Page 102 of 206 First 98100101102103104106 Last
Results 1,516 to 1,530 of 3089

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

  1. #1516
    Originally Posted by Stigbob View Post (Source)
    I'm not seeing any sort of link between the two things.
    Coherency certainly isn't the strongest point of this thread.

    Btw, is there really no one who can help me to find out from what thread the poster list mentioned in this post is actually coming from?

    Never mind, found it. It's from 'chapter four - exploration reveal'. But now I'm missing the original. But how do I see it on the front page so that I could verify these numbers? I can only take the direct link but not see it's next level above (in the forum overview). Strange...

  2. #1517
    Originally Posted by picommander View Post (Source)
    Coherency certainly isn't the strongest point of this thread.

    Btw, is there really no one who can help me to find out from what thread the poster list mentioned in this post is actually coming from?

    No blue ball telling you where the thread is, eh?

    It's from this one: https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showth...oration-Reveal

  3. #1518
    Originally Posted by picommander View Post (Source)
    Coherency certainly isn't the strongest point of this thread.

    Btw, is there really no one who can help me to find out from what thread the poster list mentioned in this post is actually coming from?

    Never mind, found it. It's from 'chapter four - exploration reveal'. But now I'm missing the original. But how do I see it on the front page so that I could verify these numbers? I can only take the direct link but not see it's next level above (in the forum overview). Strange...
    It's about two thirds of the way down this page:

    https://forums.frontier.co.uk/forumd...News-Bulletins

  4. #1519
    Originally Posted by picommander View Post (Source)
    Never mind, found it.
    My apologies picommander, I provided direct links in that post and thought the source would be clear enough to anyone that clicked on them.

  5. #1520
    Originally Posted by askavir View Post (Source)
    No blue ball telling you where the thread is?

    It's from this one: https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showth...oration-Reveal
    Very funny.

    Originally Posted by Red Anders View Post (Source)
    It's about two thirds of the way down this page:

    https://forums.frontier.co.uk/forumd...News-Bulletins
    And that's the problem. I simply can't see it on that page, which I would need to verify these numbers. That's really confuddling me. I can very well see this tread as linked by Askavir, but this wouldn't help my case. I actually set my forum date filters to 'last year' for this purpose, but to no avail.

    Here is a screenshot of that page. What do you see what I don't see:



    I hope my problem is clear by now? I can see the first link but that's useless for my purpose, while I simply can't see it in the overview - unless I'm slowly going nuts, senile and blind. Look at my screenshot above...

    Just realized this page form my screenshot doesn't cover it as the origin is from 12.09.2018. and my forum seems to default to one month. But even when setting it to 'last year' and scrolling far below that date I still can't see it.

  6. #1521
    Originally Posted by picommander View Post (Source)
    And that's the problem. I simply can't see it on that page, which I would need to verify these numbers. That's really confuddling me. I can very well see this tread as linked by Askavir, but this wouldn't help my case. I actually set my forum date filters to 'last year' for this purpose, but to no avail.
    Very odd. I have whatever the default settings are for date filters and so on but the thread was started last year and the last post was also made last year, so that shouldn't be causing you any problems. Here's a screenshot of the bottom half of the page as I see it, do you have the threads on either side of it?



    I did have a quick look myself and the numbers are totally accurate.

    Tell you how you should be able to do it. Advanced search > change to the 'search single content type' tab, enter 'Will Flanagan' for user name, search for 'threads started by' and 'show results as threads'. That brings up a list of all Will's threads in exactly the same format as a main forum page, including the link you need to click to get the post counts. It should be on page three of the results assuming you have the default view, it was started on 12 September.

    In fact having just seen your screenie, I think maybe you just didn't look back far enough?

  7. #1522
    Originally Posted by Red Anders View Post (Source)
    Very odd. I have whatever the default settings are for date filters and so on but the thread was started last year and the last post was also made last year, so that shouldn't be causing you any problems. Here's a screenshot of the bottom half of the page as I see it, do you have the threads on either side of it?



    I did have a quick look myself and the numbers are totally accurate.

    Tell you how you should be able to do it. Advanced search > change to the 'search single content type' tab, enter 'Will Flanagan' for user name, search for 'threads started by' and 'show results as threads'. That brings up a list of all Will's threads in exactly the same format as a main forum page, including the link you need to click to get the post counts.
    Maybe you should just post a link to that thread. We are talking about the same people who can’t spend two minutes at idle speed to FSS a system then decide if they want to have a closer look at something.

