![[VR] Merkir](https://d2aefvhu2f0gi9.cloudfront.net/data/avatars/m/141/141091.jpg?1553527154){kind=avatar}
TLDR; Suggestions to increase player choice, strategy, mystery and anticipation/tension/excitement during use of the new Discovery Scanner, to work in with FDev's new mechanics. It revolves around a new "Honk" pre-analysis, the use of a signal analysis computer complementing the new "tune and focus" mechanic to better cater for different play styles, and suggestions for better "reveals" to heighten mystery and anticipation during the discovery process.
Firstly, thanks FDev for allowing us the opportunity to give feedback, and apologies this is so late. I understand from the Community Guest event that the exploration reveal went very well... great to hear. I'm very hopeful! And I realise you've probably almost completed development, but I will give some basic feedback anyway.
The following is feedback for the Discovery Scanner only (not the Detailed Surface Scanner). Some of these have already been suggested by other players in other threads (StuartGT, Mengy, et. al. - thanks to those players). These suggestions allow, in fact expect, the new functionality as revealed by FDev. For each suggestion I also give rationale, concentrating on why I think it may improve the player experience, whether increasing anticipation, mystery, player choice and/or strategy. Here are my ideas for changes...
Discover Scanner (DS) process / steps:
1. The 'Honk' stays, and becomes a fast, pre-processing analysis of the initial system signals.
I suggest the honk duration be linearly related to the number of bodies in the system, ranging from approx. 2 seconds for a lone star, to perhaps 15 seconds for 100+ bodies. I suggest 2 seconds + 1 second per 10 bodies. I also suggest an audible blip for every 10 bodies pre-processed.
Rationale:
The longer the honk duration, the more anticipation/hope that an interesting system has been found. Imagine if the pre-processing honk takes a full 15 seconds, with the tension/anticipation building every second
. And of course it's more realistic.
2. The initial Honk reveals only a subset of the current data and an approximation of the system structure, with most of the bodies represented by black/grey silhouettes with no surface detail. An initial approximate visual indication is given on a system map or orrery. This has already been suggested by many players on other threads.
Rationale:
A sense of mystery is maintained, with a glimpse of what might be there. Some form of visualisation of the solar system, however incomplete, is a must.
3. Each black/grey body shows the probability of that body being one or more of the major types (ELW, WW, GG, etc.). It also shows a probability of being terraformable. This has also been suggested by other players, although perhaps only for the entire system?
Eg. a greyed out body may show probabilities like:
Rocky Body = 60%
High Metal Content = 37%
Earth Like = 3%
(Terraformable = 8%)
Another example might be:
Icy World = 75%
Water World = 25%
(Terraformable = 15%)
Rationale:
This is a no-brainer, at least to me. Besides being more realistic, it allows for more informed player choice/strategy. Eg. "Terraformable chance 15% hmmm... do I investigate further to see if this is a Terraformable Water World?"
Most importantly, it maintains a sense of mystery and anticipation. We've already been told by FDev that the new Honk will reveal signals that to a trained eye (ie. everyone) give precisely what the body types are in the system. Wouldn't that ruin the mystery? Why not give probabilities instead, which maintains and increases anticipation/hope/mystery, even excitement?
4. Use the new "tune and focus" mechanic as described by FDev to remotely discover individual bodies. The only important change I suggest is to maintain the "mystery" (as described above) by ensuring that the initial display of signals doesn't 100% identify each body type from the get-go, which IMO is not the best game design. Instead, players should learn that certain signals are more likely to be specific body types instead of identifying them precisely. Only by completing the new game mechanic process should the true body type be confirmed.
Rationale:
I'm very hopeful that the new DS mechanics as described by FDev will be fun, but it needs to be used in an environment of mystery, not "oh there's an ELW signal, I'll have to go through the procedure now to be awarded the discovery". Please, keep the mystery/hope/excitement alive that comes from a reveal after the manual "tune and focus" mechanic is completed.
In short, let the initial signal and percentage probabilities build tension, excitement and hope, and completion of the new mechanic reveal the mystery and confirm or deny the hope that it might be special.
5. As well as the manual "tune and focus" mechanic as described by FDev, the DS should include a full Signal Analysis Computer (SAC). After the initial Honk is complete, the player can opt to manually analyse the signals using FDev's new mechanic, OR, the SAC may be used to automate the process somewhat. This gives advantages and disadvantages, but most importantly, it gives players choice and strategy options. Since this requires some explanation, it is described below in more detail.
Discovery Scanner (DS) Signal Analysis Computer (SAC) process:
I propose that every DS has a SAC which optionally may be used by players to help analyse the initial signals representing system bodies. It can be used instead of or in parallel to the new "tune and focus" mechanic. I see the SAC being used in two modes, "Full Range" and "Targeted" as follows.
Note that for gameplay balance, the time spent using FDEev's new manual process should be less than the time taken using the automated SAC. Ie. making the effort to do it manually rewards the player in at least one way - time. Ofc IRL a computer will always perform signal analysis faster than a human, but some handwavium is required for game play and balance/reward purposes.
