Could Frontier please demonstrate how to use the FSS enjoyably?

[lenna]

I meant in terms of removing the distinction between a body 500,000 Ls away and one 50 Ls away. Aside from the number of times you have to press zoom-in they require the same effort to explore. By that measure, the FSS 'flattens' all systems to the same depth.

Not really - it is a local system scanner. It already filters out the noise from radio noise outside of the system, it is not as if you can use it to scan objects in other systems.

The ADS really was little different in that regard - just skipped the arguably pointless and irritating blob-hunt mini-game that FD call the FSS.

 

[lenna]

Stepping through the planet types then fine-tuning individual signals would have been a good solution, I think.

Essentially where I was coming from.

AND FOR THE LOVE OF GOD HAVE THE FSS REMEMBER WHERE I LEFT THE TUNER!

+1000 … could not agree more.

The modes thing doesn't bother me much, since I stay in analysis mode 97.2% of the time. It's more irritating in the SRV, I find.

I find it incredibly irritating to have to switch modes - but more than that, it is the constant repetitive and banal "X is non-functional in your current mode" messages that are the real problem.

 

[xondk]

Ah the overloaded automatic 'argument' again. You know, with that thinking you could easily wipe the whole game in a single stroke (like manually piloting space ships with weapons in 3300 - with WWII engine sounds on top of it, I beg you). You don't need a crystal ball to predict that in 3300 no one will be allowed anymore to drive a car manually, let alone a spaceship!

"automatic arguement" I have no idea what you are referring to, and you are seemingly not actually trying to create a discussion and merely throwing words around trying to belittle my reply? or are you just making assumptions that have no basis in my post at all?

I'm referring to that many say the new stuff is 'bad', without actually bringing up what would be good, I argue its better then what was before and I like doing 'something' and that as far as realism it leans on actual methods for discovering things in space.

The pre-existing exploration mechanics were fine on the most part - and what happens IRL is fine for a stationary/geo-stationary telescope but an abysmal premise for a product like ED. Other proposals included special scanners that would scan the surface/sub-surface of bodies and provide more detailed information via one of the pre-existing MFDs.

The point is that forced interaction does not make for good mechanics, and blob-hunt/space-golf are essentially that - forced interaction (during exploration of virgin systems) and other changes around it just make matters worse.

"Pre-existing exploration mechanics" are more or less the same as what is now, with the extra addition of surface scanning, fss only replaces what you did before.
Before this upgrade what we did was honk, and got a level 1 scan, and then fly to planet and get a level 2 or 3 scan depending on if you had detailed discovery scanner.

Now, we honk, get an idea of the general gravity lines, we go in and scan for sensor information that indicates that something might be there, and we keep going until we find the object, getting a level 3 scan, and then there is the addition of a surface scan.

The later in my book seems significantly better then what we had before.

 

[-VR- Max Factor]

How do you feel about the visual execution of the FSS?

Some of it I like other bits, not so much.

 

[MadDogMurdock]

"automatic arguement" I have no idea what you are referring to, and you are seemingly not actually trying to create a discussion and merely throwing words around trying to belittle my reply? or are you just making assumptions that have no basis in my post at all?

I'm referring to that many say the new stuff is 'bad', without actually bringing up what would be good, I argue its better then what was before and I like doing 'something' and that as far as realism it leans on actual methods for discovering things in space.

"Pre-existing exploration mechanics" are more or less the same as what is now, with the extra addition of surface scanning, fss only replaces what you did before.
Before this upgrade what we did was honk, and got a level 1 scan, and then fly to planet and get a level 2 or 3 scan depending on if you had detailed discovery scanner.

Now, we honk, get an idea of the general gravity lines, we go in and scan for sensor information that indicates that something might be there, and we keep going until we find the object, getting a level 3 scan, and then there is the addition of a surface scan.

The later in my book seems significantly better then what we had before.

There have been many many suggestions about changes to the FSS that would make it better but that is all hot air because ED is in maintenance mode until the 'new era' at the end of 2020.

