News Content Recap: Beyond - Chapter Four Livestream - Background Simulation and Scenarios

NeilF

NeilF
Micha said:
There is no separation of purpose between the DS and FSS; they are part of the same thing. In the new system, think of the "honk" as a sonar pulse which returns echoes of things of interest in the system (but no details), and the FSS as a telescope used to determine the details about them.

**Current system:**
1. (Core Module) Scanner - populates your 3d center console scanner, detects USSs in flight, performs basic scans on targeted ships, etc

2. Basic / Intermediate / Advanced Discovery Scanner - this currently is the "honk"; populates the System Map and gives information on mission targets. Alternatively go to the NavBeacon for the same (and more) information.

3. Detailed Surface Scanner - this is the scanner which gives detailed information on a planet; material composition etc. Fleshes out data available in the System Map and yields "First Discovered by" tags.

**New System:**
1. Same as before.

2. Discovery Scanner - replaces the current B/I/A DS, still the "honk", gives full information on the primary star and populates the FSS (below) with "gravity anomalies" in *unexplored systems*. Systems previously explored by Commanders will show up as if you'd done an old-style "honk". Yields monetary bonues equivalent to the old "honk" (and first-discovered-by on the primary star?)

3. Full System Scanner - new interface mode of the DS, *part of the same module as the DS* (ie, 2 & 3 are built into the same hardware); allows you to fully scan a system after the "honk". This gives the same information as the 2 & 3 of the old system. On top of that, it allows you to scan for the new "persistent" USS's in the system (and possibly other stuff such as generation ships etc). Yields "First Discovered by" tags.

4. Detailed Surface Scanner - is completely new gameplay and information now (it's original functionality is now part of 2&3); used to fire probes at planets to map a planet. Mapping a planet reveals persistent POIs on the surface such as volcanoes or brain trees. Yields the new "First Mapped by" tags.

----

Unsure whether you will always need to "honK", it was described as being the first step in entering the FSS interface during the exploration live stream, which indicates that yes you do. But in the BGS live stream they seemed to show just using the FSS interface directly.

Regardless, the "honk" and the FSS are part of the same module, and are now used for many different purposes, not just exploration. You still don't *need* it as you can get most of the same information from the Nav Beacon. The DSS remains mainly an exploration tool, although miners might be interested in it too now as it can be used to detect resource-rich areas in rings. We'll find out more about that next week.
Click to expand...

Understood, the Honk and FSS are currently aimed at being one in the same tool/module.

My question/point is, if we pretended than the Honk remained exactly what it is (an optional module), BUT the FSS was a standard feature on all ships? What would be pros and cons be?

From my understanding (possibly flawed?):-
- Explorers would still need fit an Discovery Scanner, to break the back of any new system they visited.
- Everyone else could benefit from being able to get the most out of systems content if they wished by using the FSS?
 

NeilF

NeilF
Micha said:
Sure, BUT, being able to scan for USSs is brand-new gameplay now. FDev aren't taking away any functionality as regards USSs, they are adding to the ways in which you can detect them.

Up to now all you could do is fly around randomly and wait for them to spawn. Now you can scan NavBeacon, use the FSS, -or- fly around randomly to find them. If people find the FSS approach compelling enough to use a module slot for, then that is an outfitting / optimisation question for every person now, isn't it?
Click to expand...

Understood... BUT, players are now faced with the choice of:-
1) Find out what potential gameplay is on offer in a system (via USS)
2) Do not find out what potential gameplay is on offer in a system (via USS)

Which is more appealing? Given I suspect most CMDRs will want to generally know (ie: option 1), then they either have to:-
1) Carry a Discovery scanner at the expense of a slot, just to use the FSS.
2) Take the time/effort to visit Nav Beacons.

I suspect neither of these is appealing as (1) would be seen as just a needless loss of a slot, and (2) a needless time grind.


And all the while, the question remains, what would be so wrong for everyship to have an FSS as standard? If you want to find out what USS are in the system, you can invest the time in the FSS to find out... Done...

Just putting the thought/question out there...
 
Last edited:

Miko

M
My question would be related to this whole Megaship attack scenario. You state players must defend this ship or face negative faction consequences.

What I would like to know is whether players attacking one of these in multiplayer create permanent damage to the Megaship, as seen in the demonstration in the live feed where your FD boys blew up some partsor whether this resets per instance?

Also, how does one defend this ship if players hiding in solo attack it? What about players in different instances or PC/Console Open play? Without cross play this kind of thing becomes an even bigger issue. Much in the same way being undermined in Powerplay has forever.
 

A D

A D
Sierra_Hotel said:
Very cool. I like the BGS changes overall, not sure "happiness" is necessarily the right word to use, but I don't have a suggestion for an alternative.
Click to expand...

Agree happiness is a bit odd. When describing civilisations would more likely talk in terms of "prosperity", "wealth" and "stability".
 

WorldsGreatestForumDad

Banned
WorldsGreatestForumDad
After the attack on the fuel rats and some thinking. Its better to go all in with open only and the influence with the BGS so we can stop our attackers. Weighted success will work but bigger groups would win by default over time. With the same 0 risk the fuel rats are suffering now.

Do the right thing. Do it, for the fuelrats!

o7 Cmdrs
 

Han Zulu

Han Zulu
Countries "happiness" and "life satisfaction" are terms used and there are yearly studies made. Currently I think Finland or Norway are the "happies" countries in the world.

Now, if that's a good indicator to be used in Elite is probably a different issue. I'd prefer maybe something fancier term like "satisfaction" or similar. Prosperity and stability don't describe if people are happy about it or not. They're terms relating to hard numbers of economics, while "satisfaction" is people's response and feel about the economy. Poor people can be happy, and wealthy people can be depressed and miserable. In the end it's more of if people have a positive outlook for what's now and the future.
 