Full Range SAC
This is the easiest. It may be engaged directly after the Honk, after the initial signals have been revealed. Instead of using FDev's new "tune and focus" manual procedure, the SAC performs the analysis for you, iterating through all signals from least to most energetic (or vice versa) and short to long range (or vice versa) and across any other dimensions FDev reveals - perhaps gravity wells? The player may abort the analysis mid-stream if the player doesn't need any more revealed/analysed.
The Full Range SAC automated analysis should take longer than a competent player's "tune and focus" manual process.
Rationale:
It gives players choice and an extra strategy option. Not all players may want to perform the manual "tune and focus" method, especially if some players find it a rote chore. Also, FDev's new mechanic would not be performed by a human IRL, so the SAC gives greater verisimilitude. It also gives all players (even hard core explorers) some chill-out time - a break from the manual process.
Targeted SAC
The player may target a narrower energy spectra band and/or range band of particular interest to them. I suggest the choice should be 5 (five) bands within each dimension, ie. 25 combinations (choices) of energy vs. range bands. For example, the player may target the 3rd (middle) energy band and the 2nd range band. Or the player may choose energy bands 1 thru 3 and range bands 3 and 4. The time taken will be smaller than the Full Range SAC described above, in proportion to the total bands chosen to analyse.
The Targeted SAC automated analysis should take longer than a competent player's "tune and focus" manual process over the same band(s). Note also that a competent manual analysis can more precisely target individual signals whereas the SAC must process all signals within the band(s). Thus, hard-core explorers using the manual approach have a time advantage and can more exactly target their signals of interest.
Rationale:
Player choice and extra strategy options, as above. It allows the player to target specific types of bodies like gas giants or ELWs, while not being as targeted as the manual approach. it allows experienced, knowledgeable explorers to target their goldilocks zones of interest at times they don't want to do so manually.
Summary
I propose three options for players - FDev's new manual mechanic, a Full Range SAC (simple) choice, and a Targeted SAC choice. I also suggest that while the SAC is processing, in any mode, the player can still use FDev's manual process at the same time, thus bringing even more refined gameplay and strategy options to optimise the entire process.
These suggestions make me hopeful that an exploration "meta" could be a thing, where explorers compare various strategies for optimising exploration based upon what precisely they are trying to discover.
I suggest these options better cater for the full range of play styles, whether hard-core explorers, casual explorers, cherry-pickers, and non-explorers who just want a simple no nonsense system map.
Aside: I have far more ideas for discovery/exploration. For example I'd like to see the exploration modules able to perform geomorphology analysis of bodies to give many more additional metrics. Importantly, these and other system body measurements should be incorporated into new discovery and exploration missions. This is a whole other topic that I could spend hours on (and hopefully will).
Firstly, thanks FDev for allowing us the opportunity to give feedback, and apologies this is so late. I understand from the Community Guest event that the exploration reveal went very well... great to hear. I'm very hopeful! And I realise you've probably almost completed development, but I will give some basic feedback anyway.
The following is feedback for the Discovery Scanner only (not the Detailed Surface Scanner). Some of these have already been suggested by other players in other threads (StuartGT, Mengy, et. al. - thanks to those players). These suggestions allow, in fact expect, the new functionality as revealed by FDev. For each suggestion I also give rationale, concentrating on why I think it may improve the player experience, whether increasing anticipation, mystery, player choice and/or strategy. Here are my ideas for changes...
Discover Scanner (DS) process / steps:
1. The 'Honk' stays, and becomes a fast, pre-processing analysis of the initial system signals.
I suggest the honk duration be linearly related to the number of bodies in the system, ranging from approx. 2 seconds for a lone star, to perhaps 15 seconds for 100+ bodies. I suggest 2 seconds + 1 second per 10 bodies. I also suggest an audible blip for every 10 bodies pre-processed.
Rationale:
The longer the honk duration, the more anticipation/hope that an interesting system has been found. Imagine if the pre-processing honk takes a full 15 seconds, with the tension/anticipation building every second
. And of course it's more realistic.2. The initial Honk reveals only a subset of the current data and an approximation of the system structure, with most of the bodies represented by black/grey silhouettes with no surface detail. An initial approximate visual indication is given on a system map or orrery. This has already been suggested by many players on other threads.
Rationale:
A sense of mystery is maintained, with a glimpse of what might be there. Some form of visualisation of the solar system, however incomplete, is a must.
3. Each black/grey body shows the probability of that body being one or more of the major types (ELW, WW, GG, etc.). It also shows a probability of being terraformable. This has also been suggested by other players, although perhaps only for the entire system?
Eg. a greyed out body may show probabilities like:
Rocky Body = 60%
High Metal Content = 37%
Earth Like = 3%
(Terraformable = 8%)
Another example might be:
Icy World = 75%
Water World = 25%
(Terraformable = 15%)
Rationale:
This is a no-brainer, at least to me. Besides being more realistic, it allows for more informed player choice/strategy. Eg. "Terraformable chance 15% hmmm... do I investigate further to see if this is a Terraformable Water World?"
