Allow use of pre 3.3 Advanced Discovery Scanner

[lenna]

Mixing the FSS with the ADS is on the same order as running 2 OS's side by side.

Not really even close to being the same thing. Theoretically though, (with certain reasonable limits) you can run as different many OS's as you like side by side - you just have to use the right tools.

You'd need to relog to change it. Well, I guess you wouldn't have to, but having 2 different types of discovery scanner (notice I say Discovery Scanner as opposed to mapping or other specialized type of scanner) side by side just doesn't seem workable to me.

Essentially, the "mapping part" is what people are asking for - but essentially that is the only thing the DS scanner did - identify the positions of unexplored suns/planets/planetoids/moons/asteroid-clusters for further investigation.

I know some on both sides are being pedantic and referring to the desired module as the ADS but it is the end effect people are after rather than the specific module.

 

[Shinji Ikari]

I prefer Bassfish.

I prefer Stockfish 10.

 

[[Diplomacy] Carnegie]

Not really even close to being the same thing. Theoretically though, (with certain reasonable limits) you can run as different many OS's as you like side by side - you just have to use the right tools.

If we're going to persist in using this wildly inaccurate analogy

Since the ADS functionality still exists in explored systems and the FSS simply provides an additional layer of UI functionality on top, then the FSS would be equivalent to Windows and the ADS to opening up a Cmd prompt. Both systems provide the same results, performed in different ways, with personal preference being the only differentiator.

 

[lenna]

Both systems provide the same results, performed in different ways, with personal preference being the only differentiator.

Essentially true, but also not true in the same breath - the ADS and FSS have overlap BUT they do not directly provide the same results in themselves.

Neither analogies are good enough to justify their persistence in this thread - my comment regarding the multi-OS analogy was more to highlight the flaws in that line of argument than anything else.

If we are going to pick an appropriate analogy though - the FSS is a tripod-mounted-telescope/pair-of-spotting-binoculars plus some recording method, and the ADS is a surface navigation radar system.

The FSS allows for long-range focused search and identification, the ADS pretty much just indicates where things are and requires additional tools/methods for identification.

 

[Skip Rockbounder]

Could you write that a bit louder please...

WHAT?

 

[CMDR Karrde Sun]

Since the ADS functionality still exists in explored systems

It doesn’t actually.. The credits function but we know frontier took care of that. The discovery aspect is gone.. it’s automatically done even before you honk.

If you take a bullet list of the entire set of changes you can rationalise it though it’s disagreeable.

 

[[Diplomacy] Carnegie]

It doesn’t actually.. The credits function but we know frontier took care of that. The discovery aspect is gone.. it’s automatically done even before you honk.

If you take a bullet list of the entire set of changes you can rationalise it though it’s disagreeable.

You honk, your System Map gets populated. The only difference now is that there's a filter on the System Map for 'discovered by somebody' that controls what you see. The FSS just sets the 'discovered by somebody' flag when you win the blue-blob minigame and refreshes the SysMap*. It's the honk that tells you how many bodies are in the system, not the FSS screen.

The fact that the old-DSS still works on 'Unexplored' bodies tells me (with my vast experience of doing the same thing) that the developers did the absolute minimum of new coding and just modified what was there, slinging a new UI on top to make it look all shiny new.

I mean, it still makes the same damn noise

Edit:
* actually, it probably doesn't, given that you can't access the SysMap from within the FSS

 

[CMDR Karrde Sun]

....

The system map is there before you honk in pre discovered systems...! Participation reward map. You know the thing that some people demand must be opened in the most excruciating way available?

Yep thats what the fss does in those systems.

I also found it strange that the point at method still works. It always did even without the old dss.. not sure if it pulls in the detailed info or not. Considering flash scanning exists it almost feels like a bug, or fell though the first pass implementation.

 

[[Diplomacy] Carnegie]

The system map is there before you honk in pre discovered systems...! Participation reward map. You know the thing that some people demand must be opened in the most excruciating way available?

Yep thats what the fss does in those systems.

Ssshhh!
We don't talk about that. It's telepresence for cartographic data

 

[Riverside]

Here's a video of entering a system that's already fully tagged, but new to me.

 

[lenna]

Here's a video of entering a system that's already fully tagged, but new to me.

Yup - the actual level of coding required for the proposed ADS-replacement/SMC should actually be pretty minimal. The nuts and bolts of the near-body scans and populating the map are already there. The required testing impact should also be minimal.

 

[lenna]

I also found it strange that the point at method still works. It always did even without the old dss.. not sure if it pulls in the detailed info or not. Considering flash scanning exists it almost feels like a bug, or fell though the first pass implementation.

The old DSS was not a pre-requisite for near-body scanning - it just enabled a certain level of information being available, with the tangible rewards scaled accordingly. I see no rationale where the retention of the near-object/near-signal scanning could legitimately be considered either a bug or an oversight.