  8. #1523
    Originally Posted by IndigoWyrd View Post (Source)
    Maybe you should just post a link to that thread. We are talking about the same people who can’t spend two minutes at idle speed to FSS a system then decide if they want to have a closer look at something.
    That might have been funny if I wasn't one of the people who would quite like the ADS back and picommander wasn't one of the players who hated the thing. I mean OK it was still pretty funny but not for the reason you intended

    More importantly though it wouldn't have helped him because he wants to check the stats for number of posts by each forum user - you can't do that from within the thread as far as I know (can you?) which is the whole problem that he's having.

  9. #1524
    Originally Posted by IndigoWyrd View Post (Source)
    Maybe you should just post a link to that thread. We are talking about the same people who can’t spend two minutes at idle speed to FSS a system then decide if they want to have a closer look at something.

  10. #1525
    Originally Posted by Red Anders View Post (Source)
    That might have been funny if I wasn't one of the people who would quite like the ADS back and picommander wasn't one of the players who hated the thing. I mean OK it was still pretty funny but not for the reason you intended
    Best laugh I've had since the last time somebody called the ADS 'easy mode'.

  11. #1526
    Originally Posted by Red Anders View Post (Source)
    Very odd. I have whatever the default settings are for date filters and so on but the thread was started last year and the last post was also made last year, so that shouldn't be causing you any problems. Here's a screenshot of the bottom half of the page as I see it, do you have the threads on either side of it?



    I did have a quick look myself and the numbers are totally accurate.

    Tell you how you should be able to do it. Advanced search > change to the 'search single content type' tab, enter 'Will Flanagan' for user name, search for 'threads started by' and 'show results as threads'. That brings up a list of all Will's threads in exactly the same format as a main forum page, including the link you need to click to get the post counts. It should be on page three of the results assuming you have the default view, it was started on 12 September.

    In fact having just seen your screenie, I think maybe you just didn't look back far enough?
    Thank you very much! Found it now (without the trick you suggested). The culprit was basically a mix of my weak eyesight that's more or less forcing me to heavily increase any screen output and the forum defaulting to 1 month. After adjusting both I suddenly found it and could verify these number. You're right, they are correct.

    Sorry for any inconvenience, very much appreciate your help!
    (phew, I'm glad it just were my eyes and not my brain...)

    So sad your are sitting on the other side of the 'fence'. You actually seem one of the very few posters here that actually make some sense - and actually care to read and understand what you are quoting.

  12. #1527
    Originally Posted by Riverside View Post (Source)
    Thatchinho, there is nothing that cannot be discovered with either method.There are no things that only the FSS can discover.
    Sorry bud, this is a long discussion and things are going to get a bit mixed up here and there. But can we be clear with this point - I've not said there are things which can only be discovered via the FSS. I'm talking about probability and practicality, not absolute possibility.

    Originally Posted by Riverside View Post (Source)
    If things only the FSS can discover are added:

    Once it has been discovered by anyone, a player not using the FSS screen itself in the current version of the game will be able to find it without using the FSS Scanner Screen because whatever it is will have been tagged by another player.
    Oh, is that right is it?

    Well luckily I've got a new Alt in the bubble, so I double checked something...

    Pics or it didn't happen and all that.

    I'm going straight to the correct body here, so please extrapolate this out to someone who doesn't know it's there...


    1. Enter system. Get ADS style map.


    2. SC out in that direction and old-style DSS scan the GG on the way.


    3. FSS Passive Scan detects and scans the moons. (Can't be avoided, at least not without deactivating modules, as the passive scan range is greater than than the old-style DSS scan range for a body that size).


    4. Check the SysMap


    &

    4. Check the Nav Panel


    Nothing to see here Guv, just some Water Geysers. Right?... Not really worth bothering with.


    But wait, I've just FSS scanned it, and what's this?!


    It's a known bug! (But that's an aside.) Let's Map it. What's that there now?!


    That's slightly odd. I'm going to check it out. Oh hello! This is strange, what's this all about?

    (Genuine Spoiler below.)



    Obviously some things do appear in the Codex, but where they do it's still only 1 location per region. If people rely on that, they're going to miss out on finding other locations, and on the possibility of finding Unreported things for themselves.


    Originally Posted by Riverside View Post (Source)
    In addition every player now has a built-in FSS to detect it with anyway, that they choose not to use it & miss out should be their choice to make.
    If they know that they're opting to miss out on things then fine. The point is that a lot of people would not have known. For a lot it would have not been a choice of that nature, and why should they have to miss out on things just because they didn't realise they'd would be missing out on things when they made their choice?

    Originally Posted by Riverside View Post (Source)
    If the ADS-style mechanism isn't updated to allow the new things to be found this would be a conscious gameplay choice by FDev. They can simply update the whole game instead of only their preferred bit. This is not a big obstacle, and even if the decision to needlessly restrict player agency is taken once again this still does not justify removing the old stuff, which will still function to discover the core game assets.
    Well as I said though it's not just about new stuff, it was also about all the existing stuff. The whole point I've been making has been about the disparity between the ADS mechanism as-it-was and the FSS mechanism as-it-is, and why it was never as simple as just having the Old alongside the New due to that disparity, and how people deal with change. I think I've been quite clear that I was never saying there weren't other alternatives.

    Originally Posted by Riverside View Post (Source)

    So far in the game, I have not done anything significant with the Thargoids. I've found a barnacle, killed a few scouts, that's it. I realise I need special weapons to take on a big Thargoid, if I wanted to take a pop at one I'd just fit the modules. I didn't find this out from meeting a Thargoid, I found it out by reading the module descriptions in outfitting & made a personal choice.
    Was it a previously undiscovered Barnacle? And do you mean you found it pre 3.3 or post 3.3?

    But with the outfitting point, you're someone who's very active on the forums. Could you honestly say that you're not at least partially informed
    on that particular matter as a result? What do you think the position would be for someone who doesn't come to the forums or reddit/youtube/etc. ?


    Originally Posted by Riverside View Post (Source)
    There are no scenarios that justify the removal of the old modules. Your argument hinges on FDev deciding that it is better for those stubborn few to not explore at all rather than to explore in a potentially limited fashion. This is a churlish stance that I do not believe FDev would take if they realised it could have been avoided.
    Come on now, can we please not go down the route of disregarding what I've actually been saying and claiming that my argument hinges on something completely different which isn't what I was saying, and isn't an implication of what I was saying.

    Look, I've explained it a lot now, and despite that you still insist there's no scenario. Which is fine if it's a disagreement with what I'm actually saying, but it just seems odd when you're then citing reasons which invoke things which aren't part of what I said. There's a breakdown in communication somewhere, and honestly, I'm trying to avoid that as much as I can.

    Let me try and put it another way in terms of what you said above...

    If a problem could be avoided, but avoiding it would cause another problem, how would you decide what to do? And if you think the problem that would be caused is larger than the one that would be avoided, and act on that basis, is that churlish?

    Originally Posted by Riverside View Post (Source)
    So it boils down to this:

    If it was a Design decision it failed, because the complete functionality remains in the game with an additional filter that stops it working if something isn't tagged. No code simplification, no reduction in complexity. They may as well have left the modules in & saved some time, and avoided frustrating some players.

    If it was a Marketing decision it failed because no new sales will be generated by the removal of a gameplay feature, and no new sales would be lost by leaving it in. There was a cost with no benefit.

    If it was an oversight it just needs to be corrected ASAP.


    Whether they are added back into the game or not, there was no benefit to removing them, only a needless cost.
    That all completely disregards everything about how people deal with change and how that interacts with this particular situation, and the consequences that result from that.

    Disregarding that stuff is not going to help, because FD are not going to be obliged to similarly disregard it when considering their options and people's proposals. Seriously, please just consider what I'm saying here.

  13. #1528
    Originally Posted by Thatchinho View Post (Source)
    Seriously, please just consider what I'm saying here.
    I'm going to keep this reply deliberately short Thatchinho.

    I appreciate the time you have put into constructing your post, but you have introduced no new points to the conversation with this post, I have already addressed all of your points in the post you replied to. There is plenty of subjective justification for introducing a new tool and encouraging it's use, there is no objective justification for removing the old ones. They just need to be put back in the game:

    A More Advanced Discovery Scanner

  14. #1529
    Does anybody else besides me find it interesting that the Exploration sub doesn't have a single thread dedicated to complaining to the FSS/demanding the ADS back? In fact, I couldn't even find any complaint posts over there, much less dedicated threads. What does that tell us?

  15. #1530
    Originally Posted by Thatchinho View Post (Source)
    Sorry bud, this is a long discussion and things are going to get a bit mixed up here and there. But can we be clear with this point - I've not said there are things which can only be discovered via the FSS. I'm talking about probability and practicality, not absolute possibility.
    I admire your patience, I really do! But I'm not surprised about the result. Hope you'll mentally survive this treadmill of a discussion and wish you good look.