In the absence of any significant development, those who dislike the FSS have understandably fallen back to the easiest option to resolve our issue, which is the restoration of the ADS as a module.

Those who don't want it don't need to fit it and would have an extra slot compared to those who would fit it and recover the exploration methods that they liked.

 

[xondk]

There have been many many suggestions about changes to the FSS that would make it better but that is all hot air because ED is in maintenance mode until the 'new era' at the end of 2020.

In the absence of any significant development, those who dislike the FSS have understandably fallen back to the easiest option to resolve our issue, which is the restoration of the ADS as a module.

Those who don't want it don't need to fit it and would have an extra slot compared to those who would fit it and recover the exploration methods that they liked.

Could you link some of those suggestions? I've seen this claim several times, but i've not actually seen any serious suggestions, and scanning the entire forum is a bit eh.

I enjoy the compared to what we had before, could it be improved beyond that? sure, but my whole point is that it is better then what we had, could some suggestion someone made end up being better once out and tried by a lot of people? sure, it is possible but it isn't really provable that other random idea's would be better and not have similar flaws.

Not sure what else you where trying to suggest when it's not about automation. Care to clarify?

Yes, we control where our fss should scan and examine objects?
This information comes probably in form of spectograms and a whole host other metrics, and futuristic sensors, and we the user are presented with the information of our choice.
So yeah, that part is 'automated' if that is what you are referring to, but this already happens irl, reducing long repetitive actions to specific choices?

 

[lenna]

"Pre-existing exploration mechanics" are more or less the same as what is now, with the extra addition of surface scanning, fss only replaces what you did before.

Nope - not even close, the only truth in your statement is the FSS replacing what preceded it - the rest is pure bunk.

 

[Maro-Val]

Can someone pls also ask the devs why on earth we cannot charge the fsd while we are in the soul crashing fss? Or why we have to zero throttle to enter it?

 

[MadDogMurdock]

Could you link some of those suggestions? I've seen this claim several times, but i've not actually seen any serious suggestions, and scanning the entire forum is a bit eh.

I enjoy the what are you doing compared to what we had before, could it be improved beyond that? sure, but my whole point is that it is better then what we had, could some suggestion someone made end up being better once out and tried by a lot of people? sure, it is possible but it isn't really provable that other random idea's would be better and not have similar flaws.


Yes, we control where our fss should scan and examine objects?
This information comes probably in form of spectograms and a whole host other metrics, and futuristic sensors, and we the user are presented with the information of our choice.
So yeah, that part is 'automated' if that is what you are referring to, but this already happens irl, reducing long repetitive actions to specific choices?

I'm not trawling through these threads for you but my suggestions briefly are:

• Restore some form of system scan that provides a system map outline with selectable body position in the nav panel.
• Enable the FSS in SC flight by putting the visualization and zoom/tune control directly in the cockpit view as part of Analysis Mode.
• Retain the current camera view for those who like it and multicrew users.

The point you seem to ignore is that for more than a few people, the FSS is not better than before.
By making system exploration a jigsaw where you fill in the pieces one by one, it has removed a range of styles that preferred to see an overview and then fill in the details.

I can fit the FSS into an improved version of the latter method as an optional step, but only if some form of system scan is restored.
But as it stands, with the obligatory FSS fill in the pieces method, I don't want to explore at all.

 

[Winterwalker]

Can someone pls also ask the devs why on earth we cannot charge the fsd while we are in the soul crashing fss? Or why we have to zero throttle to enter it?

You can charge FSD before you enter FSS, do agree we'd be better off without throttle zero.

I think the problem with an outline scan is either it gives you no useful information (blank planet positions in sys map, is not different from knowing there are x unexplored is system, which is FSS now) or there is no information to gain from FSS, as sys map already gives you identifiable planets (as old system). The only way around that I think would be an intermediate position, and I don't think it's all that good;

1. Honk, system map populates type-identifiable planets, no cartographics cash.
2. FSS works in exploration as now, paid as now.
3. DSS as now.

