![[Diplomacy] Carnegie](https://forums-cdn.zaonce.net/data/avatars/m/123/123809.jpg?1553527149){kind=avatar}
Which is why we got a combination of land-based telescope and radio tuner.
Maybe if they'd read a couple of science-fiction books instead we'd have gotten something suitable for a 34th century spaceship.
Allow use of pre 3.3 Advanced Discovery Scanner
- Thread starter ThatSmileyGuy
- Start date
Which is why we got a combination of land-based telescope and radio tuner.
Maybe if they'd read a couple of science-fiction books instead we'd have gotten something suitable for a 34th century spaceship.
Funny you should say that, back in the old days of 'Traveller RPG' we had tech levels to set a standard, if a planet were offered tech too far in advance it would have no use for it...17th century and phone chargers might be a good example, and it seems to me that ED have something of a tech level assumption problem, where 20th/21st century hurdles are being placed for the sake of presumed gameplay for a 34th century game, it's almost as if FDev kinda 'winged it' at the beginning and set many things in concrete that with forethought would have been very different (the SuperConda is a prime example)
If we get legs are we going to have found a cure for gravity on board our non spinning ship? we have faster than light travel not just between the Stars but in system too, yet vehicles in general are tied to speeds far less than we have seen in the 21st century when not in that 'magic' cruisespace place, and we use a Telescope system tied into a Radiowave type device to resolve what a 'honk' has found gravitic* evidence of in an instant... but the said radiowave-o-scope only works when the engine is at no throttle and the FSD is not spooling up.
Edit... sorry for digressing a bit there, but it's kinda linked to the Gameplay, tech assumptions and thinking outta the box (sci-fi)
There were PvP vetrans who had their PvP experience ruined by the Engineers. Those Engineers completely unleveled the playing field thereby making PvP virtually untenable. I wasn't any great shakes at PvP but I did have a chance. Not now. Did I complain about the Engineers? Yeah, but not because of how it affected my PvP experience but because it's not really engineering. I knew arguing against it on the basis of my personal preference had no chance of doing anything constructive. So if you want to argue against this, find something that doesn't fit with physics. Don't argue it on personal preference. That will get you nothing but some typing practice.
Not really the same thing - the situations are not comparable. There have been PvP balancing concerns with Engineers and FD have attempted to address them without removing existing options most of the time. The same can not be said wrt FD's treatment of exploration mechanics.
And the FSS has been the new standard for how long? Give them a chance. They didn't address balancing PvP within the time range of when the FSS was introduced until now. Not even close. But don't argue it on personal preference. That's not going to get you very far, if at all. Address the physics of it.
Last edited:
That was an addition, not a substitution. If I don't like to use the engineers, I can simply forgo them. That's not the case with the FSS.
Wrong!! My personal agenda is rather irrelevant. Examples are only valid when they are supported by fact, not my (or anyone else's) opinion.
Yeah, you could forgo them. And be totally out-classed in PvP. To make it even close to tenable, you had to use the engineers. Otherwise the playing field would be so un-level you'd think you were in a black hole.
True, that doesn't refute what I said and FTR you can look for communities who still fight without engineered modules.
Sure you can look for them. That's no guarantee you'll find them. But the whole point of PvP is to be able to engage people on the fly. Whether you know them or not is irrelevant. I see someone with a bounty on his head, If I can pull him out of SC one of us is going to the rebuy screen or at the very least have some costly repairs. That's much more dangerous now than it was. To him and to me. Because for all I know he's engineered to the hilt. And if he's not, then it's more dangerous for him as I am somewhat engineered. Especially that corrosive shell MC
I think your example with the effect Engineering had on PvP has some parallels with some of the frustrations expressed about the new discovery process, both put busy work (which some enjoy & others do not) in the way of the activity you want to do, but ultimately PvP without engineering is still possible and with a trusted opponent a viable organised activity. I agree unengineered ships would be uncompetitive but they can still be used.
The old exploration modules (ADS, IDS & BDS) have been removed from the game, they cannot still be used. This would be understandable if there were a balancing issue to justify it but there isn't one, there was simply no need to remove them.
Last edited:
That's a matter of personal taste, I have seen people who handicap themselves to mock those who attempt to destroy them. The point is, I can forgo the engineers, I cannot forgo the FSS. Also, engineering is not a binary yes/no state, IOW, I can engineer some of my modules while leaving others as they are, can I do something similar when exploring? Nope, there's only the FSS. Your example just proves how anomalous this move by FD was.