Most importantly, it maintains a sense of mystery and anticipation. We've already been told by FDev that the new Honk will reveal signals that to a trained eye (ie. everyone) give precisely what the body types are in the system. Wouldn't that ruin the mystery? Why not give probabilities instead, which maintains and increases anticipation/hope/mystery, even excitement?
4. Use the new "tune and focus" mechanic as described by FDev to remotely discover individual bodies. The only important change I suggest is to maintain the "mystery" (as described above) by ensuring that the initial display of signals doesn't 100% identify each body type from the get-go, which IMO is not the best game design. Instead, players should learn that certain signals are more likely to be specific body types instead of identifying them precisely. Only by completing the new game mechanic process should the true body type be confirmed.
Rationale:
I'm very hopeful that the new DS mechanics as described by FDev will be fun, but it needs to be used in an environment of mystery, not "oh there's an ELW signal, I'll have to go through the procedure now to be awarded the discovery". Please, keep the mystery/hope/excitement alive that comes from a reveal after the manual "tune and focus" mechanic is completed.
In short, let the initial signal and percentage probabilities build tension, excitement and hope, and completion of the new mechanic reveal the mystery and confirm or deny the hope that it might be special.
5. As well as the manual "tune and focus" mechanic as described by FDev, the DS should include a full Signal Analysis Computer (SAC). After the initial Honk is complete, the player can opt to manually analyse the signals using FDev's new mechanic, OR, the SAC may be used to automate the process somewhat. This gives advantages and disadvantages, but most importantly, it gives players choice and strategy options. Since this requires some explanation, it is described below in more detail.
Discovery Scanner (DS) Signal Analysis Computer (SAC) process:
I propose that every DS has a SAC which optionally may be used by players to help analyse the initial signals representing system bodies. It can be used instead of or in parallel to the new "tune and focus" mechanic. I see the SAC being used in two modes, "Full Range" and "Targeted" as follows.
Note that for gameplay balance, the time spent using FDEev's new manual process should be less than the time taken using the automated SAC. Ie. making the effort to do it manually rewards the player in at least one way - time. Ofc IRL a computer will always perform signal analysis faster than a human, but some handwavium is required for game play and balance/reward purposes.
Full Range SAC
This is the easiest. It may be engaged directly after the Honk, after the initial signals have been revealed. Instead of using FDev's new "tune and focus" manual procedure, the SAC performs the analysis for you, iterating through all signals from least to most energetic (or vice versa) and short to long range (or vice versa) and across any other dimensions FDev reveals - perhaps gravity wells? The player may abort the analysis mid-stream if the player doesn't need any more revealed/analysed.
The Full Range SAC automated analysis should take longer than a competent player's "tune and focus" manual process.
Rationale:
It gives players choice and an extra strategy option. Not all players may want to perform the manual "tune and focus" method, especially if some players find it a rote chore. Also, FDev's new mechanic would not be performed by a human IRL, so the SAC gives greater verisimilitude. It also gives all players (even hard core explorers) some chill-out time - a break from the manual process.
Targeted SAC
The player may target a narrower energy spectra band and/or range band of particular interest to them. I suggest the choice should be 5 (five) bands within each dimension, ie. 25 combinations (choices) of energy vs. range bands. For example, the player may target the 3rd (middle) energy band and the 2nd range band. Or the player may choose energy bands 1 thru 3 and range bands 3 and 4. The time taken will be smaller than the Full Range SAC described above, in proportion to the total bands chosen to analyse.
The Targeted SAC automated analysis should take longer than a competent player's "tune and focus" manual process over the same band(s). Note also that a competent manual analysis can more precisely target individual signals whereas the SAC must process all signals within the band(s). Thus, hard-core explorers using the manual approach have a time advantage and can more exactly target their signals of interest.
Rationale:
Player choice and extra strategy options, as above. It allows the player to target specific types of bodies like gas giants or ELWs, while not being as targeted as the manual approach. it allows experienced, knowledgeable explorers to target their goldilocks zones of interest at times they don't want to do so manually.
Summary
I propose three options for players - FDev's new manual mechanic, a Full Range SAC (simple) choice, and a Targeted SAC choice. I also suggest that while the SAC is processing, in any mode, the player can still use FDev's manual process at the same time, thus bringing even more refined gameplay and strategy options to optimise the entire process.
These suggestions make me hopeful that an exploration "meta" could be a thing, where explorers compare various strategies for optimising exploration based upon what precisely they are trying to discover.
I suggest these options better cater for the full range of play styles, whether hard-core explorers, casual explorers, cherry-pickers, and non-explorers who just want a simple no nonsense system map.
Aside: I have far more ideas for discovery/exploration. For example I'd like to see the exploration modules able to perform geomorphology analysis of bodies to give many more additional metrics. Importantly, these and other system body measurements should be incorporated into new discovery and exploration missions. This is a whole other topic that I could spend hours on (and hopefully will).
Last edited:
