Page 16 of 16 First 12141516
Results 226 to 235 of 235

Thread: Why FSS mode must stay

  1. #226
    Originally Posted by Max Factor View Post (Source)
    Except they were not semactics as that word changed the whole meaning of the sentence. You were wrong, plain and simple and now you are just trying to brush it aside with semantics.
    Yes, I was wrong in recalling that you used the word "interesting" where you didn't. So? It was an honest mistake, and I said why I mistook your meaning.
    You might think that "my posts are pretty easy to undersand [sic] unless you are a very small infant.", but you're making some assumptions there yourself.

    Edit: just adding this here instead of a new post because this is going off-topic fast. You seem to be assuming that anyone who speaks English knows perfectly well what you mean, as "your posts are pretty easy to understand" unless they are very small infants. Yet people from outside the UK will have not just different levels of knowledge of English, but will also come from different cultures as well, and might misunderstand what you think you meant, especially if your meaning hinges on one or two words.
    For example, where I'm from, the word "unique" also implies "interesting". I only learned just now that in English, it doesn't. I still think that it doesn't is a bit silly though, but hey, I'm not one to change a language.

  2. #227
    Originally Posted by marx View Post (Source)
    Yes, I was wrong in recalling that you used the word "interesting" where you didn't. So? It was an honest mistake, and I said why I mistook your meaning.
    You might think that "my posts are pretty easy to undersand [sic] unless you are a very small infant.", but you're making some assumptions there yourself.
    I am not assuming anything. Just stating my opinion.

  3. #228
    Originally Posted by Max Factor View Post (Source)
    I am not assuming anything. Just stating my opinion.
    Are you sure​ you don't assume anything?

  4. #229
    Hello. I quite like the FSS and hope that it stays.

    That isn't to say it's perfect but it adds far more to the game than it takes away. My main reservation was that it would slow down travel and obfuscate the content of systems, but actually in practice that's not been an issue for me.

    Where I'd like to see FD improve is on how they hone and improve processes. There is some good feedback here, even from the worst of the whingers, but I don't think FD have been, historically, that great at iterating on ideas, which is a real shame.

    Just my two penneth, please do carry on.

    Aps.

  5. #230
    Originally Posted by Gregg Rulz ok View Post (Source)
    Are you sure​ you don't assume anything?
    Not in that post anyway. We all assume, the trick is not to act on your assumptions until we know for sure. But I do admit it is sometimes difficult not to.

  6. #231
    Can we get this thread back on track? General assumptions about each other and nitpicking wording when many are not native English speakers (and those that are probably get lost in dialect differences anyway) will not really move the discussion in any useful direction.

    I'd like to add to the partial list of reasons to keep the FSS/DSS combo in something close to their current form: These exploration tools not only give a bit of game to play with during the system scanning process; they also provide a platform and an entry for new stuff to be added to the game.

    If something should go it should be the System Map. Not entirely disappear - it is after all one of two displays of the data gathered by the FSS and DSS. But right now it appears tacked onto the FSS/DSS system. So:

    - Make it empty when entering a new, unexplored system.
    - Add stars only on first scan. But there could be some graphic indication of mass distribution, even if just a histogram.
    - Add data to it as scans progresses. Maybe the layout should be unassuming about orbital configurations until that can be established through the FSS.
    - Integrate the DSS outcome with the System Map better. I would like to see all data gathered on planets in the System Map: Number and type of geology and biology, ring type and anomalies encountered.
    - Add positions and type of Lagrange Clouds and NSPs to the System Map.

    In short, make it look a bit more scientific and better connected to the FSS/DSS functionality, as well as to the Codex.

    S

  7. #232
    Originally Posted by Sysmon View Post (Source)
    Can we get this thread back on track?
    I very much doubt it

  8. #233
    Hey all,

    Apologies for the necroing the thread. Just wanted to respond to Marx's substantial and considered reply.

    Marx, sorry about the delayed response, real life stuff going on.

    Originally Posted by marx View Post (Source)
    Oh, then here's the case. Prior to the FSS, I could determine whether a system is worth investigating, and if not, jump out, in 45 seconds. To get the same level of information, I'd have to scan each and every body in the system. So let's be generous and use only three minutes per system on average. (Obviously depends on how many bodies a system has now, and whether any are in "unfortunate" positions from the arrival point.) So, how many systems does it take to find some very rare ones? It goes into the tens of thousands, so let's go with ten thousand systems. I and others have found stuff with worse odds. Now, prior to the FSS, that would have taken 125 hours. A whole lot, but humanly doable - plus the process was relaxing, and didn't demand much attention.