I think indicator-hieroglyphs should point you towards any undiscovered remaining in FSS. The fact you're not given any indicator, and that feeling of searching in the dark for the last blob is not a great look.

 

[-VR- Max Factor]

There have been many many suggestions about changes to the FSS that would make it better but that is all hot air because ED is in maintenance mode until the 'new era' at the end of 2020.

In the absence of any significant development, those who dislike the FSS have understandably fallen back to the easiest option to resolve our issue, which is the restoration of the ADS as a module.

Those who don't want it don't need to fit it and would have an extra slot compared to those who would fit it and recover the exploration methods that they liked.

You need to find out what maintenance mode mean. If they are developing the next era, it by definition is not in maintenance mode.

Here is the definition: Maintenance mode. In the world of software development, maintenance mode refers to a point in a program's life when it has reached all of its goals and is generally considered to be "complete" and bug-free.

They are also developing smaller updates on the way to the next era. That is the opposite of what maintenance mode is.

 

[-VR- Max Factor]

I'm not trawling through these threads for you but my suggestions briefly are:

• Restore some form of system scan that provides a system map outline with selectable body position in the nav panel.
• Enable the FSS in SC flight by putting the visualization and zoom/tune control directly in the cockpit view as part of Analysis Mode.
• Retain the current camera view for those who like it and multicrew users.

The point you seem to ignore is that for more than a few people, the FSS is not better than before.
By making system exploration a jigsaw where you fill in the pieces one by one, it has removed a range of styles that preferred to see an overview and then fill in the details.

I can fit the FSS into an improved version of the latter method as an optional step, but only if some form of system scan is restored.
But as it stands, with the obligatory FSS fill in the pieces method, I don't want to explore at all.

Your first point would destroy the FSS for me. So a no from me.

 

[Kaocraft]

You need to find out what maintenance mode mean. If they are developing the next era, it by definition is not in maintenance mode.

Here is the definition: Maintenance mode. In the world of software development, maintenance mode refers to a point in a program's life when it has reached all of its goals and is generally considered to be "complete" and bug-free.

They are also developing smaller updates on the way to the next era. That is the opposite of what maintenance mode is.

When you have to resort to quoting definitions to deflect a criticism, you may have already missed the argument. There’s an emotional component to the Maintenance Mode label as it is applied here, and essentially it means: nothing significant or exciting is happening or appears to be coming, developers are not engaged with community, game is pretty much “done”. You might be successful at convincing people that they’re Using Words Wrong, but the underlying sentiment is what would need to be addressed if you want to change anyone’s mind (or even have a meaningful disagreement).

What do you think? Is the more colloquial use of “Maintenance Mode” very far off the mark? Maybe if we called it “Low Effort Mode” this would be better? Seems to me that the extent of Frontier’s engagement right now, with the community and with the game, amounts to putting out the occasional fire and slowly chugging along, doing the bare minimum to keep the game functional and/or mitigate the rate at which it loses existing functionality.

It’s not sufficient to say “New Era” as if that means something, it doesn’t change anything about the way the game is now or about the way it has been handled for most of its lifespan, and it doesn’t actually tell us anything about what to expect in the foreseeable future. That’s the thing that people are frustrated with, and that’s what most of them are expressing when they say “Maintenance Mode”.

 

[Darkfyre99]

The fss is horrible
Everyone knows it

Sorry, not "everybody" knows it. I still think it's a wonderful exploration mechanism, because it checks nearly all my boxes for an enjoyable exploration experience:

1) It doesn't provide unwanted information while using it. I explore for that feeling of discovery, that moment when you know something you previously didn't know before. Unwanted information can easily ruin that feeling of discovery, and with the FSS I have control of the flow of information, allowing me to get as much, or as little, information as I want about anything in the system.

2) It is possible to deduce a lot of information about the bodies within a system and their orbital configuration without having to actually resolve them in the FSS. All it takes is one or two pans of the system (depending upon the complexity of the system), and some strategic tuning. It is far more fun to deduce that information myself, than get told the information by automatic systems. It's even fun to learn I am wrong about something, because discovering I'm wrong still invokes that feeling of discovery.

