Max, I would appreciate it if you would take the time to read & fully understand what is being requested. For clarity the functionality currently only available for tagged & pre-populated systems would require the fitment of a module (the old ADS) to work in virgin & partially tagged systems.
Allow use of pre 3.3 Advanced Discovery Scanner
- Thread starter ThatSmileyGuy
- Start date
Max, I would appreciate it if you would take the time to read & fully understand what is being requested. For clarity the functionality currently only available for tagged & pre-populated systems would require the fitment of a module (the old ADS) to work in virgin & partially tagged systems.
Am I right in saying that you just want the ADS back in the game if so:
As long as it is mutually exclusive with the FSS, thats fine by me. There needs to be some challange to tag systems instead of having them handed to you on a plate which is what it would be if both were available at the same time. Either search for them using the FSS or us the old style ADS and fly in a straight line, not both.
Challenge? Are you saying that using the FSS to locate bodies is difficult?
So long as there's no crossover of targeting information between the system map and the FSS then you would indeed still use it to both locate and scan / tag bodies. There's simply no point in using the 'workaround' of opening the system map, identifying with a degree of certainty a body you want to cherry pick, target it, leave the system map, point your ship at the targeted body in SC, throttle to zero, enter the FSS and then tune the frequency so you can scan it. And that's just one body, I can't imagine what a dismal experience it would be to do it for multiple bodies.
Ok, I'm speaking for myself here, perhaps I'm exceptionally skilled at using the FSS (I really doubt it), but it's so quick and easy to find bodies and scan systems using it, I can only imagine people who absolutely loathed using it would even consider doing the above method rather than just scan the system (or cherry pick the body) using the FSS.
To me, it's just a total non issue. I cannot imagine people playing (and certainly not enjoying) the game by using the locating workaround. But hey, if somebody wants to do it that way, why would I care. To think of that scenario as being some kind of exploit, cheat or easy mode is IMO very far fetched.
What has challange got to do with difficulty?
Depends on what you want to do regarding exploration. I can see people doing that. As to a dismal experience, it is no more dismal the the old ADS was. Which was Honk, open system map, if there was anything interesing fly in straight line to destination (very rare that you needed to avoid gravity wells), if not jump. Just as dismal.
I would agree that it is a bit too easy to find planets. I don't like that the spectrum analysis actually tells you what planet you will find. That should be something you learn.
Good for you. If you are not going to do the above example, having it mutually exlusive shouldn't effect you in any way, so you shouldn't be opposed to it then. For me it does effect me. It's another nail in the coffin of ED lore (there are already lots, I don't want more). For me the lore is important, just as important as the mechanics.
![[Diplomacy] Carnegie](https://forums-cdn.zaonce.net/data/avatars/m/123/123809.jpg?1553527149){kind=avatar}
That's EXACTLY what this and every other suggestion has been requesting.
I'm 100% sure it CAN be implemented since the functionality to support it is still present in the game. All that needs to happen is for the 'already discovered by someone else' filter on the honk to be removed if the module is present. It's literally one line of code.
Can you point me at the lore explaining why my ADS spontaneously disappeared, or why my old-DSS continues to function even though it spontaneously disappeared too?
Honestly, if you think your head-canon should get in the way of someone else's gameplay then you really should take a long, hard look at your priorities.
I just pretend that abomination never existed in the first place. Happy to forget it forever.
I have looked at my priorities and they are just fine thanks. And I am not trying to get in the way of people's game play.
That is because they are, after having it explained to them still incapable of grasping the problem. Endlessly disagreeing with something when you dont really understand whats being said is pretty irrelevant really isnt it? I assume thats whats going anyway.
For someone who prefers the new system there is no problem at all, it doesn't matter how you word it as it doesn't effect them and therefore isn't a problem.
That is just a terribly crass attempt at smearing. People that are happy to get along with the new system understand full well that some of you are just so disappointed to lose the ADS that you even had the temerity to put in your signature at one point that you had "suffered a great injustice".
I have told you often enough (as have others) that we supported the proposal in beta that the ADS be retained with a reduced function and the FSS be introduced as an enhanced feature to use if desired. We didn't get it, we got the new system and had to get used to it (which was painless) - some of you however just keep complaining like a dog with a bone.
Its like asking me if i care that somebody down the street had their car stolen. Its no skin off my nose.
No, no its not and please dont put words into my mouth. I have come to understand that this game has people of all ages and abilitys playing. Some of them simply cant grasp the problem.
That was on an unrelated issue. Forum rules prevent me from discussing it.
Last edited:
...thereby increasing the workload of the developers; who will now have to maintain two different features that do the same thing. Meaning when one thing changes, they have to replicate that change on the other feature.
I know, as a developer, I wouldn't be too happy about having to maintain a legacy feature for a small minority of people who can't / won't adapt.
This right here is the key. That is the point i'm trying to highlight: "to use if desired".
Claiming You have supported the ADS to be retained i find it hard to understand Your remark. It is natural that people would like to express their disappointment. After all, it is the feedback FDev asked for.
It is as if You were trying to say, post update, that You either like the new system and get along or You have nothing to say.
I find it sad that most of the dicussion about changes in Elite are met with such responses. But that's me getting sidetracked here.
Regarding the first quote, that's all i'm asking to be taken into consideration. Maybe we could, in one form or another, bring ADS for sake of allowing explorers to choose their tyle of gameplay. I opened this thread in hopes that maybe Us, the community could come up with a way to make that work. Better explain the nature of the request. See if We could come up with ideas to satisfy both parties.
The remark was specifically about people who have refused to engage with the new system and just keep complaining about it. Some of us have just accepted it's presence and got on with accommodating it at worst and welcoming it at best, some have just moaned.
P.S. Note the proposal in beta was for the ADS to be altered to give a minimal display, requiring the FSS function to gather detail - not for the outright retention of the ADS as an alternative - that just isn't going to happen.
As a developer You should know that some legacy features are in fact kept for sake of for example backward compatibility. But that's not the issue we are here to discuss.
ADS has been in the game for a long time now. It might not have been perfect mind You, but if it has proven working for such a long time there doesn't seem to be much maintaining to be done. I do not claim to be one hundred percent correct here.
Please re-read the thread to get a better understanding of what features of old system are mentioned. Those two don't do the same thing.
As Para Handy said, ADS was requested to stay in game in a manner that FSS would be another way to carry out exploration for the willing to use the system.
Neither can You say that it's a small minority of players who would like to see the return of the feature(then again, neither can I prove that the minority is not in fact small).
read my post from above:
"... Some of us have just accepted it's presence and got on with accommodating it at worst and welcoming it at best, some have just moaned."
"P.S. Note the proposal in beta was for the ADS to be altered to give a minimal display, requiring the FSS function to gather detail - not for the outright retention of the ADS as an alternative - that just isn't going to happen."
How small does this minority have to be before it becomes acceptable to just exclude them? We all paid for the game as it was advertised. For every vocal poster i suspect theer are many who said nothing. As you say there is no proof so i could be off but my feeling is that i am not.
This still doesnt explain why the endless nay saying. If people had just got on with it and held a truely neutral attitude to all this, then why do they keep posting?