Regardless, the overriding point is that the actual LOE required to implement the proposal should be relatively minimal - fixing the bugs in the FSS is likely to be orders of magnitude higher, the blue blobs in the FSS are STILL not even visible in VR for example - that is despite the issue being picked up during the Betas for 3.3.

 

[CMDR Karrde Sun]

The old DSS was not a pre-requisite for near-body scanning - it just enabled a certain level of information being available, with the tangible rewards scaled accordingly. I see no rationale where the retention of the near-object/near-signal scanning could legitimately be considered either a bug or an oversight.

Regardless, the overriding point is that the actual LOE required to implement the proposal should be relatively minimal - fixing the bugs in the FSS is likely to be orders of magnitude higher, the blue blobs in the FSS are STILL not even visible in VR for example - that is despite the issue being picked up during the Betas for 3.3.

I don’t use VR, but amazed it doesn’t work, I thought vr has always been one of Elites main marketing points. Never saw any complaints making it to dd either so..

Yeah I like the flash scanning, the point and wait scanning feels unwelcome (‘hey I was flying to that don’t scan it!!!’) every time it happens

 

[lenna]

I don’t use VR, but amazed it doesn’t work, I thought vr has always been one of Elites main marketing points. Never saw any complaints making it to dd either so..

There were allegedly (by FD during the 3.3 Beta) issues with the shaders responsible for this aspect, and the problem was not fixed at release - it does however seem to have been fixed in a recent update (finally!). With the blobs visible the mechanics are not quite as bad, but there are still other aspects of the FSS mechanics that could do with (IMO) significant improvement. That is however a bit moot in regards to the topic of this thread - although it does highlight that the FSS is still pretty much a work in progress.

Yeah I like the flash scanning, the point and wait scanning feels unwelcome (‘hey I was flying to that don’t scan it!!!’) every time it happens

The fundamental issue in play is that not everyone likes the FSS scanning mechanics (even for just flash scanning what is ahead of them). The near-body/point-and-wait scanning is however more palatable for some, even if it takes longer.

FD have been totally inconsistent with their treatment of the development of exploration mechanics versus other mechanics. For example, they auto-mutated the engineering of pre-3.3 engineered DSS modules while leaving engineered weapons alone when they changed to the cumulative engineering methodology. In addition, mining retained the old asteroid mining mechanics while adding the new mechanics in. The removal of the ADS and their overall approach to redeveloping the engineering mechanics in the first place is both inconsistent with their own game evolution charter and their approach to developing other gameplay. They removed options when they should not have, but ultimately adding the proposed ADS-replacement/SMC as an option would help to address that issue.

 

[Faded Glory]

There were allegedly (by FD during the 3.3 Beta) issues with the shaders responsible for this aspect, and the problem was not fixed at release - it does however seem to have been fixed in a recent update (finally!). With the blobs visible the mechanics are not quite as bad, but there are still other aspects of the FSS mechanics that could do with (IMO) significant improvement. That is however a bit moot in regards to the topic of this thread - although it does highlight that the FSS is still pretty much a work in progress.

Just for accuracy (I play in VR - Rift), the blue blob indicators were missing in the first beta, and that was fixed initially for the Rift, but not I think the Vive at the time, in the second. I gather that we are still missing some elements in VR such as orbit lines, but TBH that never bothered me. Not having the gravity wells indicated certainly made it much less usable.

I think as regards FD's development strategy, they are clearly aware of long term and possibly quite widespread issues with the game, not just in exploration, but overall, such as SC being passive and some would say dull, the challenge for players to find things on life size planets using lat / long coordinates and no navigation aid.

I do recall at the time they announced that they were working on exploration, so long before the actual mechanics were revealed, that they mentioned they were coming up with a new way to find things, including mission targets. Sounded good, because frankly the RNG nature of stuff finding the player rather than the player finding stuff is pretty weak, and removes a huge amount of potential gameplay! Instead of the game saying go to this place and find that thing, it's go to this place and wait for that thing to show up.

Looking back on that, I can see that the FSS is intended to address these things while providing hands on gameplay.

The problem is that if you don't enjoy the gameplay, it doesn't help, and while the need to use the FSS in the bubble is optional, it's not while exploring. I would never use the FSS to find mission targets, in many cases they are revealed anyway as soon as you enter the system (or they attack you - so we're back to the underlying issue of stuff finding us, not vice versa), and when looking for USS's, the fact that to the FSS a USS is a USS, meaning that the RNG simply requires one to bang through 20 or so signal sources until you find the one you are interested in. Again, if you enjoy the gameplay that's a benefit, but if you don't all it really does is highlight the RNG.

Anyway, fortunately no need to actually do any of that. Scan the nav beacon, USS, mission targets are all revealed. That's really all they need to do with exploration. Accept that not everybody likes the FSS gameplay and provide alternatives, the easiest of which would be to provide an optional system map reveal as that would enable those who like to fly and scan to do that, and allow those looking for anomalies and oddities to spot them. Players who like the FSS, enjoy the gameplay and the benefits it provides would be in no way affected.

