.

Unfamiliar is subjective, for beginners even the Pleiades is unfamiliar, for me, Jaques Station ,Beagle Point and the Box Nebula are familiar because I've been there multiple times.

 

[Shinji Ikari]

I’m always amazed by the seething hatred I manage to accidentally trigger from people I thought were more mature here. I’m also amazed by how much the forum doesn’t like copypasta-ing definitions and their format.

You can't know that, literally nobody had the chance to reply to the definition before you made comments on the reaction.

 

[[Diplomacy] Carnegie]

ex·plo·ra·tion
/ˌekspləˈrāSH(ə)n/

noun

1. the action of traveling in or through an unfamiliar area in order to learn about it.

sight·see·ing
/ˈsītˌsēiNG/

noun

1. the activity of visiting places of interest in a particular location.

So, looking for interesting places in unfamiliar areas fits your definition of exploration.

If you tell someone about it, and THEY go visit it, then THEY'RE sightseeing.

 

[Bryan K]

You can't know that, literally nobody had the chance to reply to the definition before you made comments on the reaction.

I was trying to tack that bit on to the definition post, but the formatting wouldn’t let me (I don’t always forum, but when I do, I use my iPhone). Had to just make a separate post.

Sorry for the confusion. Busy night, got sick of fighting with the format.

 

[Bryan K]

So, looking for interesting places in unfamiliar areas fits your definition of exploration.

If you tell someone about it, and THEY go visit it, then THEY'RE sightseeing.

No. Investigating a system marked as “unexplored” is my definition of exploration. I find nearly all systems interesting at some level (it’s freaking outer space, that used to be enough).

If I’m on an exploration run, I don’t skip systems unless they’re already charted by someone else (that parcel of information has been acquired by humanity, no need to get it a second time).

 

[Wendake]

Fix the POIs scan time in FSS - that's my only requirement...can take up to 30 seconds when a planet have more than 30 POIs and it's a huge waste of time...always love to stare at the screen without being able to do anything else...

 

[[Diplomacy] Carnegie]

No. Investigating a system marked as “unexplored” is my definition of exploration. I find nearly all systems interesting at some level (it’s freaking outer space, that used to be enough).

If I’m on an exploration run, I don’t skip systems unless they’re already charted by someone else (that parcel of information has been acquired by humanity, no need to get it a second time).

"Investigating a system marked as 'unexplored'" is what we're ALL doing.

Just because we have a different definition of 'interesting' doesn't mean it isn't 'exploration'. If it did, then YOU'RE 'sightseeing' to, since you say that you don't find every system 'interesting'.

The bottom line is, nobody gets to decide what is exploration and what isn't. Either we're all explorers or none of us are.

 

[Faded Glory]

The bottom line is, nobody gets to decide what is exploration and what isn't. Either we're all explorers or none of us are.

Delving into real life definitions for something we are doing in a game always seems to me to be a tad futile...

 

[Shinji Ikari]

No. Investigating a system marked as “unexplored” is my definition of exploration.

Yes, that's the issue with your argument, it's your definition.

 

[Maolagin]

Good enough for relative input but not absolute input - all 4 of the rotaries on the X56 are only 8-bit (256 position) rotary devices and the throttle is only 10-bit (1024 position) and none of these are truly workable as an absolute position control for tuning - the Throttle for reasons that should be obvious and the rotaries because they lack the required precision.

Yes - the rotaries are workable as a differential input device for tuning but that was not the usage being countered. What was being suggested was to use the "physical" position of the relevant analogue input to mechanically preserve tuning memory.

To the contrary, I use it in absolute mode for the precise reason that the physical position corresponds to the tuning setting - both so the tuning position persists from session to session, and so I can develop muscle memory for the tuning.

As for control setup and tuning memory - all I can say is that last time I checked the FSS resets to the centre point every-time I leave and re-enter it and I have the Logitech version of an X-56 configured as my primary controller. K+M are too impractical to use on a regular basis in VR.

That's just curious. I did not observe that behavior. But I agree, it's a bit cumbersome to be fumbling for the KB in VR, so if you're primarily using VR it's a moot point.