FSS - my opinion

[marx]

I think Osric has probably 'overlooked' plenty of similar jibes marx, you can too.

And it is a frustrating situation.

Well, yes. I've also had worse thrown at me than that... but not from moderators.

And hey, also from the developer post often quoted: "While we understand that this may be disappointing for some of you, we would like to thank you for taking the time to share your thoughts and feedback with us."
So, why is taking the time to share thoughts and feedback with Frontier bad?

 

[Burke]

Simple: because their explanation doesn't quite work, and sounds more like PR talk.

Its condesending isnt it? All that trollolery that came before prepared the forum for that post to explain it all away.

I think we got the FSS cause... i dont know a particulalry fat whale perhaps or group of players who pour money in. They got asked what they wanted and nobody else had a say.

Theorys

 

[Riverside]

Well, yes. I've also had worse thrown at me than that... but not from moderators.

I appreciate it can be difficult to differentiate, but to me it was clear that Osric was not laying down the law. S/he has an opinion on this too, and this issue is an obstacle to any productive debate over the future direction of any exploration/discovery mechanic developments. It's always going to come up almost immediately because it is by far the most contentious topic in exploration. People have left the community over this, others have stopped enjoying the game.

 

[Ozric]

Wow, okay, that was uncalled for. Especially the insinuation that he might also suffer from mental health issues. This would be bad on its own, but from a moderator, even more so.
Even worse, what you wrote could also apply to people who attack any negative criticism of the FSS in every single thread, yet somehow you didn't include them. No offense, but when you do it like this, that doesn't help convince me that there's no bias.

I think you entirely misread that.
What I mean was simply that ruminating on the same thing over and over again, especially something that you cannot control the outcome of is not good for anyone. I wasn't insinuating that anyone here has mental health issues, just that it's not good for your mental health.
Trust me, I know.

But I'm sorry, I thought I would try and diffuse the situation, that clearly backfired. So I'll just go away again.

 

[marx]

But I'm sorry, I thought I would try and diffuse the situation, that clearly backfired. So I'll just go away again.

I appreciate your apology. If you wanted to "try and diffuse the situation", it would have been better to remind certain participants to keep things civil. "What I mean was simply that ruminating on the same thing over and over again, especially something that you cannot control the outcome of is not good for anyone." suggests that you think they should stop discussing the matter.
And, um, Open Only threads, PowerPlay, and so on...

 

[Burke]

I actually appreciated ozrics reply and was not offended at all.

 

[Ozric]

I've lost count of how many times I've tried that over the last year or so

 

[marx]

I actually appreciated ozrics reply and was not offended at all.

That's good to hear. I suppose I can be triggered when I see people wanting to shut down discussion, and moderators should be held to a higher standard than normal. I'll drop the matter though, it would be better to be back to discussing things anyway.

 

[marx]

You mean like people calling other poster trolls for not going quite conform with the general gist of your opinions? Tell me more about civilised conversations...

Oh, yes. To clarify what I meant: you might not remember, but after the FSS was revealed, there suddenly came new posters saying that the people who explored before were not explorers, exploration only starts now, it's a good thing old explorers are leaving because the real top explorers will only be starting now, how "FSS haters" can't adapt, how earlier efforts were worthless, and so on.
None of them continued posting about exploration though. But as you can see, the subject still comes up.
Of course, if those don't meet your definition of trolling, then we'll just have to agree to disagree.

 

[Darkfyre99]

Also, even though you know that "exploration activity" was short-hand for "exploration activity via number of new systems", now you're using it in a broader sense. Please don't, because...

Actually, I didn’t.

I consider exploration activity to be exploration activity, as simple as that. A player who spends in a system using the FSS, flying to a biological POI they spotted, probing the planet to reveal them, landing at one, and scanning what grows there to have been just as active as an explorer who jumps and honks as fast as the game permits them to.

I’m honestly surprised to find that you don’t.

 

[marx]

Actually, I didn’t.

I consider exploration activity to be exploration activity, as simple as that. A player who spends in a system using the FSS, flying to a biological POI they spotted, probing the planet to reveal them, landing at one, and scanning what grows there to have been just as active as an explorer who jumps and honks as fast as the game permits them to.

I’m honestly surprised to find that you don’t.

Ah, I left out three words that I meant to say. To clarify, here's my edit: "even though you know that in that thread, "exploration activity" was often short-hand for "exploration activity via number of new systems"."
No offense, but you've left out the end of my quote, and taken out of context like this, it seems like I think exploration consists only of discovering new systems, which I obviously don't.

You could also expand it to "exploration activity measured via number of new systems", if you'd like. We have data on that, we have data on squadrons' exploration data sales, but we don't have data on time spent. (Well, we do have a few dozen veteran explorers sharing their stats over the past year, but that's obviously not a representative sample size.) You yourself quoted the monthly systems vs date chart from that thread.

