FSS makes no sense

[voidwalker]

I want to preempt some replies to his thread with some clarification: I actually like the mechanic. The mechanic is a good idea and it makes exploration more interactive.

However, after months of careful consideration, I have come to the conclusion that it SHOULD NOT be integrated in every ship, at least without visual restriction/limitation of some kind. Let me explain.

Using this system, I can look all around my ship and acquire perfect telescopic acquisition of planetary bodies without the view being spoiled by the ship itself. This magic camera the flies around the ship to get these views has absolutely no explanation. Let me show you how it should be done.

This is the optics pod on an SA341M Gazelle, used for recon and for targeting and lasing for TOW missiles.

Here, under the starboard wing, is the LANTIRN pod used for guiding GBUs and Mavericks carried by an F-14B Tomcat
​

Note that these are systems that are predominantly used to guide air-to-surface weaponry, and perform reconnaissance. There are many other kinds, some of which are integrated, for example, the optics systems on some dedicated attack aircraft, like the Su-25T's Shkval system, installed in the nose of the aircraft:

​

So here's what I propose. First of all, all ships designed with exploration in mind (Diamondback, Asp Explorers, some multirole ships like Python, etc) get an integrated system, but with a limited field of view, forward facing, but with maybe about 60 degrees field of view vertically and laterally. Maybe bigger ships can have multiple integrated systems positioned around the hull. After that, FSS scanning pods can be installed on hardpoints as turrets that rotate around depending on where you're looking. If you have an integrated system on the front, and a turret that can look behind the ship, transitioning between fields of view will be seemless. However, if your field of view is limited, then you'll be required to turn your ship to give your FSS as new field of view.

I have no problem with range. The way I see it, the FSS is a system that integrates telescopic systems with radiometric and gravimetric sensors assisting with the detection of planetary bodies, and telescope technology with great fidelity is not hard to build. But the system as it is takes too many liberties, in my opinion.

Addendum: I want to make it clear that I'm not using the images above to precedent, but as examples of what I'm talking about - optics systems mounted to aircraft to provide visual recon and acquisition, much the same way as FSS is used, but minus the weapons targeting.

Discuss.

 

[Vandaahl]

However, if your field of view is limited, then you'll be required to turn your ship to give your FSS as new field of view.

...and add more hoops to the snore fest. Thanks, but no.

 

[Zieman]

In principle I like your idea. But game. Meaning too much needless complication.
As of now, ships named <whatever> Explorer don't have rear facing hardpoints, or even any placed in the rear half of the ship, so the additional coverage needs to go to Utility mounts, which aren't too abundant in those ships either.

 

[RevCaoticFox]

u do know the SUGGESTIONS link is right below the NEW POST button... right?

 

[voidwalker]

...and add more hoops to the snore fest. Thanks, but no.

You'll make that choice when deciding on your ship and fit. There will be more than a few such ships and fittings that will allow FSS to be performed exactly as it is now, only it will make sense.

 

[RevCaoticFox]

You'll make that choice when deciding on your ship and fit. There will be more than a few such ships and fittings that will allow FSS to be performed exactly as it is now, only it will make sense.

because this far into the future... it WONT just be incorporated into the skin of the ship... I mean, think about it... our canopies are GLASS!!!

You'll make that choice when deciding on your ship and fit. There will be more than a few such ships and fittings that will allow FSS to be performed exactly as it is now, only it will make sense.

You'll make that choice when deciding on your ship and fit. There will be more than a few such ships and fittings that will allow FSS to be performed exactly as it is now, only it will make sense.

 

[Firebeard]

Id always assumed it WAS forward facing and you turned your ship to locate the bodies

 

[CMDR Cosmic Spacehead]

But the Apache gunship has its sensor pod on top of the rotor and has 360° vision.

 

[RevCaoticFox]

IDK what happened to my post up there... I didn't quote anything...

 

[CMDR Cosmic Spacehead]

IDK what happened to my post up there... I didn't quote anything...

