Explorers : would you consider giving up on the infinite honk for...?

[Genar-Hofoen]

I do not believe the Honk system should be changed at all...

What many people have asked for is more depth not more grind... changing the current honk system would not achieve that, even in the manner you have proposed.

Additions such as sub-surface geological surveys, seismic surveys, radiation surveys, lifeform surveys, weather surveys and the like could be added via orbital scans and perhaps would require different types of scan for different features (including requiring specialist SRV excursions perhaps). I can even see a potential for scientific SLFs that may work like re-usable probes (for certain types of orbital scans).

There are many ways the current system could be enhanced without adding more grind. Any solution that reduces the level of information returned by the Honk would be doing exactly that - adding grind, not depth.

Agreed. Again.

I'm sick of reading proposals on how to turn convenient body discovery into something dull and drawn-out which would add nothing to exploration except the time taken to discover a spinning ball in space. God these forums are depressing reading

 

[Mengy]

I'm sick of reading proposals on how to turn convenient body discovery into something dull and drawn-out which would add nothing to exploration except the time taken to discover a spinning ball in space. God these forums are depressing reading

I guess that's where you and I disagree. I don't want exploration to be convenient, I want it to be engaging and interactive. I want the act of exploring a system to require more than just a button press. I want things to discover by a more engrossing process than just honking a horn and parking my ship face to face with a planet.

That's why Frontier couldn't figure out a way to put exploration into multicrew, because it's so convenient that there isn't anything for a crew to actually do. I'd rather it was different.

 

[Andovar]

Additions such as sub-surface geological surveys, seismic surveys, radiation surveys, lifeform surveys, weather surveys and the like could be added via orbital scans and perhaps would require different types of scan for different features (including requiring specialist SRV excursions perhaps).

Yes, this please.

 

[Genar-Hofoen]

I guess that's where you and I disagree. I don't want exploration to be convenient, I want it to be engaging and interactive. I want the act of exploring a system to require more than just a button press. I want things to discover by a more engrossing process than just honking a horn and parking my ship face to face with a planet.

That's why Frontier couldn't figure out a way to put exploration into multicrew, because it's so convenient that there isn't anything for a crew to actually do. I'd rather it was different.

Tsk.

But really, who actually wants body discovery to take longer than it does now? What could it possibly add to your time, other than time? Feeling increasingly frustrated at the very concept of making mere body existence discovery take much longer than it already does. :/

 

[[Diplomacy] Carnegie]

Tsk.

But really, who actually wants body discovery to take longer than it does now? What could it possibly add to your time, other than time? Feeling increasingly frustrated at the very concept of making mere body existence discovery take much longer than it already does. :/

I concur.

I'm fundamentally opposed to any change to the ADS that results in me having to either blindly fly around a system looking for bodies which may or may not be present, or fly half a million light seconds to identify an icy body as being an icy body.

 

[Mostly Awol]

I would give up the infinite scanner only if whatever replaced it would give me hints or clues on where to travel/scan. For example the limits on the other scanners are very small that any system with a second star outside that range could only be found by sight alone. God forbid its more than a few 100kls away or even higher. So using my example of a distance star lets say I get the entry stars system or closer planets but with some vague readings popping up as a USS that would require me traveling there and scanning again to get more details of that area. I would also love a wave scanner on my ship like on the SRV but for USS or something similar. My only concern is scanning should not rely on the mk1 eyeball in the 34th century.

 

[Indy Original]

I concur.

I'm fundamentally opposed to any change to the ADS that results in me having to either blindly fly around a system looking for bodies which may or may not be present, or fly half a million light seconds to identify an icy body as being an icy body.

I love the idea of using parallax, but I understand why other people don't - it's just not feasible to hunt down everything in a system by flying around randomly and squinting at the screen, especially since there "may or may not be" anything to find in the first place (and even if there IS something there, it might be worthless).

But what if you only had to use parallax to hunt down far-flung stars? Not only would this be easier (because stars are bigger and brighter than planets, obviously), it would also not involve any random flying - since you could determine the approximate location of a distant star by observing how it affects the orbit of the primary star, due to the way they gravitationally interact! You could also work out roughly how far away the star was, by looking at the primary star's orbital period... and then you could decide for yourself whether or not it was worth going in search of the secondary star, based on this information. Best of all, this orbital data is already in the game... Frontier would not have to add anything, they could simply reduce the ADS range somewhat, and call it a day! (There are some great ideas in this thread, but some of them are so complicated that we might never see them in the game - whereas what I am suggesting is so simple, the devs could do it in their lunch break.)

And of course, you would NEVER be flying around searching for stars that may or may not be present, because you can see which stars are in the system (and what type of stars they are) by checking the system map - undiscovered stars are actually shown, as soon as you arrive in-system. So you would know in advance how many stars there were, and based on their type you could make educated guesses about how likely they are to have valuable planets... and then it would be up to you to decide whether or not to go looking for them.

If exploration involved making choices like this, that alone would make it feel more involved and engaging; and having to use parallax would make finding that far-flung star feel more rewarding, since it would actually be an accomplishment! And then, once you get close, you just honk your ADS and voila, all the planets orbiting that star are discovered.

How's that for a compromise?!

 

[Red Martian]

I had a transport run the other day which required me to find the proper location of a planetary base. I had just upgraded my ship, but the station I had left didn't have an Advanced Discovery Scanner, so I had to make do with the BSD. It was like finding a needle in a haystack. This was hampered even more by the constant interdictions that often happen on a transport run. By the time I had found it, there were only 8 minutes remaining on my mission clock. It was nothing but pure frustration, and it was all for 64,000 credits.

So I'm firmly in the "no" camp. ADS is fine as it is.

 

[lenna]

I don't want exploration to be convenient, I want it to be engaging and interactive. I want the act of exploring a system to require more than just a button press.

The honk is only the first phase of the process, adding interactive and engaging components to the other parts of the process is where the focus needs to be.

Besides which, the Discovery Scanners have uses outside of the exploration activities. They can be almost essential during certain types of mission.

What you are talking about by trying to nerf the Discovery Scanner mechanics is adding "frustration and grind" not "engaging or interactive" activities.

 

[Ziljan]

Having ranges of 500, 1000, and infinite IS broken. That's like having speeds of 100, 500, and instant teleportation regardless of distance.

Well said Moss! This needs to be repeated over and over again until it sinks into the collective consciousness.

Basically it boils down to a choice between cake or death.

[video=youtube_share;XFsyXcj4_JI]https://youtu.be/XFsyXcj4_JI[/video]

 

[[Diplomacy] Carnegie]

How's that for a compromise?!

The thing is, YOUR gameplay is already available through using the BDS and IDS, and so I don't see why I should give up MY gameplay.

If you want to argue for changes to the IDS so that, for example, it shows all bodies in the primary system and any other stars then you'd probably get a lot of support. I'd even support 'manual' discovery getting a bonus payout.

That seems like a better compromise to me.

 

[[Diplomacy] Carnegie]

Well said Moss! This needs to be repeated over and over again until it sinks into the collective consciousness.

Basically it boils down to a choice between cake or death.

https://youtu.be/XFsyXcj4_JI

There are fixes to that which do not require breaking the ADS.

 

[RandomGun]

But really, who actually wants body discovery to take longer than it does now?

I want discovery process to be interactive and one that can be improved by skills and knowledge and with better equipment. It is impossible to fit anything like that into the near-instant scan we have now. Of course, discovering bodies should have better monetary and also non-monetary rewards (for example missions and useful exploration information from cartographers).

My question is, why do you want to find those most distant bodies and their information instantly? What do get from that?

 

[Ziljan]

I want discovery process to be interactive and one that can be improved by skills and knowledge and with better equipment. It is impossible to fit anything like that into the near-instant scan we have now. Of course, discovering bodies should have better monetary and also non-monetary rewards (for example missions and useful exploration information from cartographers).

My question is, why do you want to find those most distant bodies and their information instantly? What do get from that?

Excellently put. It would be very difficult to keep an instant all knowing single button press mechanic and end up with a deep and meaningful scan mechanic. It's possible, but it would probably be more interesting to have the ADS (as well as the BDS and IDS) be infinite range but not necessarily instant or one button press. Maybe the difference in the scanners could be size/weight/speed. With the bigger ADS weighing more and giving significantly faster and more accurate/complete scans, and BDS giving only basic info and perhaps more slowly since the detectors would be smaller and less sensitive.

There are fixes to that which do not require breaking the ADS.

I think you've misunderstood. My post was about the IDS and BDS needing to be improved to be competitive with the ADS. The ADS functionally it's a different though related issue. My only point there was that all of the scanners should have a useful place in the game for veterans who have played for more than 1 or 2 hours.

 

[[Diplomacy] Carnegie]

I want discovery process to be interactive and one that can be improved by skills and knowledge and with better equipment. It is impossible to fit anything like that into the near-instant scan we have now. Of course, discovering bodies should have better monetary and also non-monetary rewards (for example missions and useful exploration information from cartographers).

My question is, why do you want to find those most distant bodies and their information instantly? What do get from that?

Interactive does not have to equate to time-consuming.
Parallax astronomy is not a skill, it's an exercise in patience.
Knowledge is already part of the equation - eg. knowing that it's not worth hitting brown dwarf stars if you're looking for earth-likes.
The ADS is the epitome of 'better equipment'.

Traditionally, it falls upon those advocating change to justify it, rather than those advocating the status quo.

 

[[Diplomacy] Carnegie]

I think you've misunderstood. My post was about the IDS and BDS needing to be improved to be competitive with the ADA. The ADS functionally it's a different though related issue. My only point there was that all of the scanners should have a useful place in the game for veterans who have played for more than 1 or hours.

Then we have some agreement - I even suggested changes to the IDS which extend its functionality such that it becomes a meaningful alternative to the ADS, especially for those who prefer a more manual discovery process.

 

[Indy Original]

The thing is, YOUR gameplay is already available through using the BDS and IDS, and so I don't see why I should give up MY gameplay.

If you want to argue for changes to the IDS so that, for example, it shows all bodies in the primary system and any other stars then you'd probably get a lot of support. I'd even support 'manual' discovery getting a bonus payout.

That seems like a better compromise to me.

The IDS could definitely do with a buff - considering how much more expensive it is than the BDS, it's current range is like a bad joke. But as long as the ADS has an infinite range, the IDS will only ever be a stepping stone... even the name, 'Intermediate', makes it sound temporary! I thought that giving the ADS a range good enough to detect all of a star's planets (& nearby stars, too), but not enough to detect far-flung stars (which, let's face it, most players would probably never fly to anyway) was a good way to give everybody what they wanted, without making the BDS & IDS completely redundant. People who want the convenience of finding everything nearby can have it; but people who want the challenge of finding distant objects, well, they can have that too, without the ADS's infinite range putting them at an inherent disadvantage. (I suppose if 'manual' exploration paid better, as you suggest, that would also work... but, how could that be justified, in-game?)

Also, don't think of it as 'giving up YOUR gameplay' so that I can have mine - if you take that attitude, you will always be opposed to it, naturally. Instead, think of it as gaining the chance of some satisfaction and enjoyment, albeit at the cost of some time. It's like flying a small ship, rather than just always using an Anaconda... it might not be as efficient, but it's much more challenging and fun, so it's a net gain overall.

(Incidentally, parallax would also make multi-crew actually useful for explorers, since it's another pair of eyes to scan the starfield with! I know it's not much, but hey, it's better than nothing, and multi-crew needs all the help it can get right now.)

 

[madbilly]

I set off home from BP in September last year, following the anticlockwise Sag-Car mission route. I've still not made it to Colonia, and I generally only scan what's within range of the main star unless it looks interesting in the system map, and then I'll travel, sometimes hundreds of thousands of ls. All these suggestions of nerfing the ADS to make it more "engaging" to find bodies would make it take even longer for me to get to Colonia and wouldn't improve the experience at all. I just wouldn't bother searching for anything I couldn't see, and I think the vast majority of people out exploring would feel the same.

The ideas I've heard about the ADS having less range, of adding things like wave scanner to the ships, are good, I really wish they'd been done at the start of the game. But they weren't, and nerfing the ADS to add more "realism" now is no more realistic than waking up tomorrow to discover that the internal combustion engine didn't exist and everything is steam powered. Please be a bit more pragmatic with your ideas.

And I hope to see you in the black, finding shinies

 

[lenna]

The IDS could definitely do with a buff - considering how much more expensive it is than the BDS, it's current range is like a bad joke. But as long as the ADS has an infinite range, the IDS will only ever be a stepping stone... even the name, 'Intermediate', makes it sound temporary!

IRBM (Intermediate Range Ballistic Missile) is not a temporary ballistic missile class, it is a class of missile that has a range greater than an SRBM but lower than an ICBM. Intermediate is nothing to do with temporary in that particular context, it is something with capability in between two things. The same word usage context applies in the case of the IDS wrt the BDS and the ADS.

Ever think that players may not give a rats backside about multi-crew and would have preferred it was never implemented at all yet still wish to engage in exploration? (applies to at least one person I know - I personally don't care either way)

I am sorry but the old "parallax body detection" debate has been covered so many times in these forums but on the whole I think it is too late to be talking about introducing limits to the ADS just to support such gameplay. There is nothing stopping players limiting themselves to the IDS if they want to engage in parallax body detection mini-game type gameplay - it results in lower rebuy and build costs too.

I don't think anyone would object to a buff for the IDS and possibly the BDS, but the ADS should probably remain as-is, reducing the ADS range would not be an acceptable option nor would reducing the level of detail returned by the "honk".

 

[Genar-Hofoen]

I want discovery process to be interactive and one that can be improved by skills and knowledge and with better equipment. It is impossible to fit anything like that into the near-instant scan we have now. Of course, discovering bodies should have better monetary and also non-monetary rewards (for example missions and useful exploration information from cartographers).

My question is, why do you want to find those most distant bodies and their information instantly? What do get from that?

My counter-question is : where do you get off wasting precious tens of minutes of your lifetime hunting for a spinning virtual ball in space, when you could be spending that time actually exploring and examining them?

Is this the typical masochistic wish to make the game more painful I see so often on the forums?

If so - then meh.

But nevermind. I'm sure Sandro et all will see your wish to make the game more masochistic, and supply you and unfortunately me, with your wish to make the game even more boring.