3) If there doesn't seem to be anything particularly interesting about a system, and/or its bodies, I can quickly use it to resolve all the bodies, just in case I missed something interesting.

4) If there does seem to be something particularly interesting about a system, and/or its bodies, I can explore the system by using a combination of the FSS, parallax, and flying by bodies to resolve them. Trying to fly efficiently without navigation data is a lot of fun, because I have to rely on audio and visual cues to start my braking maneuver, rather than simply watching the ATA count down to the right moment.

There remain two flies in the ointment of the FSS. The first is that I still have to go to the system map to get certain information about a body, especially if I'm resolving that body via flyby as opposed to using the FSS. I'd really prefer to pull up body information on my information panel in the cockpit, rather than the system map, which remains extremely clunkly to use when you're playing in VR and/or a HOTAS. The second is that we have to throttle down to use the FSS in the first place. I'd rather make the choice of whether I need to throttle down to get the information I want myself, than have it forced on me, especially since half the time I haven't even come to a full stop by the time I exit the FSS in the first place.

It would also be nice if they fixed the orbital line bug in VR, but that isn't nearly as annoying as those two issues above.

edit:

I suppose I'll need to put in the inevitable "I wouldn't mind if they reintroduced an optional version of the ADS, for those who exploration style isn't suited for the FSS. Just keep that thing away from my ships." disclaimer.

 

[xondk]

Nope - not even close, the only truth in your statement is the FSS replacing what preceded it - the rest is pure bunk.

Ok, I can also say you are wrong, but when I do I generally back my statement up with 'why', so your statement is utterly meaningless unless you explain why I am wrong, what is the difference in mechanics currently? other then what has been added?

It's not about me and what I'm referring to. From the part I quoted I got the impression you would try to justify automation in a game that's mainly about manually flying and acting. This argument "in 3300 these things would be all automated and done by computers" is quite popular here around (which is factually true of course but would result in a horribly boring game). If that was not what you wanted to say I must have misunderstood you then...

Ah I think you misunderstood, or we talked past eachother, I never meant it towards automation, I meant pure technically in what FSS represents, taking in the light from a system, (automatically) processing it, and giving players an output. Rather then having to fly towards a planet and then 'scan' there, which also is a computer interpreting sensors and showing us the result.

Which is also what happens, in irl a computer is used to process the data to speed up the discovery of what the data might hold.

I'm not trawling through these threads for you but my suggestions briefly are:

• Restore some form of system scan that provides a system map outline with selectable body position in the nav panel.
• Enable the FSS in SC flight by putting the visualization and zoom/tune control directly in the cockpit view as part of Analysis Mode.
• Retain the current camera view for those who like it and multicrew users.

The point you seem to ignore is that for more than a few people, the FSS is not better than before.
By making system exploration a jigsaw where you fill in the pieces one by one, it has removed a range of styles that preferred to see an overview and then fill in the details.

I can fit the FSS into an improved version of the latter method as an optional step, but only if some form of system scan is restored.
But as it stands, with the obligatory FSS fill in the pieces method, I don't want to explore at all.

First off, my points aren't ignoring anyone, I'm explicitly stating I like it better then what we had before.

Second, most cannot know every thread in the forum and unless pointed to it, especially given how the forum grows if you are not reading it that often.
Showing suggestions at least when I use suggestions that are not my own is then my responsibility to point to them to indicate where they are at, which also serves to provide those suggestions a bigger crowd.

on your suggestions:
1: What would this do? what is the advantage of honk, fly to planet? it would seem significantly slower then what we have now, unless you also intend to map, in which case speed probably ends up being the same.
2-3: I mean that would be nice from a UI perspective, but I believed that we were talking about the FSS mechanics being bad? are they only bad because they cannot do certain things? in that case we are talking about some things it lacks rather then it being a bad mechanic which seems to be what many are claiming?

I do not understand your reference with this as it is now being a jigsaw as right now, in my view at least, it does exactly that, you enter a system you look around get an overview and go to map those planets that are of interest to you?
Before seemed to at least in my book be way more scattered.

Unless you are referring to the overview being a one click and you have some information, then need to judge if a planet might be interesting.
Where my overview is more based on if there is anything interesting in the system, and then go to that interesting planet.

So yeah, I'm not ignoring people's issues with the FSS, I'm just not agreeing that it is a problem at least for me, and suggestion 2-3 would definitely be welcome additions but again, from my understanding it was the mechanic that was being argued bad? that scanning from afar to get a good amount of information, acting like a mobile observatory, was a bad mechanic.

 

[-VR- Max Factor]

When you have to resort to quoting definitions to deflect a criticism, you may have already missed the argument. There’s an emotional component to the Maintenance Mode label as it is applied here, and essentially it means: nothing significant or exciting is happening or appears to be coming, developers are not engaged with community, game is pretty much “done”. You might be successful at convincing people that they’re Using Words Wrong, but the underlying sentiment is what would need to be addressed if you want to change anyone’s mind (or even have a meaningful disagreement).

I am not reflecting any criticism, where we I doing that?

What do you think? Is the more colloquial use of “Maintenance Mode” very far off the mark? Maybe if we called it “Low Effort Mode” this would be better? Seems to me that the extent of Frontier’s engagement right now, with the community and with the game, amounts to putting out the occasional fire and slowly chugging along, doing the bare minimum to keep the game functional and/or mitigate the rate at which it loses existing functionality.

Call it whatever mode you like. People will have different opinions.

It’s not sufficient to say “New Era” as if that means something, it doesn’t change anything about the way the game is now or about the way it has been handled for most of its lifespan, and it doesn’t actually tell us anything about what to expect in the foreseeable future. That’s the thing that people are frustrated with, and that’s what most of them are expressing when they say “Maintenance Mode”.

Never said it did. People should try to use the correct terminology or else people will not know what they are talking about.

Again, how it's been handled is subjective and down to personal opinion.

 

[lenna]

There have been many many suggestions about changes to the FSS that would make it better but that is all hot air because ED is in maintenance mode until the 'new era' at the end of 2020.

When you consider that many of the suggestions being made now were actually made during the Beta it does make you wonder if FD will ever take on board the critique of the FSS and do anything to improve it regardless of the time frame. I could not blame anyone for thinking that they will not, but I also think it is unfair to criticise FD regarding level of communication or delivery time scales.

The relatively simple proposal to revive the ADS in some shape or form would help side step many of the problems at least some of us have with the FSS implementation but I think any improvements (ADS revival or FSS/DSS revision) are not likely to be delivered before next year now. FD are almost certainly in a position where they have to release a new premium expansion (c/f Horizons) for a variety of reasons and implementation of that expansion is likely to take precedent over other concerns.

 

[lenna]

Ok, I can also say you are wrong, but when I do I generally back my statement up with 'why', so your statement is utterly meaningless unless you explain why I am wrong, what is the difference in mechanics currently? other then what has been added?

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.

 

[Darkfyre99]

Ahh you added the 'Netflix' thing again. It's funny how the FSS proponents seem to think this is some kind of argument winner, when the only people who were using Netflix while exploring were those who DIDN'T like the ADS. Those of us who enjoyed exploration prior to 3.3 were too busy having fun to be wasting time on Netflix.

I've never watched Netflix while playing Elite: Dangerous, even before I started playing in VR. It's the kind of game that seems to demand my full attention, unlike many other games I've played.

Before 3.3 and the FSS, I simply didn't do much exploring at all, because the ADS was that awful. I've been exploring non-stop since the 3.3 beta, and now having reached Beagle Point, I'm planning on a leisurely trip back to the Bubble, ETA around 2020 and the "New Era" of Elite: Dangerous.

 

[lenna]

Before 3.3 and the FSS, I simply didn't do much exploring at all, because the ADS was that awful.

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