My earlier points in my reply still stand, of course.

 

[marx]

@Frillop Freyraum : you used an earlier version of my post in your quote. You probably missed the edit I made after it.

As for the big, bold words, maybe you took things too seriously, or even personally I didn't call you a troll, after all.

And I don't know about you, but me, I think of "euphoric noobs" more as those who go out and are all starry-eyed at their first tags, their first Earth-like worlds, and such, not those whose first (and pretty much only) posts were "haha you all suck". A rather different intent there.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

The one thing I still don't understand is why when the designers of the game gave an explanation for the decisions they made, the regret they couldn't please everyone, but made it clear that in their opinion reinstating the ADS would be detrimental to the current experience. You're still here acting as though somehow they've not clarified it, or that you know better than they do on the design of their own game.

I called shenanigans on that. The ADS with a few minor changes can work together with the FSS. Players have voiced a concern that you could select a planet in the system map, and then you'd know the location of the planet also in FSS. A simple solution is to make the planets in the system map unselectable. The one thing the developers made clear is that they were not willing to spend any more than the minimum effort on the exploration update. What they made clear is that they we late in delivering the exploration update, and had to cancel the focused feedback round because of that.

Instead of: "we can't please everyone", the correct statement should have been: "In the limited time and resources we were given, it's not possible to make any more changes because we have an update in December. So suck on it".

Just after " HEy Guys! Hewy Guys! Open Only Powerplay Guys!". Yeah, that wasn't an obvious distraction at all, for all the good that little turd grenade achieved.

And what's the point of posting here anyway? It can't be to show off your avatar, you know mine is hundred times sexier.

I like to discuss things. And I enjoy my time on these forums. Not sure what other point there is. What's yours?

And my avatar is the most sexy man that ever lived, so you are demonstratively wrong

 

[Agony_Aunt]

No it doesn't.

What do you find hard about it?

 

[-VR- Max Factor]

What do you find hard about it?

Never said the FSS was hard. But it's not easy to tell with a glance from the wave forms the exact planets as the wave forms can be so close to each other. This is in reply to the FSS being a one hit wonder, which it obviously isn't.

Obviously if you dial it in, it's pretty obvious.

 

[CMDR Karrde Sun]

Yes.. now that you guys have mentioned it again, it is curious..

• Why is the fuss built into every ship? There isn’t a pulse laser, mining laser or even cargo rack included. Also proximity scanning still works for bodies and you can target signal sources in the old way.
• Exactly why the ads was removed. We don’t actually know, it could be just coincidental that it made some haters happy.

If we’ve been squirming around because of software incompetence and they just couldn’t get something working.... think about how many kittens they’ve killed.

Maybe the team that rotates onto exploration next time will have more luck regardless.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

Never said the FSS was hard.

"Very difficult" are the words you used

edit: tip: I don't know from memory, been a while, but I think there's some wording beneath the spectrometer, you can use them to pin point the specific types. Or mouseover if I remember correctly.

Anyway, I found finding specific planet types dead easy after just an hour playing with the FSS. In any case pretty damn far from very difficult.

 

[CMDR Karrde Sun]

Never said the FSS was hard. But it's not easy to tell with a glance from the wave forms the exact planets as the wave forms can be so close to each other. This is in reply to the FSS being a one hit wonder, which it obviously isn't.

Obviously if you dial it in, it's pretty obvious.

It is a one hit wonder, and you can very easily tell the planets. It’s the count of each type you can’t.

Which also doesn’t make much sense because wouldn’t there be a directional component to how strong the waveform is? Guess it must be 360 degrees and gets through objects when the fuss itself can’t.

 

[Faded Glory]

edit: tip: I don't know from memory, been a while, but I think there's some wording beneath the spectrometer, you can use them to pin point the specific types. Or mouseover if I remember correctly.

Anyway, I found finding specific planet types dead easy after just an hour playing with the FSS. In any case pretty damn far from very difficult.

When you center your tuning marker on a waveform, then bottom right of the screen will tell you exactly what you are looking at.

If you are slightly off, and on the cusp between two body types, then it's possible to get an incorrect reading, as I discovered once when I thought I was looking at an ELW, but it turned out to be a RIW instead.

Only made that mistake once...

 

[marx]

edit: tip: I don't know from memory, been a while, but I think there's some wording beneath the spectrometer, you can use them to pin point the specific types.

Wherever you move the slider on the barcode, the game tells you what body (or signal) type is there, in the bottom right.
So yes, the positions can quickly be memorized, and if you're uncertain, all you need to do is move over there and the game tells you.