    After the FSS, it would be 500 hours. Ouch. Technically still doable, but that's 500 hours of a simple, repetitive minigame that does demand your attention. Best of luck finding anyone who will fully scan 10,000 systems. Even then, they might not find what they were looking for - for example, a set of five planets around four interacting barycenters took me a bit over 50,000 systems, and since last I heard, Allitnil found two or three such, over thrice as many systems, I suppose that would be a good ratio. To find one now, one would have to spend literally thousands of hours doing nothing but playing the FSS. Hence why I said it's practically impossible.
    Thanks for taking the time to give a good illustration of your position.

    Anyway, I do get where you're coming from, but I think when evaluating the pros and cons of the FSS, the effects on various different types of exploration styles and interests have to be considered.

    If we consider the time taken to decide whether a system is worth investigating, then as I see it, we had a situation that for one type of interest, the time was approx 45 seconds, whereas for others it could be hours/days/weeks. That situation no appears to be that for one type of interest it's now 3 minutes on average, versus 4 to 6 minutes on average (due to the time taken for the FSS to resolve signals on planets with vulcanism.)

    Overall it's a significant reduction in the time needed to make a decision. Ok, that's no help to anyone who has little or no interest in the things for which the time has been reduced, but ultimately it's still going to be important in terms of the overall value of the changes.

    Originally Posted by marx View Post (Source)
    This ties in with the problem of the galaxy: if you hide something out there, and it's not around a nebula, and you give no hints towards it, then it most likely will never be found. The galaxy is simply far too big. So, FD either has to give hints, and quite specific hints - the system name of the Zurara had to be literally spelled out as a hint before it was found, after years of surveying the Formidine Rift - or they'll know they placed something that nobody will likely find. Why would they do that?
    The game we all bought is the game with the big galaxy. IMHO that needs to be accepted to a certain extent. As to why they would place anything with a high likelihood no one will find it - well there's always a chance someone will. So why not place a few Easter Eggs? And also, why not also have some plot significant things out there on the off chance that someone does stumble across it naturally, rather than it having to be found via a trail? - the trail can always be added or activated if it becomes critical to do so.

    Originally Posted by marx View Post (Source)
    So, Guardian sites might exist outside of nebulae. For practical purposes though, they might as well not even exist. The burden of proof would be on those who'd claim that they do exist though.
    Well the thing here is that the majority of Guardian sites aren't in nebulae. It's just the small remote areas that are in nebulae. So there's no inherent Nebulae connection. And the search method used is inherently heavily biased towards finding Guardian sites in Nebulae, enough in my view to mean that it's not safe to conclude that they only exists in Nebulae. A few other things to consider here:

    - Ram Tah has said that other distant sites exist.
    -----------------------------------------
    Guardian Logs 23/28 : Technology Log – Starship Technology This log is unusual – it appears to refer to another group of Guardian sites, far from the ones we’ve already discovered. I realise that might sound disappointing, but in fact this find is extremely important. The log suggests these undiscovered sites might contain blueprints not only for Guardian engines, but for Guardian starships! Just think — someday soon, we might uncover a Guardian ruin that will allow us to manufacture ships and fighters incorporating Guardian technology. It makes my skin _prickle just to think of it. And who knows — maybe you’ll be the one to find it.
    ----------------------------------------

    All the distant areas so far have all been Ancient Ruins, and Blueprints can't be obtained at these so those can't be the areas referred to. No sites of other types have been found in Nebulae yet (AFAIK) so as it stands they could be anywhere (though of course, there's nothing to say that they are actually in-game and accessible at this point in time).

    - Why would the Guardians only build remote areas in Nebulae? (My personal hypothesis is that the reason for remote sites being in Nebulae is due to the Guardians chasing a very useful resource which could be found in some of them - Meta Alloys.)

    - There may be ways of finding the locations of Guardian sites, which we're not yet aware of, and if not pointers can be provided:

    -- Melville claimed to have found a key to finding Guardian sites

    -- We don't yet know the meaning of the code in the sounds made by the obelisks

    -- Ram Tah has (apparently) been able to get some systems from the Guardian data / network

    Originally Posted by marx View Post (Source)
    By the way, the bigger problem gameplay-wise is that the more complex Guardian structures, the ones you need to do for the tech unlocks, don't exist outside the plot area next to the bubble. You can't unlock stuff if you're near Colonia.
    Not sure that constitutes a gameplay problem. It's just part of the game when playing in a big galaxy.