Yes, Engineering was detrimental to PvP balance, but any new weapon or modification to existing weapon behavior can be detrimental to it - just look at the fuss over drag munitions recently. However, Engineering didn't remove anything from the game, and when FDev reworked the special effects to the extent that it was no longer possible to create some items which players already had, FDev left those modules in the game.
So whilst there are some parallels to the FSS/ADS issue, it actually shows that FDev have set a precedent for retaining grandfathered modules, which should have been extended to the ADS.
I don't think there is another situation where FDev have removed a component of the original (1.0) game without justification, they usually go to great lengths to make sure no player loses out.
Dropping Apple support came with the opportunity to get a refund, and the game can still be played on a PC with the same license.
Wing missions can be completed by a single player.
Mining with a regular mining laser and refinery is still possible, limpets are not essential equipment.
The Docking Computer module is still available despite the Advanced version including it's full functionality, and both autodock and autolaunch are toggleable.
Mapping probes are infinite to allow non-horizons customers to map planets even though it would have been an incentive to buy the Horizons DLC to be able to get the first mapped tags.
The list goes on.
Busy work is purely subjective.
The definition of busy work is: work that keeps a person busy but has little value in itself.
Now if you talk about monetary value, all computer games are just a load of busy work. But I see value in many different ways. Enjoyment being probably the most important one in computer games. If you enjoy doing something, it is of value to you, therefore it cannot be busy work.
Now if it holds no enjoyment to yourself and you don't get anything out of it at all, sure call it busy work, but it is only busy work to you and the people that feel likewise.
I personally enjoy the FSS (not the actual mechanics, these are pretty standard among most gameplay mechanics so I have no real feeling on them) it's what I get from it that I enjoy. The mechanic itself is secondary to what I see when I use the FSS.
Most people complaining keep talking about it like whack-a-mole, not realising that the old ADS and flying your ships to planets is not very different. It's just a long drawn out version of whack-a-mole, but at the end you didn't even get to whack the mole yourself as the computer did it for you (not saying you have called it that as I can't remember, I just find those sayings as means to make the new mechanic look bad is just a wee bit silly as they are also describing the old mechanics too).
Glad to see You back.
Of course, both methods have their shortcomings and both could be seen as busy work. Whereas flying to certain body Yourself under the previous mechanic could arguably take more time than point-and-clicking the bodies to reveal what's where it has to also be noted that the element of ADS we seek being brought back facilitates different method of exploration where the cumulative time of FSS-ing the system is far greater than time spent in systems one could find of value at a glance.
I don't deny that. Not my decision at the end of the day. I can't see FDev changing it to be perfectly honest.
Well yes, that it is subjective is partly the point I suppose. I don't mind the FSS, like you I think there is room for improvement but also like you I like the advantage of being able to scan at a distance, for which the cost of vulnerability and having to hunt for the body in the FSS Scanner Screen are much smaller than the previous cost (time to travel).
I have become a completion scanner, I map no more than I used to scan (probably less), if I want to fast travel I must now accept that all I am doing is travelling and not also looking for things that interest me (mostly pretty things, those 'ohh shiny' moments are gone).
Perhaps you could suggest some other changes that have removed functionality from the game Max. There may be something I have overlooked (because I don't use that feature or the change was to my advantage). Making Powerplay Open only would be an example of this, a move FDev mooted but have not done.
Last edited:
Yup, there is certainly is room for improvement.
I fast travel pretty much the same as before. I jump in, honk, start to scoop if I can. Decelerate and check the FSS, if I see potential I will scan, if not I go out of the FSS and go to the next system. I generally only map what I intend to land on. This process only slows me down by a few seconds then what I did before, but I was never as extreme as other travel explorers.
I am looking forward to the day when I can land on atmospherics and spend days or even weeks in one solar system or even on one planet.
Why would I do that. I can't think of anything currently, not that that has anything to do with anything. I suppose the old BGS as opposed to the new BGS could be considered. There maybe some others, but I just try to adapt to any changes that come my way and try not to think about them much.
Whilst 'busywork' is indeed subjective, in a game about flying a spaceship stretching the definition of busywork to include flying a spaceship is a little silly, don't you think?
Likewise, claiming flying around a system equates to whack-a-mole ignores the fact that flying is and always has been central to Elite gameplay.
What the FSS does is insert an unavoidable non-flying step to the process of exploration. None of the other activities in ED have flying gated on some other activity. Even mining, which is arguably the closest activity to exploration (in that the rewards don't come directly from moving your ship around) requires you to fly FIRST.
This is why words like 'minigame', 'timesink' and 'busywork' get used for the FSS, and why they don't apply to the old mechanics.