Could Frontier please demonstrate how to use the FSS enjoyably?

[lenna]

Codex bugs are unfortunate, of course but aren't a comment on the FSS operation per se.

I am sorry, but that is a white-wash - inexcusable more like it.

With respect you don't seem to acknowledge that ED is a game played by a community at various levels of expertise, generally due to how long ago they started a new Commander. All players must be catered to.

Arguably, the FSS/DSS does NOT do that, it needlessly replaced a perfectly fine and working mechanic ADS/DSS with mini-game focused kitsch. The ADS/DSS did not require a particularly high level of expertise and arguably neither does the FSS/DSS. The fundamental way in which the FSS/DSS was introduced to ED was disruptive and confrontational. FD failed to appropriately cater for existing explorers in a fair or reasonable way.

The refund on the ADS and freeing up of a single slot does not appropriately compensate for having to deal with irritating and needless mini-games.

 

[Darkfyre99]

It is the complete reverse for at least some of us because the FSS/DSS is that awful.

Which is why I don't mind of Frontier reintroduced the ADS as an optional module.

Personally, I think that many of the common complaints about the FSS come from the same place as common complaints about Supercruise, the tendency for players to reduce a game mechanic with some depth to it, until it's shallow but uninteresting. Not all of the complaints, mind you. There are some legitimate complaints, especially given that certain kinds of rare unicorns simply cannot be identified without resolving a body first, but I find the "minigame" complaint in particular to be especially grating.

You can certainly play it as a "minigame" that's standing between you and the system map, but I've found treating it as a multi-sensor tool that needs to be analysed to quickly find stuff of interest to be far more satisfying.

YMMV

 

[Winterwalker]

On top of which, FDev stated that they created the FSS to make exploration quicker.

Exploration as was (discovery) is quicker. Surveying (what I would argue real eploration to be) has another couple of levels; smarter FSS cherry picking if that's your thing and a closer look at the planet you 'discovered' (as now is, mapped) requiring travel to planet.

There are 400,000,000,000 systems

You only have to look at a heat map to show the VAST majority of unvisited systems (and I do mean by percentage) are > 10,000Lys from starter systems. Mapping gives you a taste of exploration as a noob though and, although I haven't seen a heat map for it yet and even though the pattern will be the same, it will be cooler and less completed. This brings your first cartographics achievment, as a noob, closer to start systems.

I am sorry, but that is a white-wash - inexcusable more like it.

Sorry no. That's a databasing bug that has nothing to do with what using the FSS is like.

 

[Agony_Aunt]

Ah, is this a thread where anyone who disagrees is wrong?

I must admit, i see pluses and minuses to the new system.

I think my preferred variant would be the honk shows the planets, but you have to use the FSS to find signal sources, anomolies, and get more details on the planets. So a honk will show you an earthlike, but not any info about its gravity, atmosphere, etc, and payout will be small.

 

[-VR- Max Factor]

Which only emphasises the major of a mess FD have made of exploration with 3.3.

Codex for existing CMDRs missing swathes of discovery information already reported prior to 3.3 for CMDRs that already visited and scanned places (local body scans or otherwise) - I have Elite in exploration, have several first discoveries under my belt pre-3.3 yet a near empty Codex.

Unrelated to the FSS. I like the codex, I find it useful regardless of the bugs.

Pointless Mini-games added that add user interaction for the sake of it - poorly thought out, and badly implemented overall

Welcome to computer games.

Various other irritating ship control changes which seem to have not been properly thought through.

Seem fine to me. What's irritating about them?

The segregation of mapping and discovery is arguably a major mistake on the part of FD, especially given the other issues they have created. The introduction of the FSS/DSS mechanics has generated more problems than it supposedly solved (not that I think there was anything wrong with the ADS/DSS in the first place that could justify the removal of the legacy mechanics).

Why is it a major mistake?

 

[lenna]

Personally, I think that many of the common complaints about the FSS come from the same place as common complaints about Supercruise

Not quite...

Super-cruise is a travel mechanic, a case of learning to manage throttle v. external forces in essence. Many of the complaints about it seem to be related either to the time to travel from A to B or the perceived lack of interesting things to do while engaging in it.

The FSS complaints are far more fundamental, the key complaint from at least some quarters is the addition of poorly thought out (and badly implemented) mechanics as a blocker for an activity that did not need it previously. It is roughly comparable to erecting a brick wall across a public right of way with a rope ladder on either side to get over it when the brick wall is arguably unnecessary.

I appreciate that you are not against the concept of an ADS-replacement being introduced as an optional module but arguably the ADS should never have been removed in the first place.

 

[Old Duck]

You can certainly play it as a "minigame" that's standing between you and the system map, but I've found treating it as a multi-sensor tool that needs to be analysed to quickly find stuff of interest to be far more satisfying.

I've always found the "minigame" and "it takes you out of the cockpit" arguments to be a stretch. The Galaxy Map both takes you out of the cockpit and is a very elaborate "minigame" by these standards. The System Map, which the ADS crowd loves so much, takes you out of the cockpit and could be argued as a minigame if one wanted to push it.

I'm actually in the opposite camp where I want more things removed from the cockpit. I hate how Analysis Mode turns planets outside my window into TRON / Battlezone renditions with the mapping overlay. IMO this should be restricted to the DSS screen, or at least have a switch like orbit lines that I can turn off. I want to feel like I'm looking out a window when I'm looking out my window, and save all the Matrix graphics for separate computer screens like the FSS and DSS.

Disclaimer - I'm a 2D gamer, so 'out of the cockpit' means something different to me than it does the niche VR crowd.

 

[lenna]

I've always found the "minigame" and "it takes you out of the cockpit" arguments to be a stretch. The Galaxy Map both takes you out of the cockpit and is a very elaborate "minigame" by these standards. The System Map, which the ADS crowd loves so much, takes you out of the cockpit and could be argued as a minigame if one wanted to push it.

Those are not even close to the same thing - arguably both the galaxy and system maps can be ignored on the most part while in flight - even when exploring (only really required to reference for route planning). They also have none of the elements that make the FSS a mini-game.

 

[Riverside]

I am sorry, but that is a white-wash - inexcusable more like it.


Arguably, the FSS/DSS does NOT do that, it needlessly replaced a perfectly fine and working mechanic ADS/DSS with mini-game focused kitsch. The ADS/DSS did not require a particularly high level of expertise and arguably neither does the FSS/DSS. The fundamental way in which the FSS/DSS was introduced to ED was disruptive and confrontational. FD failed to appropriately cater for existing explorers in a fair or reasonable way.

The refund on the ADS and freeing up of a single slot does not appropriately compensate for having to deal with irritating and needless mini-games.,

Just chipping in to say I agree that there was no need to remove the old stuff, it seems to me it would have actually been easier to leave it in place. I'd like to see some comment (preferably an apology & an eta for when it will be put back into the game) along with the OP's request.

I don't really mind the FSS, but it's shortcomings would be rather easier to overlook if the alternative had remained in place.

 

[[Diplomacy] Carnegie]

You only have to look at a heat map to show the VAST majority of unvisited systems (and I do mean by percentage) are > 10,000Lys from starter systems.

You only have to fly 1,000 LY to be sure of getting a 1st Discovered tag. At around 1,500 LY they become the majority. You can do that distance in under an hour in a ship only vaguely set up for exploration, and half that time in a dedicated ship.

The vast majority (by percentage) of ALL systems is greater than 10,000 LY away, since that's less than half way to the core, where the vast majority of stars are. As a metric, it's meaningless.

 

[marx]

Let's not forget that Frontier created the "first mapped by" tags explicitly to give players a chance to place new tags on stuff around the bubble.

Also, no offense, but Elite in exploration doesn't mean much anymore, so no need to refer to "Elite explorers". You can spend 10-12 hours and get from Aimless to Elite.


As for new players, although the aim was to make exploration easier for them, whenever I host someone in multicrew - did it just now - about 90% don't know the FSS and can't figure it out. I can count on one hand those who could use it. I'm starting to have my doubts if the tutorial even comes up in MC, but that doesn't change the fact that the interface needing a tutorial already means that it's a bad one.
Ironically enough, the last player I hosted thought that the D-scanner meant that you charge it up to scan stuff, and the further you charge it, the farther you scan things. No, he wasn't a veteran player who never touched exploration before. But a new player for whom apparently this would have been more intuitive.

Looking back on it now, it probably would have been better for new players as well to leave in some version of the ADS, as an optional alternative to the FSS. Maybe market the latter as a more advanced exploration tool for more experienced players. (Heh heh.)

https://forums.frontier.co.uk/posts/7840065/edit

Well, here's hoping that as part of their effort to make the game more attractive to new players, they'll revisit and improve the FSS as well.


Update: Oh, and it looks like they still haven't fixed exploration multicrew - not rewarding anything (no credits, no rank) to crew, present all the way to Chapter Four's beta. Despite numerous bug reports, of course.

 

[Winterwalker]

The FSS complaints are far more fundamental, the key complaint from at least some quarters is the addition of poorly thought out (and badly implemented) mechanics as a blocker for an activity that did not need it previously. It is roughly comparable to erecting a brick wall across a public right of way with a rope ladder on either side to get over it when the brick wall is arguably unnecessary.

Again I think you assume that Frontier have their eyes ONLY on people playing the game now. Hate to break it to you but new licenses is where FD's business is at and while they won't want to alienate existing players (and it's a split decision whether they have) the FSS adds instrumentation into the cockpit of your pretend spaceship, making the piloting experience as a whole more complex. And the fact that you spend longer in a single star system is not a bad thing, honk-scoop-repeat used to be slated (as bad) for people who remember.

I appreciate that you are not against the concept of an ADS-replacement being introduced as an optional module but arguably the ADS should never have been removed in the first place.

Unfortunately the ADS had to go because it's just not compatable with FSS. FSS though adds a 'fog of war' function that -- believe me - when ED first released and a fog of war didn't exist, people were gutted about missing out on. I think if ADS were to be restored it would have to be foggy in some way.

One honk knowledge is inarguably convenient .. but is it really exploration?

 

[[Diplomacy] Carnegie]

Ironically enough, the last player I hosted thought that the D-scanner meant that you charge it up to scan stuff, and the further you charge it, the farther you scan things. No, he wasn't a veteran player who never touched exploration before. But a new player for whom apparently this would have been more intuitive.

That's how the discovery scanner works in X4. Longer honk gives you longer range, with the possibility of overcharging and getting a missfire. It's intuitive if you've played pretty much ANY game before, and involves a modicum of skill.

 

[Riverside]

One honk knowledge is inarguably convenient .. but is it really exploration?

Yes.

 

[-VR- Max Factor]

Let's not forget that Frontier created the "first mapped by" tags explicitly to give players a chance to place new tags on stuff around the bubble.

I don't think it was explicitly for that. I certainly don't remember them saying that is what it was for.

Also, no offense, but Elite in exploration doesn't mean much anymore, so no need to refer to "Elite explorers". You can spend 10-12 hours and get from Aimless to Elite.

Elite in exploration never meant much anyway.

As for new players, although the aim was to make exploration easier for them,

No it wasn't.

whenever I host someone in multicrew - did it just now - about 90% don't know the FSS and can't figure it out. I can count on one hand those who could use it. I'm starting to have my doubts if the tutorial even comes up in MC, but that doesn't change the fact that the interface needing a tutorial already means that it's a bad one.

So what it is. Easy like the old ADS or a deeper and more complex system?

Having. Tutorial does not mean it's bad design. That is just dumb. So are you saying games like SIM city, total war and any other game that has tutorials are bad.

Ironically enough, the last player I hosted thought that the D-scanner meant that you charge it up to scan stuff, and the further you charge it, the farther you scan things. No, he wasn't a veteran player who never touched exploration before. But a new player for whom apparently this would have been more intuitive.

Maybe he should read the manual and look at all the online tutorials.

Looking back on it now, it probably would have been better for new players as well to leave in some version of the ADS, as an optional alternative to the FSS. Maybe market the latter as a more advanced exploration tool for more experienced players. (Heh heh.)