NeilF

NeilF
Miko said:
My question would be related to this whole Megaship attack scenario. You state players must defend this ship or face negative faction consequences.

What I would like to know is whether players attacking one of these in multiplayer create permanent damage to the Megaship, as seen in the demonstration in the live feed where your FD boys blew up some partsor whether this resets per instance?

Also, how does one defend this ship if players hiding in solo attack it? What about players in different instances or PC/Console Open play? Without cross play this kind of thing becomes an even bigger issue. Much in the same way being undermined in Powerplay has forever.
Click to expand...

That's why, in an ideal world, the game should orchestrate/offer PvP related scenarios. eg: Two Powers or two Faction opposing each other, are offered a couple of scenarios/tasks (in OPEN only) where they can PvP/ The game shoud orchestrate timings and instances accordingly.

I know there's a lot to this, but FD were willing to create a whole stand alone game (CQC) which is now all but collecting dust. If only that ethos and effort have been thrown at the above...
 

Kzak

Kzak
One question: Will the new BGS mechanics eventually allow the colonization of new planets/establishing space stations in orbit around new planets in new systems? Or will this have to be done manually by FDev until further notice?
 

Parmo

Parmo
Not much for the casual solo (not talking about game mode) player here. This type of player constitutes the vast majority of the ED player base - an assertion.
It's beyond reasoning that FDev does not keep this part of the player base in mind when introducng new features etc into ED.

The presence of factions does liven up the ED universe in the bubble for the solo player but only so far.

This part of the update as described seems to be focused on players that have setup their own factions or those interested in doing so. By definition these players are not casual solo players: they form a very small part of the player base.
From OP: "As part of Beyond - Chapter Four, we're making a few changes to the Background Simulation that will have a big effect on how you will manage and spread your faction's influence across the Milky Way."
and
"It's worth noting that some of the gargantuan factions, led by a handful of people, will need to scale up their group in order to manage their existing holdings. With these changes, maintaining widespread factions will pose an added challenge, but we've introduced improved in-game BGS feedback to help coordinate your group's efforts."

These quotes I use to backup my claim that there is not much here for the casual solo player.

The scenarios are interesting though. I hope they will be implemented such as to provide the player with a more lively existence.[yesnod]

One thing that does bother me with what I have read of the OP regarding system, or is it faction?, status. If a system is in state of famine the population will decrease due to an increase in mortality that is usually associated with famine.
Does the galaxy or system map ever reflect the population levels in the affected systems? This is pertinent to other system states.
There may come a point at which the population of a system, station or installation is not viable. May be there will be an abandoned outpost somewhere.

There seems to be a state missing and that is of blockaded. Blockades can cause famine and shortages. As a consequence there will be smugglers and blockade runners and missions for them to the affected systems, stations and installations. And missions to stop them?
May be a faction can seige a system, station or installation too.
 

wstephenson

wstephenson
Limoncello Lizard said:
A question for FD.

How will the allocations of rare goods be affected by the changes to faction states?
Click to expand...

Rare goods? Those are sooo 2015. Do you think they will even get a mention in the Codex?

But seriously, I'm interested too. They affect Engineer unlocks, and it would be cool to use them more in the game, for example as supplies to space bars.
 

Rat Catcher

Rat Catcher
I think the concern with Rare goods is one that in certain political states they are illegal - if a system currently supplying Rares was to be taken by one of the 'prohibition' factions they would no longer be available.

Good question!
 

Konan

K
I have no idea of what the actual numbers are of those who manipulate the BGS but I did see almost 6000 players watch this stream live as it was broadcast. Many were there a couple of hours before it aired just waiting. It seemed that there were many very interested in it at the time. Just my observation.

I also would like to see even more depth in the BGS such as the examples you gave. Population growth and decline, terraforming systems actually finishing, allowing players a little more involvement in the manipulation of commodities. I'd also like to see something like this example: delivery of explosives to an extraction outpost for a particular faction which in turn would create more or better missions of hauling precious metals that are extracted using the explosives to other systems that demand or use them. No explosives, no missions. That's a simple example but more depth with commodities affecting missions and factions could involve more systems. I already trade between systems that are symbiotic li!e that (extraction and industry being one) but its lacking a little more.

Also, in the commodities descriptions of markets, for example, gold and silver are used in the making of certain technologies BUT I never see any of this technology or some end use of hauling it there. Everything is kinda just used for money, influence or materials but not in actually affecting the system. I love the new updates but I'd really like to see more cause and effect in the BGS than just money and influence.....like watching a station grow after accumulating a certain amount of wealth...or being empty and abandoned because a famine killed off the populace. I think it would endear players more to the systems they frequent and create a bond where they actually care or not if pirates are disrupting shipping or lanes or God forbid, the thargoids show up and attack their station....right now I see so many stations they have been attacked and no one really cares...why should they? They have no connection to them.....
 
Last edited:

Limoncello Lizard

Limoncello Lizard
Ratkatcher said:
I think the concern with Rare goods is one that in certain political states they are illegal - if a system currently supplying Rares was to be taken by one of the 'prohibition' factions they would no longer be available.
Click to expand...
Currently, the only rare goods that are unavailable are blocked by player factions that FD placed in the system. Those two (Wolf Fesh and Gilya Signature Weapons) may as well be deleted from the game now. But that is FD's problem to fix.

What I'm more concerned about with the new BGS changes, is that pretty much every state, other than boom, reduces the supply of rare goods.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom