Explorers : would you consider giving up on the infinite honk for...?
- Thread starter Godsailsaqueen
- Start date
Last edited:
![[Diplomacy] Carnegie](https://forums-cdn.zaonce.net/data/avatars/m/123/123809.jpg?1553527149){kind=avatar}
So you're unwilling to 'hamstring' YOURSELF in order to get the element of mystery you're craving, but you're happy to 'hamstring' EVERYONE ELSE in order to have it.
It's so nice to see people willing to work to find a compromise solution </sarcasm>
One shot Galaxy honk....
Like the old galactic hyperdrive
Like the old galactic hyperdrive
Currently you don't know what type it is until you do scan it, you can try to guess the type from the thumb nail image but it is far from reliable in all cases. There are a fair few MR/HMC planets with atmospheres that could be mistaken for earth likes (or visa versa).
Because seeing those 500,000LS systems and everything about them is SOOOOO important. </don'tneedsarcasmtagbecauseitisprettyobivious>
Given that the original outcries way back when were to get rid of the ADS infinite range altogether, my solution is the very definition of compromise - you keep the infinite range honk, only you don't get to see the details of what is circling the ultra-distant stars. You can judge for yourself if, based on the mass and distance from its star it's worth checking out or not.
Compromise isn't just about give (ie adding to the BDS/IDS as I also suggested). Compromise is about give and TAKE. You're offering one, not the other.
I'm only interested in adding a bit of sense to the playing field. The devs themselves regret the infinite honk as it is currently implemented.
Last edited:
If you want a neutral distance for ADS, based on my use of the ADS to date... 1,000,000 Ls or 1Ly would be the only ADS range limits I would consider acceptable.
In this context IDS could be increased to 300,000 Ls and BDS to maybe 90,000 Ls.
There are plenty of GOOD non-exploration related reasons to keep the ADS as is but if ADS/IDS/BDS limits were to be rebalanced I would only consider the above an acceptable compromise.
Last edited:
Well it's a game, so clearly not THAT important - but still.
Yes, I'M offering GIVE - YOU'RE only offering TAKE.
It's a game. What has sense got to do with it?
I assume I can review your posting history and there won't be any instances where you've suggested that FDev might actually have been wrong about something.
Some bad food analogies in this thread, so let me add mine. The current exploration 'game' is bread and butter. Kind of dull and in need of something but it's a reasonable starting place. For all the grand claims of filet mignon etc, all we've had proposed so far is take away the butter and force players to churn their own butter. Just making something more time consuming doesn't make it more fun or engaging
except mass and distance mean nothing in the judgment of whther its worth wasting time in SC to go see. all these removing capability ideas do is guarantee that secondary stars past a certain distance, plus EVERYTHING orbiting them will not be scanned at all. you wont get more interesting gameplay but more tedious exploring, and less information, less stuff scanned, fewer people wanting to do it at all. if thats what you want fine. remove ALL the scanners except the detail scanner and refuse to replace the basic disco. if you find that interesting fine. and i will drop in once you have gone and find that distant earthlike that you missed with your eyes because it was a little too far away for parallax or you just missed it for some other reason.
All the BDS/IDS/ADS reveals is the mass, orbital details, whether it has an atmosphere/is land-able, and a thumb nail image - you still need to scan bodies get the real details such as body type, atmospheric details, general composition, and gravity/persistent major POI details.
I don't think anyone would really object to tweaks and refinements to the DSS mechanics to make that part of it more interesting nor do I think they would majorly object to adding orbital/near object scan features.
For example:-
- Add mechanics to scan rings and asteroid belts to determine probability of finding minable resources
- Add mechanics for orbital scans to detect particular regions that might be especially rich in certain materials
- Add mechanics for orbital scans to look for biological life
- Add mechanics for orbital scans to detect radio sources both natural or otherwise
There are plenty of detail and interesting things that could be added to improve exploration without even touching the BDS/IDS/ADS, but perhaps the BDS/IDS could do with an appropriate rebalance.
100x range would be good rebalance for those two.
+Rep... hate the Food analogy virus but this is perhaps the only analogy that seems even close to being accurate wrt nerfing the BDS/IDS/ADS mechanic.
Give the DS two different scan ranges.
R1 Scans only for the position of objects in the system you are in but no info about what the object is.
R2 Does the same as the current DS
So an ADS will still have an infinite range for R1 but a limited R2 scan range.
R1 scans will net no credits, but it will give you information as to where to go and honk again.
Then we introduce two new Discovery Scanners with an even greater R2 scan range than the ADS, The Prototype DS and the Large DS. One of them only being obtainable through powerplay
....just because.
R1 Scans only for the position of objects in the system you are in but no info about what the object is.
R2 Does the same as the current DS
So an ADS will still have an infinite range for R1 but a limited R2 scan range.
R1 scans will net no credits, but it will give you information as to where to go and honk again.
Then we introduce two new Discovery Scanners with an even greater R2 scan range than the ADS, The Prototype DS and the Large DS. One of them only being obtainable through powerplay
....just because.
In what universe am I offering only take?
My suggestion - expand BDS/IDS so that they provide more information (for example, location and mass info up to 10x farther from their current more detailed ranges. So, BDS gives current info up to 500LS, and simple info up to 5000LS. IDS gives current info up to 1000LS and simple info up to 10,000LS). That's give.
In exchange, I proposed reducing the current info provided by the ADS to 100,000LS (more than enough, as I pointed out, to cover most binary or larger star systems) while still providing simple info to an infinite range. That's take.
Even if you proposed the same or similar "give" as me somewhere, that does not cancel out the fact that I feel the same way or the fact that it's a "give." I have provided give and take. You have not. You want ADS to be the same as it is now. You're willing to give more to the other scanners, but not back down an inch on the ADS as it is. That's not compromise.
The title of this thread is : would you consider giving up on the infinite honk for...? Clearly, your answer is "no" regardless of how you fill in the blank.
Hell, I'm not even going that far - I'm not talking about giving it up, only slightly nerfing it.
Last edited:
My offer:
I give you the tools to explore the way you want to explore - a BDS/IDS combination that gives you the level of detail you want.
I take NOTHING from you.
Your offer:
You take from me the tools to explore the way I want to explore - an infinite ADS.
You give me nothing I want.
You're trying to tell me that YOUR offer is the compromise one?
Nothing in any of my suggestions prevents you from playing the way you want - you simply don't use the ADS.
Last edited:
I am only talking about dealing with the discovery scanner mechanics as they currently are. Do I want more things to do? Better scanner features? More gameplay associated with exploring? GOD YES. But I'm only referring to the current mechanics and what I'd like to see as a quick fix until they can add those things. Hopefully an ADS nerf can be included as part of the exploring shakeup they do in the future and you won't the infinite full scan a bit a bit because of everything thing else that's added. But I'm only talking about what they could do right now, in the meantime.
And to flip your script - you might not have taken anything, but you're not offering anything that I want, either. Because what I want is the ADS tweaked so that it doesn't show you every single thing in the entire system in detail, to leave just a touch of mystery so that exploring can be a smidge more interesting until FD gets off their butts and does more with it as a whole.
I don't fly BDS/IDS, so what you're "giving" gives me nothing. However, my modifications proposed were to make them more useful for other early starting explorers because right now they're useless (especially how quickly one can buy an ADS in the game these days). Those tweaks were meant to be in line and consistent with the nature of the proposed nerf.
If I'm giving you nothing that you want, you're giving me nothing that I want, either.
And I could play football hopping on one foot too! And fight in High Rez zones in a Sidewinder!
Are you sure about that? I can understand it, but have you forgotten that we can "SEE" that there are more planets out there after that distance. We can see their mass, and whether or not they have an atmosphere. When we are within distance, we can rehonk for the extra 100,000 ls (Or so) of clarity. As the Planets are "naturally" blurred out due to scanner range.
The purpose of this is to add a "Slightly hidden" aspect to the gameplay using pre-existing techniques. AKA, ze honk. It affects very few people, but it adds to a sense of mystery. Most systems are well within 40,000 ls of the main star after all. So... overall, I think its a very good compromise.
The aim here is to TRY and introduce a mechanic that involves some mystery. It states to the pilots that their equipment is not all powerful. Gives them a sense of humility.
However - if it is introduced, IT MUST BE REWARDED. Extra cash for travelling the distance and so and so forth.
Plus points:
A: Most people wont notice it.
B: For the Mug!
C: It smoothes the way for more "Involved" exploration later on.
D: Its easy to do for the Dev team.
Thoughts? On topic please?
Yes, EXACTLY.
You could get the effect you want by not using the most powerful equipment.
The only thing preventing you exploring the way you want is your childish refusal to use anything but the ADS.
Instead you insist that everyone else is inconvenienced like a toddler screaming until the entire family has to go to McDonald's again.
Clearly there's no point in discussing this further.