Yes it would be easier, as nothing is easier then pressing a button for 5 seconds and then flying in supercruise just to let a passive scan happen. Glad you think that the FSS is the more complex design. Not that the ADS is needed. They just need to learn like everyone else.

Well, here's hoping that as part of their effort to make the game more attractive to new players, they'll revisit and improve the FSS as well.

I hope they improve it too as it is far from perfect, just miles better then the abomination of the ADS.

 

[marx]

Unfortunately, "jump-scoop-honk-FSS spectrum-jump" is just one step better.
Like I said, Frontier could do better than both the ADS and the FSS. Also, as I have been saying for years now, they should revisit interstellar travel and add a more active alternative to it, not just "line up, press jump button, do nothing for 30-40 seconds, repeat hundreds of times". As it is, this is also a common complaint about exploration for new players.

 

[[Diplomacy] Carnegie]

Unfortunately the ADS had to go because it's just not compatable with FSS. FSS though adds a 'fog of war' function that -- believe me - when ED first released and a fog of war didn't exist, people were gutted about missing out on. I think if ADS were to be restored it would have to be foggy in some way.

One honk knowledge is inarguably convenient .. but is it really exploration?

1. The ADS as an optional module is not incompatible with the FSS. It simply allows for more playstyles.

2. I'd be fine with fog-of-war if identifying bodies didn't also explore them. Parallax exploration is the ultimate FoW and that's what I'm using in preference to the FSS

3. The ADS honk wasn't exploration. It was what you did before you started exploring

 

[xondk]

If you can't tell the difference then you must be blind - blob-hunt/space-golf (FSS/DSS) is mini-game hell lacking any true sense of immersion, the experience is jarring and there are many other flaws with it that have already been spelled out in this thread. Some may decry the previous ADS/DSS experience but at least it felt logical and immersive, unlike what we have now which epically fails on the second part.

The FSS/DSS mini-games do not fit well with ED, the FSS might be based on real-world science principles but the implementation is abysmal. FD obviously listened too much to the anti-honk crowd.

That is entirely your opinion, and again you are using a lot of negative words but you are not actually saying anything, at best you seem to just be raging without feeling like you need to properly justify that, and seemingly are just tossing words around?

And saying that entering a system and then actually scanning for stuff, is less immersive then enter system honk, is just...........absurd.

The FSS implementation is terrible and no amount of "streamlining" will fix the fundamental issues there are with it. IMO whoever designed the concept should be either given appropriate retraining or barred from designing game mechanics in the future.

Again what is terrible, what about the mechanic is it that you think is so bad, you are simply tossing words without actually stating your reasoning behind your oppinion.

In a product primarily about space flight it does not make any logical sense to have a mechanic like the FSS. It is pure mini-game that panders to the anti-ADS crowed too much and does not appropriately consider the concerns of those that enjoyed the gameplay facilitated by the ADS/DSS mechanics.

Wait wait, didn't you just write.

The FSS/DSS mini-games do not fit well with ED, the FSS might be based on real-world science principles but the implementation is abysmal. FD obviously listened too much to the anti-honk crowd.

So...which is it? you want something that is designed around space flight or do you want something that fits a game like ED, which is about space flight?

 

[Winterwalker]

3. The ADS honk wasn't exploration. It was what you did before you started exploring

This is why (rlsg will be pleased I agree) throttle > 0 should 100% definitely be a thing.

 

[xondk]

Unfortunately, "jump-scoop-honk-FSS spectrum-jump" is just one step better.
Like I said, Frontier could do better than both the ADS and the FSS. Also, as I have been saying for years now, they should revisit interstellar travel and add a more active alternative to it, not just "line up, press jump button, do nothing for 30-40 seconds, repeat hundreds of times". As it is, this is also a common complaint about exploration for new players.

Ok, but what would you see the explorer loop being like? would you want more details on the individual planets, so that we would need to be careful in our choices or waste a lot of time potentially finding nothing or?

As for the space travel, I don't see how you can change that without fundamentally changing the type of game that Elite is, there are some people that want to get both in system flight cut, and also increase jump range increased, it seems ending towards a click and I am there system?