It's the system scan complete bug all over again! Run away!

System scan complete
System scan complete
System scan complete
System scan complete...

 

[voidwalker]

because this far into the future... it WONT just be incorporated into the skin of the ship... I mean, think about it... our canopies are GLASS!!!

We have no idea what technology in the future is going to be like, but if our canopies were just made of glass, our retinas would be burned out on our first hyperspace jump, and they simply wouldn't survive multiple weapon strikes, which they do. They're clearly made of something much tougher, and capable of filtering out the harmful radiation of suns.

 

[voidwalker]

But the Apache gunship has its sensor pod on top of the rotor and has 360° vision.

It's mounted up quite high to achieve that, and as a result of its mounting, it can't see straight down. There is a large blind spot directly beneath it. It also doesn't look up. Like, at all. The Longbow radar also doesn't provide visual acquisition. That remains a function of the integrated optics in the nose.

​

The Longbow is designed to provide the helicopter with the capability to automatically detect, classify, and prioritize targets. It can designate targets for Hellfire missiles, but it can't lock them. That function is still an optical function. Hellfire guidance is by semi-active laser homing. In simple terms, the Longbow radar helps the Apache crew 'see' the ground targets and their locations all around the helicopter, but to engage those targets, they will still need visual acquisition. There are some advanced millimeter wave radar seeking missile systems, but they are unreliable against ground targets, and pilots still prefer visual acquisition and beam-riding precision weapons.

 

[Madrax573]

stop applying logic and reason to this game... That ship sailed a few years ago...

 

[Iskariot]

I want to preempt some replies to his thread with some clarification: I actually like the mechanic. The mechanic is a good idea and it makes exploration more interactive.

However, after months of careful consideration, I have come to the conclusion that it SHOULD NOT be integrated in every ship, at least without visual restriction/limitation of some kind. Let me explain.

Using this system, I can look all around my ship and acquire perfect telescopic acquisition of planetary bodies without the view being spoiled by the ship itself. This magic camera the flies around the ship to get these views has absolutely no explanation. Let me show you how it should be done.

This is the optics pod on an SA341M Gazelle, used for recon and for targeting and lasing for TOW missiles.

Here, under the starboard wing, is the LANTIRN pod used for guiding GBUs and Mavericks carried by an F-14B Tomcat
​

Note that these are systems that are predominantly used to guide air-to-surface weaponry, and perform reconnaissance. There are many other kinds, some of which are integrated, for example, the optics systems on some dedicated attack aircraft, like the Su-25T's Shkval system, installed in the nose of the aircraft:

​

So here's what I propose. First of all, all ships designed with exploration in mind (Diamondback, Asp Explorers, some multirole ships like Python, etc) get an integrated system, but with a limited field of view, forward facing, but with maybe about 60 degrees field of view vertically and laterally. Maybe bigger ships can have multiple integrated systems positioned around the hull. After that, FSS scanning pods can be installed on hardpoints as turrets that rotate around depending on where you're looking. If you have an integrated system on the front, and a turret that can look behind the ship, transitioning between fields of view will be seemless. However, if your field of view is limited, then you'll be required to turn your ship to give your FSS as new field of view.

I have no problem with range. The way I see it, the FSS is a system that integrates telescopic systems with radiometric and gravimetric sensors assisting with the detection of planetary bodies, and telescope technology with great fidelity is not hard to build. But the system as it is takes too many liberties, in my opinion.

Addendum: I want to make it clear that I'm not using the images above to precedent, but as examples of what I'm talking about - optics systems mounted to aircraft to provide visual recon and acquisition, much the same way as FSS is used, but minus the weapons targeting.

Discuss.

I definitely understand your love for technical realism, but there have to be limits.
This is a spacesim game and therefore there are limits all over the place to keep things fun.
I think your suggestion would be seriously detrimental to general gameplay enjoyment.