    Originally Posted by marx View Post (Source)
    Oh yeah, and that brain tree stuff: the farthest Guardian sites, around the Eorl Auwsy nebula, have brain trees around them that don't register in the Codex when scanned. So it might appear from the Codex only that that Guardian area doesn't have brain trees around them, but it does: the Codex is just bugged.
    Ah, no, this was somewhere in the main area. I went to a known site, and checked a selection of braintree eligible bodies in systems around it. I bug reported it in the Beta, and it got passed on for investigation. Like I say though, I've not been there to check in live, so it may well have just been a Beta bug.

    Originally Posted by marx View Post (Source)
    Heh, fair enough, that was a bit poorly phrased. So who expected more new content from the big exploration update, let's see... The vast majority of people who posted speculation and feedback on the update, DW2's organisers (they started doing so based on the promise of content only, there was nothing about new mechanics at the time).
    It's just odd to me when I hear this stuff. I paid a lot of attention to the streams etc. and presumably I didn't see anything that others weren't also able to watch. Anyway, from the Frontier Expo 2017 Content Reveal (where they talked about what Beyond was going to be about), in the section on Chapter 4:

    "we're going to go back and add and build on the systems, the processes and features we're putting in the game." "not just the core features, but also new features on top of that. We're looking at adding the Codex..." Ed talks about being excited about using the Codex in conjunction with the new exploration tools...

    Maybe there's a slight language gap going on, but to me that is very much saying there's going to be new mechanics.

    That was one of the earliest pieces from FD on what Beyond was going to contain IIRC. Personally I never saw anything which was contradictory to that and I certainly never saw anything saying 3.3 was going to be content only.

    I've got to wonder where the 'content only' take on things came from. Was this from discussions that the DW2 organisers had had prior to the announcement of Beyond? (If so, fair enough to a certain extent, but equally then that would have been superseded by the Beyond announcement and subsequent comms, so it'd be a little odd to maintain the view after being told that there will be new mechanics.)

    Originally Posted by marx View Post (Source)
    It's good for you that you personally didn't expect much in the way of new content, so that you weren't disappointed, but all the foundations aside, the fact still remains that for those who already knew what's in the game to find, there has been very little new out in the galaxy.
    Well, it's good for me in the sense of not being disappointed, but not good in the sense that I would have like more content. I do think it's reasonable however to not go all out on new content for the release of 3.3. I would say that a big part of 3.3 is levelling some of the disparity in awareness of and accessibility of things across different parts of the playerbase. That needs a bit of time to bed in, and people also need a bit of time to get used to the new mechanics. Everything there at the day of release of 3.3 would be heavily biased towards being discovered by people who frequent the forums etc., and even more so the subset of that people who participated in the Beta.

    Originally Posted by marx View Post (Source)
    Ah, I thought you meant regional differences, not specific nebulae in regions. Yeah, those do appear to have some differences, but only for finds which require a nearby nebula.
    Well, speaking of disappointment as we were above, I'm personally going to be a bit disappointed if there's not really any rationale behind where things are, and things are just placed by star/planet types and region, and the answer to how they came to be spread across different planets and systems is "we waved a magic wand". Having said that, I'm already resigned to there being a bit of that just to facilitate it being possible for people to actually find things!

    Originally Posted by marx View Post (Source)
    The thing is, the edge cases of the Stellar Forge weren't placed there specifically by the devs. Do you think that the quality of the NSPs (content and gameplay-wise) justifies their rarity?
    I wouldn't think that the NSPs are placed specifically by the devs either in general (though it's not inconceivable that some were). I would think they're placed by the Stellar Forge. Or more precisely I would think they're placed automatically when the Stellar Forge generates specific circumstances that match other criteria. Anyway, for me the simulation of the galaxy and adherence to sound general scientific principles (where it's practical to do so) is part of the game. So that might distort my answer from what you're meaning by your question. For me, it's how rare something should be that determines its rarity (or at least my view of what its rarity should be). If you're asking me what I think of the NSPs as though they're what's at the end of a long and arduous quest in a game, then I can't really answer that as that's not what they are to me.

    Anyway, just to be clear, me saying that there should be stuff which is rare doesn't mean I don't think there should also be stuff that isn't rare. It's just the nature of what the things are should tie in with how rare they are.

    Originally Posted by marx View Post (Source)
    Nah, my expectation is that in some months, they'll put up this new base which will buy samples at higher than the galactic average price, and that will be it.
    Ha ha ha! Well yeah, in fairness that's pretty possible.

    Oh, and in one of your other posts you were saying about language, and it sounded from what you said like you weren't a native English speaker. If I've understood that correctly, then I've got to say, your English is great, and I wouldn't have guessed you weren't a native speaker if you hadn't said!

  9. #234
    At first, I thought about making a new thread to reply to Thatchinho, but then decided against it. Not sure what its topic would be, after all.

    Originally Posted by Thatchinho View Post (Source)
    If we consider the time taken to decide whether a system is worth investigating, then as I see it, we had a situation that for one type of interest, the time was approx 45 seconds, whereas for others it could be hours/days/weeks.
    By the "hours/days/weeks" timeframe, are you referring to finding the exact locations of planetside geologicals / biologicals? Because you didn't need nearly as much time to know whether a system is worth looking at or not. Sure, you might have needed that much time to find them, but not to know whether you have a suitable candidate planet or not. Once you have scanned a body, the planetary information did (and still does) tell you if it has volcanism or not. For biologicals, the requirements were mostly worked out.
    The chief problem is that for a larger niche than the planetary surveyors you mentioned, you need to first scan a system (mostly) fully to get the information you could use to decide if the system might be worth scanning or not.

    Originally Posted by Thatchinho View Post (Source)
    Overall it's a significant reduction in the time needed to make a decision. Ok, that's no help to anyone who has little or no interest in the things for which the time has been reduced, but ultimately it's still going to be important in terms of the overall value of the changes.
    The DSS (not the FSS!) is going to be great for finding planetary content once said content will actually arrive. As it stands, contrary to what most expected, the big exploration update added precious little. The reception of it all might have been better if we had quality new stuff to look for, but well, it's looking for pretty much the same old stuff with different tools, which are not better in every aspect.

    Originally Posted by Thatchinho View Post (Source)
    As to why they would place anything with a high likelihood no one will find it - well there's always a chance someone will. So why not place a few Easter Eggs? And also, why not also have some plot significant things out there on the off chance that someone does stumble across it naturally, rather than it having to be found via a trail? - the trail can always be added or activated if it becomes critical to do so.
    I think you're asking the wrong question here. Why waste development time (= money!) on something that nobody will realistically find?
    Let's estimate things. According to EDSM, 60-80k new systems get discovered daily, so let's be generous and say that it's 80k on average. We don't know how much more exploration activity happens outside it, but let's go with the total discovered systems' 5x ratio from back a while ago, and say that players visit 400k new systems daily. There are 400 billion systems IIRC. Even if you decrease the total count each day as you should, the end result is going to be comparable to the chance to win most kinds of lotteries.
    Sure, technically there's always a chance that someone will find it. But if it's just randomly placed, and not restricted to a search area, it's just a mathematical possibility.
    However, let's not forget that we have experimental data as well. The game has been out for several years by now. How many times has anyone stumbled upon anything new and significant, or even just a simple Easter Egg, out in a random system, without any hints whatsoever? That would be zero.

    So, as I said, if you want something found, you'll have to give hints, ones that point to narrower search areas. As such, in the absence of hints, there's likely nothing to be found. The update has been out for two months now, and there has been nothing. (Or well, if there have been any hints on GalNet, they have certainly been very obscure ones - and if so, they would have mostly been intended as foreshadowing.)

    The only possibility now for new stuff is that FD are waiting for DW2 to leave behind Sag. A*, and only then will they "activate" something that's in DW2's way to find. Which, honestly, would be kind of a duck move for everyone else.

    Originally Posted by Thatchinho View Post (Source)
    Well the thing here is that the majority of Guardian sites aren't in nebulae. It's just the small remote areas that are in nebulae.
    Well, yes - I was talking about the small remote ruins, not the main plot area.

    Originally Posted by Thatchinho View Post (Source)
    And the search method used is inherently heavily biased towards finding Guardian sites in Nebulae, enough in my view to mean that it's not safe to conclude that they only exists in Nebulae.
    I can't rule out that they don't exist elsewhere, but all the Guardian stuff that has been found has either had hints (and strong ones at that) pointing towards them, or were around nebulae. To be frank, this is sounding like a Russell's teapot scenario. Let's just recap then: what is your point with more Guardian sites possibly existing outside of nebulae? I mean sure, they might exist, but if there were new kinds of Guardian content out there, not just more of the same, Frontier would have posted hints, if they want them found. Of course, why wouldn't they?

    Originally Posted by Thatchinho View Post (Source)
    Personally I never saw anything which was contradictory to that and I certainly never saw anything saying 3.3 was going to be content only.

