Are we too set in our ways?

[CMDR DoubleSkulls]

I think there is another separate conversation about how to make exploring more interesting and maybe more skilful.

I don't personally fancy giving up my ADS. TBH I think its a little bit of stretch to believe that in 1000 years we won't be able to map planets. However I think that the system map should reveal less information about the planetary bodies. Unfortunately, looking at the system map and listening to the planets, and looking at the holograph pretty much everything about the value of scanning a body can be determined without scanning it. The only things that I don't think can be easily identified are terraformables and the classes of Gas Giants.

I think it would be better if the system map, holograms and sounds were less revealing prior to a scan, e.g. everything looks the same, but you can see mass, radius, orbital distance and the sounds were less specific (maybe MR/HMP/ELW/WW/Ammonia/Ice/Rock one sound, GGs another). Once scanned all the information we have today is shown. Perhaps the hologram can show shortly after scanning starts, but the system map only updates after scanning.

An alternative would be for the system scanner to give more details as you get closer. So perhaps within 500 ls you get sounds, within 1000 ls you get the accurate picture, etc.

This would reduce the "honk", look & listen to the system map, check the hologram, decide what to scan routine I have now. I'd have to take more hunches about what was worth travelling to so scan.

It may help to increase the diversity of the value of different types of planetary bodies. For example, if the odd icy planet was worth 10k, even if it was comparatively rare, a lot more explorers would bother to go out and scan them.

 

[Kuroshio]

Hi, I am one of the diamondback naysayers. You should read my feedback to understand why the diamondback is a worse armed explorer than a pure explorer (and it's a bad pure explorer). TLDR: hybrid kits need even more module room than regular kits, and module room is precisely what the diamondback lacks.

You can explore however you want. You don't have to worry about math or stats or optimality if you don't want -- it's your game and you can play it however you want. But there is math governing everything out there, even if you aren't paying attention to it. And there are facts regarding what ships are good for what role, even if you choose to ignore those facts.

The diamondback is just an undertuned ship for any type of exploration, armed or otherwise. The cobra (twice as cheap) is a better armed explorer, the adder (40k, order of magnitude cheaper) is a better pure explorer.

Hi! I read & repped your summary on the Diamondback, actually, and think that your proposed changes to the design make a lot of sense. Was a very thoughtful piece. I should have phrased it "in the style of the Diamondback".

And yeah, there's a lot of math going on here. Poor liberal arts majors like me. But different styles of exploration do need somewhat different equations.

I think there is another separate conversation about how to make exploring more interesting and maybe more skilful.

I don't personally fancy giving up my ADS. TBH I think its a little bit of stretch to believe that in 1000 years we won't be able to map planets. However I think that the system map should reveal less information about the planetary bodies. Unfortunately, looking at the system map and listening to the planets, and looking at the holograph pretty much everything about the value of scanning a body can be determined without scanning it. The only things that I don't think can be easily identified are terraformables and the classes of Gas Giants.

I think it would be better if the system map, holograms and sounds were less revealing prior to a scan, e.g. everything looks the same, but you can see mass, radius, orbital distance and the sounds were less specific (maybe MR/HMP/ELW/WW/Ammonia/Ice/Rock one sound, GGs another). Once scanned all the information we have today is shown. Perhaps the hologram can show shortly after scanning starts, but the system map only updates after scanning.

An alternative would be for the system scanner to give more details as you get closer. So perhaps within 500 ls you get sounds, within 1000 ls you get the accurate picture, etc.

This would reduce the "honk", look & listen to the system map, check the hologram, decide what to scan routine I have now. I'd have to take more hunches about what was worth travelling to so scan.

It may help to increase the diversity of the value of different types of planetary bodies. For example, if the odd icy planet was worth 10k, even if it was comparatively rare, a lot more explorers would bother to go out and scan them.

Same here, as I said above. I'm fine with the ADS as a navigational tool that provides size, mass, and orbital data, but not as a pre-surface scanner.

 

[Glenn Ross]

I think it would be better if the system map, holograms and sounds were less revealing prior to a scan, e.g. everything looks the same, but you can see mass, radius, orbital distance and the sounds were less specific (maybe MR/HMP/ELW/WW/Ammonia/Ice/Rock one sound, GGs another). Once scanned all the information we have today is shown. Perhaps the hologram can show shortly after scanning starts, but the system map only updates after scanning.

.
Maybe have the variants of DS just give results of [Stellar Body] and [Planetary Body] and something you can target. This allows you to then go there and use your SS/DSS to get the body to actually appear on the map. Better way of seeing what you have/haven't scanned in a system and increases the feeling of having just discovered an Earth-like. Means people will not be able to just Honk and discover the best things in a system - stopping the "Cherry-Picking" would certainly benefit the serious explorers out there.

 

[Gauntlet]

Hi, I am one of the diamondback naysayers... The diamondback is just an undertuned ship for any type of exploration, armed or otherwise. The cobra (twice as cheap) is a better armed explorer, the adder (40k, order of magnitude cheaper) is a better pure explorer.

I think someones been listening:

Hi everyone,


- Diamondback is now the Diamondback Scout

Thanks!

Michael

 

[Chris M Fortune]

.
Maybe have the variants of DS just give results of [Stellar Body] and [Planetary Body] and something you can target. This allows you to then go there and use your SS/DSS to get the body to actually appear on the map. Better way of seeing what you have/haven't scanned in a system and increases the feeling of having just discovered an Earth-like. Means people will not be able to just Honk and discover the best things in a system - stopping the "Cherry-Picking" would certainly benefit the serious explorers out there.

I don't understand how people "cherry picking" would affect serious explorers. They can still be serious with the current system and be as thorough with DSS as they feel is appropriate for them, what I or anyone else does would only affect them if they were intent on being "first discovered" and that would detract in my opinion from being a "serious" explorer.

I have three basic modes when out in the black, ping and go for fast travel, ping and check star whilst looking at system map and cherry picking and scan everything when I am in the mood which if I am honest is not all that often.

 

[puca]

[edit: removed.]

 

[draeath]

Eh, I spent around $2.2mil on a Hauler and am quite happy with it. I've almost that 30ly range - just a smidge past 27ly I believe. But it didn't break my bank, and should I run into anything unexpected, it will only cost me around $110k. Besides, if you're in it for the cash, you'll be plotting fuel-economy routes anyway. A 30 jump journey becomes a 150 jump one, which means a good 5x the payout.

I may well be wrong, though. It's been a while.

You're not wrong. If you don't have at least the basic scanner fitted, you cannot scan them.

 

[Oopsie Daisy]

snip

Personally, my problem isn't the ADS, it's the system map. And no, not that we can select targets in the future, because a) it doesn't help finding the fastest route and b) I suspect my shipboard computer can count as well as me.

It's the clearly distinguishable planet symbols. I'd really love that to be changed to a single dominant color representation ("There's a small blue-ish planet"), so you wouldn't be able to tell apart a blue high-metal content planet from a water world from an earth-like anymore. (Same for gas giants, lose the tell-tale spots). That would provide an element of low tension ("it looks promising"), of disappointment ("bah, rusty metal"), and satisfaction ("Wee! I found Kobol!"). We could have higher payouts for planetary bodies and lower payouts for the ADS scan in that case. (I can live with the basic reward, it is data, after all.)

snip

Hear, hear to that! It's quite a bit odd that my system map tells me such-and such-world is a high metal content or whatever yet I still have to travel to it and scan it to get the payout. It would be better, as you say, if the system map just said there is a planet there of X mass and I would have to go travel to it to find out what kind of planet it is.