 

[voidwalker]

I definitely understand your love for technical realism, but there have to be limits.
This is a spacesim game and therefore there are limits all over the place to keep things fun.
I think your suggestion would be seriously detrimental to general gameplay enjoyment.

I've thought about this at length, and I agree to a point, but only to a point. Which is why I made a case for larger exploration ships having multiple integrated optical systems placed strategically around the hull to provide the same functionality without the need to install turreted optics. Additionally, current functionality will still be completely available by simply installing these turrets on any other ship. What they weight and how much power they use should be very low, since we aren't talking about weapons systems.

And while I disagree in this department, I also agree with you in that this is a casual game, and I'm making this thread for reference later on, knowing what most of the replies will be. I will continue to argue in support of this idea, but know that I actually agree with you, and I'm playing devil's advocate. It's for a purpose, I assure you.

 

[Watcher]

I want to preempt some replies to his thread with some clarification: I actually like the mechanic. The mechanic is a good idea and it makes exploration more interactive.

However, after months of careful consideration, I have come to the conclusion that it SHOULD NOT be integrated in every ship, at least without visual restriction/limitation of some kind. Let me explain.

Using this system, I can look all around my ship and acquire perfect telescopic acquisition of planetary bodies without the view being spoiled by the ship itself. This magic camera the flies around the ship to get these views has absolutely no explanation. Let me show you how it should be done.

This is the optics pod on an SA341M Gazelle, used for recon and for targeting and lasing for TOW missiles.

Here, under the starboard wing, is the LANTIRN pod used for guiding GBUs and Mavericks carried by an F-14B Tomcat
​

Note that these are systems that are predominantly used to guide air-to-surface weaponry, and perform reconnaissance. There are many other kinds, some of which are integrated, for example, the optics systems on some dedicated attack aircraft, like the Su-25T's Shkval system, installed in the nose of the aircraft:

​

So here's what I propose. First of all, all ships designed with exploration in mind (Diamondback, Asp Explorers, some multirole ships like Python, etc) get an integrated system, but with a limited field of view, forward facing, but with maybe about 60 degrees field of view vertically and laterally. Maybe bigger ships can have multiple integrated systems positioned around the hull. After that, FSS scanning pods can be installed on hardpoints as turrets that rotate around depending on where you're looking. If you have an integrated system on the front, and a turret that can look behind the ship, transitioning between fields of view will be seemless. However, if your field of view is limited, then you'll be required to turn your ship to give your FSS as new field of view.

I have no problem with range. The way I see it, the FSS is a system that integrates telescopic systems with radiometric and gravimetric sensors assisting with the detection of planetary bodies, and telescope technology with great fidelity is not hard to build. But the system as it is takes too many liberties, in my opinion.

Addendum: I want to make it clear that I'm not using the images above to precedent, but as examples of what I'm talking about - optics systems mounted to aircraft to provide visual recon and acquisition, much the same way as FSS is used, but minus the weapons targeting.

Discuss.

I see what you are saying here but to be honest we are already hauling around a significant weight in sensors that, on the larger ships at least, seem excessively bulky.

I tend to consider the FSS as an integration tool for the incoming data from those sensors and the additional bulk being attributed to more nodes being placed throughout/on top of the hull volume. I still don't think that sensibly account for just how bulk those become but that is perhaps another topic...

So yeah, I see what you are saying but I think where we are now is not too bad and having to do a bit more manual jiggling of the ship to get sensors in range would get annoying rather than add over much.

 

[M00ka]

Interesting observation but how do you know that when the FSS was integrated into every ship camera sensors weren't fitted to multiple locations around the ship, and the FSS software seamlessly integrates all the various images into one??? Huh huh

 

[Iskariot]

I've thought about this at length, and I agree to a point, but only to a point. Which is why I made a case for larger exploration ships having multiple integrated optical systems placed strategically around the hull to provide the same functionality without the need to install turreted optics. Additionally, current functionality will still be completely available by simply installing these turrets on any other ship. What they weight and how much power they use should be very low, since we aren't talking about weapons systems.

