Could Frontier please demonstrate how to use the FSS enjoyably?

[lenna]

I've been away from this thread for awhile, TL;DR, so forgive me if this has been asked. Are you "bring back the ADS" folks looking for never discovered "cool finds", or does it not matter?

Personally, where I am concerned "bring back the ADS" is just the easier option than fixing the mess FD have made of the FSS/DSS mechanics.

The FSS could theoretically be improved so the desire for an ADS type option goes away but FD seem to be sticking their head in the sand over further changes.

 

[[Diplomacy] Carnegie]

This is just after a simple honk, no FSS at all?

Yes.
Though I think @marx means the NavPanel not the Contacts tab - or maybe both. I never look at the Contacts tab.

 

[Old Duck]

Yes.

Huh! Well then, I learned something new! That surprises me to be honest, considering that the honk reveals the existence of planets but doesn't populate the contact list with them (as undiscovered) until you do the zoom / focus maneuver or DSS flyby maneuver.

ps - nobody has answered my original question about whether or not you need to find undiscovered systems in order to enjoy them.

 

[marx]

Yes.
Though I think @marx means the NavPanel not the Contacts tab - or maybe both. I never look at the Contacts tab.

Oh, I might have mixed them up. In any case, they do show up on the left panel, and I think the honk might not even be necessary - although I don't know, because I reflexively honk before I look left anyway.

ps - nobody has answered my original question about whether or not you need to find undiscovered systems in order to enjoy them.

Well, I can only speak for myself: I didn't reply because you specifically asked the "bring back the ADS folks".

 

[[Diplomacy] Carnegie]

Oh, I might have mixed them up. In any case, they do show up on the left panel, and I think the honk might not even be necessary - although I don't know, because I reflexively honk before I look left anyway.

I very nearly wrote the same thing about the necessity of the honk - it's a reflex for me too, so I can't be sure. It may depend on whether the system is already explored.

 

[marx]

I very nearly wrote the same thing about the necessity of the honk - it's a reflex for me too, so I can't be sure. It may depend on whether the system is already explored.

Well, I have found NSPs in entirely undiscovered systems this way - new Codex entries as well. But then, I did honk there too.

 

[[Diplomacy] Carnegie]

ps - nobody has answered my original question about whether or not you need to find undiscovered systems in order to enjoy them.

The subset of 'whiny people' who are looking for rare bodies are less likely to post than the general "I hate the FSS" group - so you may have to wait.

For me, though, I like finding rare things that nobody else has seen, but not because I want to put my tag on it, simply because I like finding stuff nobody else has seen. There's a difference, though it's kinda subtle.

Edit:
As an example, I'm currently the first discoverer of the HR xxxx system furthest from Sol (according to EDSM). This makes me happy, but I really don't care if anyone else knows

 

[lenna]

ps - nobody has answered my original question about whether or not you need to find undiscovered systems in order to enjoy them.

Depends on what you mean by "find undiscovered systems in order to enjoy them".

To me the actual system map itself is worthless outside of basic navigation during exploration, I expect to have to travel to things to discover the actual details about them. The FSS in that sense devalues exploration and adds a grind wall that can not be avoided. The mainstream random POIs are a mere distraction in the main, a means to an end. Other more unique and targetted POIs are meh, unless I have a specific reason to go looking for them are just a minor distraction.

As for first discovery tags, I expect them to be applied regardless of the exploration method used.

 

[MadDogMurdock]

Huh! Well then, I learned something new! That surprises me to be honest, considering that the honk reveals the existence of planets but doesn't populate the contact list with them (as undiscovered) until you do the zoom / focus maneuver or DSS flyby maneuver.

ps - nobody has answered my original question about whether or not you need to find undiscovered systems in order to enjoy them.

It's an intersting question, because the difference between dicovered and undiscovered is now much greater and far more obvious than before.

Prior to the FSS, I wouldn't even know if a system was explored because I rarely even looked at the individual body detail to see if there was a first discovered tag. I'd happily go and scan without even being aware if anyone had scanned it before.

Now it's made blindingly obvious by the map / nav. panel being populated.
That obviously avoids the faff of the FSS but now you know straight away that somene else was there.

That to me is another downside to the FSS.
To me at least, before the FSS existed, every new system felt undiscovered even if it wasn't.

 

[Galactic Fork]

Depends on what you mean by "find undiscovered systems in order to enjoy them".

To me the actual system map itself is worthless outside of basic navigation during exploration, I expect to have to travel to things to discover the actual details about them. The FSS in that sense devalues exploration and adds a grind wall that can not be avoided. The mainstream random POIs are a mere distraction in the main, a means to an end. Other more unique and targetted POIs are meh, unless I have a specific reason to go looking for them are just a minor distraction.

As for first discovery tags, I expect them to be applied regardless of the exploration method used.

You don't have to go somewhere to get that info, all the information we get from the fss can be received about objects in our solar system by modern day astronomy equipment.

Think of the FSS as a telescope to get a picture of the objects in the system. THEN we fly there and map it.

 

[Old Duck]

Now it's made blindingly obvious by the map / nav. panel being populated.
That obviously avoids the faff of the FSS but now you know straight away that somene else was there.

That to me is another downside to the FSS.
To me at least, before the FSS existed, every new system felt undiscovered even if it wasn't.

My complaint is in the opposite direction - our computers obviously have at least partial data on all previously-discovered systems, so how come I can't access the completed part of map for these systems without flying there myself first? We should either have the map or not have the map. It's not like there are nav beacons in these remote systems that we're querying with our "honk", after all.

 

[[Diplomacy] Carnegie]

You don't have to go somewhere to get that info, all the information we get from the fss can be received about objects in our solar system by modern day astronomy equipment.

Think of the FSS as a telescope to get a picture of the objects in the system. THEN we fly there and map it.

Call me when mapping an ELW does anything more than provide credits and tags.

 

[Faded Glory]

ps - nobody has answered my original question about whether or not you need to find undiscovered systems in order to enjoy them.

Since my early days exploring (2015), I have ignored previously discovered systems. This is purely for roleplay reasons, (it made no sense to me to 'explore' something that's already been 'explored'), although certainly while I was gaining exploration rank it made the process much faster as every system I scanned I got first discovered bonus for everything in it.

So it's not about enjoyment as such. It was simply one of a number of criteria that I considered when deciding whether to spend time in a system. I don't care particularly about tags, the chances of other players seeing my name (which would mean nothing to them anyway) are pretty remote, and at this stage of the game I need neither rank nor credits. The only reason I would bother to play is if I found the process fun.

I followed this same protocol once the FSS was introduced. I made three short trips to map notable bodies that I had previously discovered, exploring along the way. I was able to map all but two of my previously discovered ELW's (I guess they really were quite close to the bubble). Of course, even mapping those ELW's (and some AW's and WW's) ended up feeling pointless, after all, there's no way to interact with them...

 

[Shinji Ikari]

Huh! Well then, I learned something new! That surprises me to be honest, considering that the honk reveals the existence of planets but doesn't populate the contact list with them (as undiscovered) until you do the zoom / focus maneuver or DSS flyby maneuver.

ps - nobody has answered my original question about whether or not you need to find undiscovered systems in order to enjoy them.

I rather be in an undiscovered system but I still enjoy myself in explored systems.

 

[Riverside]

I rather be in an undiscovered system but I still enjoy myself in explored systems.

I'm sticking to the bubble for now, using the FSS & mapping any planet I happen to be nearby to grab extra BGS points. It's handy because it's quick and the part of the ADS I miss is already there in explored space.

If I go out further (on a passenger mission atm, no motivation to explore for the sake of it) I'll still fully scan every system & map virtually nothing (again, unless I'm going there anyway). I don't need the money, I don't need the rank increase, I just need the BGS points nowadays. It's turned something that was difficult to get but powerful into something trivial yet still powerful. That's a kind of better, isn't it?

 

[Galactic Fork]

Call me when mapping an ELW does anything more than provide credits and tags.

Do you mean like contaminating them with our probes?

But whether or not mapping does anything doesn't make a difference as to whether one should expect to go somewhere in order to get information we can already get from a distance today.

 

[[Diplomacy] Carnegie]

Do you mean like contaminating them with our probes?

But whether or not mapping does anything doesn't make a difference as to whether one should expect to go somewhere in order to get information we can already get from a distance today.

Ahh, the old 'appeal to reality' argument.
We have self-driving cars and pilotless drones, so we shouldn't expect to fly our ships at all. See how pointless that argument is?

 

[Sunyavadin]

Well, I can only speak for myself: I didn't reply because you specifically asked the "bring back the ADS folks".

Pretty sure they only exist as a hypothetical strawman. I don't know if anyone wants the ADS back, much less replacing the FSS, just to have some of its functionality added back in some manner which would build on the current exploration mechanics.

 

[Sysmon]

And yet here they are used like facts carved in stone. The sheer numbers are often overestimated. The true worth of statistics heavily depend on the intelligence and experience of the people interpreting them.

The great thing about statistics, though, is that you can pick your statistical tool to get the outcome you are after. It's about asking the question that fits the answer you want. Don't let details like reality get in the way of a good story!

S

 

[Sysmon]

Well, do you rather assume what is less likely to happen? Mind you, EDSM has a far larger fraction of the actual playerbase compared to the mentioned polls so the margin of error is far smaller.

You mean precision might be tighter. Accuracy can still be way off, depending on how representative a slice the EDSM users are of the general ED player base.

S