 

[KellyR]

Not really even close to being the same thing. Theoretically though, (with certain reasonable limits) you can run as different many OS's as you like side by side - you just have to use the right tools.


Essentially, the "mapping part" is what people are asking for - but essentially that is the only thing the DS scanner did - identify the positions of unexplored suns/planets/planetoids/moons/asteroid-clusters for further investigation.

I know some on both sides are being pedantic and referring to the desired module as the ADS but it is the end effect people are after rather than the specific module.

You do a honk to establish an orbital plane. If you have the the optional ADS, this negates the FSS. If you have the optional ADS scanner, it scans for the position of all planets. The FSS itself without the ADS is actually quicker than flying to each body you want to scan because you can tell on the tuning dial where planets are (on the dial)/ Dial them in and then start panning around using the orbit lines. That's why I say it's somewhat akin to running 2 OS's side by side. Provided FD put it in place, each login, you'd have to choose to use the ADS or the FSS. Otherwise the FSS would be overridden by the ADS. This is similar to a boot loader.

If you want to map the surface, you have a surface scanner. But you still have to fly to the body. But the FSS doesn't map bodies. It detects composition of bodies. So it's the ADS with the old way having to have a DSS and fly to each body, or the FSS and be able to find the position and composition of each body at long range. Both FSS and ADS) won't work together.

 

[[Diplomacy] Carnegie]

You do a honk to establish an orbital plane. If you have the the optional ADS, this negates the FSS. If you have the optional ADS scanner, it scans for the position of all planets. The FSS itself without the ADS is actually quicker than flying to each body you want to scan because you can tell on the tuning dial where planets are (on the dial)/ Dial them in and then start panning around using the orbit lines. That's why I say it's somewhat akin to running 2 OS's side by side. Provided FD put it in place, each login, you'd have to choose to use the ADS or the FSS. Otherwise the FSS would be overridden by the ADS. This is similar to a boot loader.

If you want to map the surface, you have a surface scanner. But you still have to fly to the body. But the FSS doesn't map bodies. It detects composition of bodies. So it's the ADS with the old way having to have a DSS and fly to each body, or the FSS and be able to find the position and composition of each body at long range. Both FSS and ADS) won't work together.

Yes, we know how they work, but what you haven't explained is why they can't work together. You just keep stating it as if it's a fact.

There is absolutely no reason why the ADS and FSS can't coexist. Frags coexist with beams, multicannons and pulses and they all do the same job, just like the FSS and ADS.

 

[lenna]

Just for accuracy (I play in VR - Rift), the blue blob indicators were missing in the first beta, and that was fixed initially for the Rift, but not I think the Vive at the time, in the second. I gather that we are still missing some elements in VR such as orbit lines, but TBH that never bothered me. Not having the gravity wells indicated certainly made it much less usable.

If you mean orbit lines outside of FSS, then I have seen them with an NVIDIA GTX 1080 Ti/VIVE Pro combo. At release of 3.3 and before one of the most recent updates the blobs were not visible on the VIVE. As for gravity wells, I am guessing you mean the concentric circles on the HUD on approach to bodies while in super cruise - if so those have been visible in the VR (VIVE) since I started using VR with Elite.

 

[Skip Rockbounder]

You do a honk to establish an orbital plane. If you have the the optional ADS, this negates the FSS. If you have the optional ADS scanner, it scans for the position of all planets. The FSS itself without the ADS is actually quicker than flying to each body you want to scan because you can tell on the tuning dial where planets are (on the dial)/ Dial them in and then start panning around using the orbit lines. That's why I say it's somewhat akin to running 2 OS's side by side. Provided FD put it in place, each login, you'd have to choose to use the ADS or the FSS. Otherwise the FSS would be overridden by the ADS. This is similar to a boot loader.

If you want to map the surface, you have a surface scanner. But you still have to fly to the body. But the FSS doesn't map bodies. It detects composition of bodies. So it's the ADS with the old way having to have a DSS and fly to each body, or the FSS and be able to find the position and composition of each body at long range. Both FSS and ADS) won't work together.

Can we just stop the comparisons to the operating system and the rubbish about logging out and logging back in.
You press the honk and either look at the System map or go to the FSS. ( you don't even have to stop just shut the throttle down... god knows why though)
Honking without attempting to use the FSS means we can spool up the FSD while looking for what's there (on the map)... that's it really.
If you don't want to look at the map then don't have it, many players never looked anyway, they just used the side panel.
It's not that difficult to understand, really, if you find you want to stay after looking at the system map then you can either FSS if you wan't to do it and be done with it, or you can select planets to leisurely fly to using the map, or scan nothing and just leave... what's the problem?
that is just the same or a damn sight quicker than it was pre 3.3 if you FSS

 

[Riverside]

It's worth bearing in mind that when you have [unexplored] contacts in the nav panel the blobs aren't resolved in the FSS. To resolve them still requires the exact same search as it does in a virgin system.

This can be tested in-game in a previously tagged system (eg some unpopulated brown dwarf in the bubble you haven't previously scanned).