And while I disagree in this department, I also agree with you in that this is a casual game, and I'm making this thread for reference later on, knowing what most of the replies will be. I will continue to argue in support of this idea, but know that I actually agree with you, and I'm playing devil's advocate. It's for a purpose, I assure you.

I would definitely love to see optical systems (and others) visibly present on the hull.
I would like to recognize a specialized explorer ship by the type and number of instrument protrusions, bulges, discs, etc on the hull.
I have also proposed on several occasions to use HP slots for exploration tools. To me It makes sense that a dedicated explorer can not deploy the same weapons arsenal as a dedicated combat ship.

 

[Stealthie]

In general, I'd like it if the look of your ship changed in accordance with it's role.

I'd love to have an exploration ship that was bristling with sensors and scanners and ungainly lumps housing all the various doodads installed.
Equally, combat ships could have visible armour-plating on display when fitted with HRPs and MRPs.

Basically, it'd be nice if FDev could go through every optional module (limpet controllers, fuel tanks, shield generators, fuel scoops etc) and decide whether it incorporates some kind of external component and then model them and show them on our ships.
The problem is that even if there was a certain amount of "cheating", with different types and sizes of module sharing a common model, it'd still be a nightmare trying to get everything to fit on every ship.
Course, this problem could be solved fairly simply, just by displaying a basic 3D model of the ship somewhere in the equipping screen and then giving us some simple tools that allow us to move, scale and rotate parts to place them anywhere on our ship hulls.
That way, it'd be up to us to ensure they were positioned sensibly and aligned correctly.

A side-effect of implementing this would be that FDev could then sell cosmetic "greeble" kits which include things like ducts, tanks, sensors, hoses, junction-boxes etc which we could plaster all over our ships as we see fit.


The function of the FSS is, however, beyond explanation.
In it, we have a system that allows us to scan planets hundreds of thousands of Ls away and get a picture of them... in the same ships that often struggle to detect another ship half a dozen km away from us.
Seems like it might've been useful to take some of that FSS technology and incorporate it into our ship's sensors, eh?

Course, I do see the point of the FSS and I do appreciate it's functionality but it's implementation is massively ham-fisted.

 

[Watcher]

In general, I'd like it if the look of your ship changed in accordance with it's role.

I'd love to have an exploration ship that was bristling with sensors and scanners and ungainly lumps housing all the various doodads installed.
Equally, combat ships could have visible armour-plating on display when fitted with HRPs and MRPs.

Basically, it'd be nice if FDev could go through every optional module (limpet controllers, fuel tanks, shield generators, fuel scoops etc) and decide whether it incorporates some kind of external component and then model them and show them on our ships.
The problem is that even if there was a certain amount of "cheating", with different types and sizes of module sharing a common model, it'd still be a nightmare trying to get everything to fit on every ship.
Course, this problem could be solved fairly simply, just by displaying a basic 3D model of the ship somewhere in the equipping screen and then giving us some simple tools that allow us to move, scale and rotate parts to place them anywhere on our ship hulls.
That way, it'd be up to us to ensure they were positioned sensibly and aligned correctly.

A side-effect of implementing this would be that FDev could then sell cosmetic "greeble" kits which include things like ducts, tanks, sensors, hoses, junction-boxes etc which we could plaster all over our ships as we see fit.


The function of the FSS is, however, beyond explanation.
In it, we have a system that allows us to scan planets hundreds of thousands of Ls away and get a picture of them... in the same ships that often struggle to detect another ship half a dozen km away from us.
Seems like it might've been useful to take some of that FSS technology and incorporate it into our ship's sensors, eh?

Course, I do see the point of the FSS and I do appreciate it's functionality but it's implementation is massively ham-fisted.

I'd like to see ship variation based on load out too.

I still feel that ship kits were a missed opportunity - they could have been the basis from some interesting in game role with visual distinction type stuff, but alas no, they are just ship hats.

Be nice to see something done with engineering and visual distinction on the visible modules at least.

Anyway..