    I've got to wonder where the 'content only' take on things came from. Was this from discussions that the DW2 organisers had had prior to the announcement of Beyond? (If so, fair enough to a certain extent, but equally then that would have been superseded by the Beyond announcement and subsequent comms, so it'd be a little odd to maintain the view after being told that there will be new mechanics.)
    Ah, sorry, looks like there was a misunderstanding here. To quote what I wrote: "So who expected more new content from the big exploration update, let's see... The vast majority of people who posted speculation and feedback on the update, DW2's organisers (they started doing so based on the promise of content only, there was nothing about new mechanics at the time)."
    I guess it would have been more clear if I wrote "they started doing so based only on the promise of content, there was nothing about new mechanics at the time". That doesn't mean new mechanics were ruled out, it just means that the promise of new exploration content was enough to get DW2 rolling, there wasn't any news on whether we'll get new mechanics or not.
    Well, in the end, we got new mechanics, and next to no new content.

    Honestly, I don't envy DW2's organisers here: there have already been murmurs from players that they'll be disappointed if the whole expedition doesn't find anything really new, but that's completely out of the organisers' hands. So if that happens, and the most probable scenario is that it will, they'll get some share of the disappointment even though it was through no fault of their own. Well, except not managing expectations, but when they wrote the mission statement and original objectives, it wasn't reasonable to expect that there won't be substantial new content, was it?

    Originally Posted by Thatchinho View Post (Source)
    I do think it's reasonable however to not go all out on new content for the release of 3.3.
    Not when it was supposed to the big update of the year, and the big exploration update of Beyond too. Of course, they could have - and should have - managed expectations on this front, but chose not to.

    Originally Posted by Thatchinho View Post (Source)
    I would say that a big part of 3.3 is levelling some of the disparity in awareness of and accessibility of things across different parts of the playerbase. That needs a bit of time to bed in, and people also need a bit of time to get used to the new mechanics. Everything there at the day of release of 3.3 would be heavily biased towards being discovered by people who frequent the forums etc., and even more so the subset of that people who participated in the Beta.
    So basically, exploration would have been biased towards the people who are most likely to be better at exploration. I'm sorry, but that's always going to be the case, even if you make information more accessible in-game to players - which is still a good thing, mind.

    But well, it has been two months since. Plenty of time has passed for bedding in and getting used to new mechanics. (Let's not forget that the new mechanics we are talking about are simple ones that take, what, less than an hour at worst to get proficient in?)

    Originally Posted by Thatchinho View Post (Source)
    Well, speaking of disappointment as we were above, I'm personally going to be a bit disappointed if there's not really any rationale behind where things are, and things are just placed by star/planet types and region, and the answer to how they came to be spread across different planets and systems is "we waved a magic wand". Having said that, I'm already resigned to there being a bit of that just to facilitate it being possible for people to actually find things!
    From the research I've done so far (see here - it didn't generate much activity though), that does appear to be the case. Region borders appear to be arbitrary, and finds can be turned off in regions. If they are present in a region, then they should be present on every suitable candidate planet. (The Codex sometimes lists requirements wrong though.)
    More mapping and whatnot will either confirm this, or disprove it, but that's becoming more and more unlikely with each passing day. But hey, if anybody will find amphora plants in the Inner Orion Spur, then I'll stand corrected - honestly, I'd prefer it if I were wrong.

    Originally Posted by Thatchinho View Post (Source)
    I wouldn't think that the NSPs are placed specifically by the devs either in general (though it's not inconceivable that some were). I would think they're placed by the Stellar Forge.
    No, I wouldn't think they are all hand-placed either (but some of them almost certainly are). However, that doesn't mean they couldn't adjust the relevant generation and weights of the Forge to make them less rare. (Or more, heh.) If I get this right, you assume that the rarity of Lagrangian clouds is due to how scientific their formation might be, and not tweaked by the devs to make for better gameplay, no? There is one big hole with that though: for whatever reason, they are far more frequent in the Inner Orion Spur than in any other region of the galaxy, including the well-travelled Inner Scutum-Centaurus Arm (where Colonia is). See here.
    Besides, while I'm not an expert in the field, I don't think we know enough to tell exactly how such clouds would form - there likely is plenty of leeway in tweaking the processes to yield different rarities.


    Oh, and off the topic: thanks for the compliment! One funny thing: you wrote that "I wouldn't have guessed you weren't a native speaker if you hadn't said!", but in the strictest sense, if I had actually said things, and not wrote them, then you could have told from my accent that I'm not from anywhere in the UK. Which would actually be better.

  10. #235