Navigation Panel - different icons

[DHMeyer]

When one discovers a new system, a list of astronomical objects in the Navigation tab is populated with "Unexplored" and small square icons in front of that. When we select an object, hologram next to the radar shows us the object. When we open a map of that unexplored system, we can see what these "Unexplored" objects are. My suggestion is to improve the list of discovered astronomical objects by making the "Unexplored" icons represent the actual nature of each astronomical object. Before they are explored and named. They are not mysterious and secret anyway, we can check what these objects are, so it seems these square icons are a bit odd here.
Alternatively, if they are to be secret and mysterious, then perhaps it would be best if both the hologram and the system map were showing these squares of mystery instead of the factual objects....

 

[Ka'Diel]

(...)
Alternatively, if they are to be secret and mysterious, then perhaps it would be best if both the hologram and the system map were showing these squares of mystery instead of the factual objects....

I really like that idea.
A lot of people complain about how the Advanced Discovery Scanner makes exploration to easy, this would be an appropriate fix, methinks.
Plus it could make exploration more fun and meaningful, as you really HAVE to fly to each object to determine what it is.

However, it would make exploration even more a way of not earning money, since you would now have to fly to every planet to find the ones that pay off.
So Frontier should really rise the payout of the scans, to make up for that.

All in all I doubt this will happen.
Because IF Frontier would implement this, from the moment on when the implemented this, all players already out there exploring would get much more money, although the had an easier job finding their ELW's and what ever.

Probably Star Citizen will handle it this way, because the will have much less planets to start with... .
But I would really like to see that here (if the payout of our scans will be higher).

 

[trollson]

Rather than giving more information up front - use an "unknown" hologram instead of the tell-tail one until an object is explored or becomes known.

I would also suggest not showing unexplored sub-targets on the Nav panel, at least until you get close - as is already done for transient targets like conflict zones. By sub-targets I would include planetary bases, moons, and "unexplored" stations (although stations and bases will be available by scanning the Nav Beacon in future?).


Making games "easier" does not make them "better" (this is not directed at this post in particulary - there are a lot of suggestions to short-cut things).

 

[DHMeyer]

I really like that idea.
A lot of people complain about how the Advanced Discovery Scanner makes exploration to easy, this would be an appropriate fix, methinks.
Plus it could make exploration more fun and meaningful, as you really HAVE to fly to each object to determine what it is.

However, it would make exploration even more a way of not earning money, since you would now have to fly to every planet to find the ones that pay off.
So Frontier should really rise the payout of the scans, to make up for that.

All in all I doubt this will happen.
Because IF Frontier would implement this, from the moment on when the implemented this, all players already out there exploring would get much more money, although the had an easier job finding their ELW's and what ever.

Probably Star Citizen will handle it this way, because the will have much less planets to start with... .
But I would really like to see that here (if the payout of our scans will be higher).

I see ADS as a telescope detecting electromagnetic radiation combined with neutrino detector, gravitational wave detector and probably a few other instruments. After all, it's "advanced" and costs equivalent of a very decent space ship. The system we have in place where it comes to scanning is pretty fine the way it is, it's a good balance between being realistic and being playable.

Just to me there is that one nasty scratch on the vinyl: these all mysterious astronomical bodies that are not mysterious at all because we can check them in system map (and you can guess which are likely to be high metal or Earth-like) and the DSS also tells us what we selected to scan. More so: even without any instruments, just watching the space outside your ship in a system where you didn't run the scan, you can locate planets and other suns and in most cases you know immediately what they are (apart from asteroid belts which you can't really see until you jump out from supercruise to see them). So it stands to reason that a device that could pay for a nice T6 or almost for Diamondback Explorer, or few hundred tonnes of platinum can also detect what these objects are. I'd rather it not to be too dumb and just show us what astronomical objects we have on that list.

However, if it definitely has to be so dumb, then I'd rather see it being dumb all the way than being dumb in one bit of the GUI and perfectly capable in two others. It's inconsistent now.

As for what it pays to explore, it's more or less fine. It's definitely waaay behind trading, but it can be used to pay the bills if you commit to it for long enough. Probably it would be good to see more objects that pay something, especially on surfaces of the planets, when you land at them and start scanning them in your scarab. These all minerals you find count for Eploration rating, but I don't think Universal Cartographic pays anything for the finds.

 

[DHMeyer]

Rather than giving more information up front - use an "unknown" hologram instead of the tell-tail one until an object is explored or becomes known.

I would also suggest not showing unexplored sub-targets on the Nav panel, at least until you get close - as is already done for transient targets like conflict zones. By sub-targets I would include planetary bases, moons, and "unexplored" stations (although stations and bases will be available by scanning the Nav Beacon in future?).


Making games "easier" does not make them "better" (this is not directed at this post in particulary - there are a lot of suggestions to short-cut things).

I do agree that making games easier does not make them better, but I think that it's the quality of the challenge that makes the good game whilst low quality of the interface and the way you interact with the game has capability of breaking it. In my opinion making a GUI an obstacle to interacting with the content is not the best idea and doesn't bring anything to the game. Some of the suggestions to short-cut things do make sense, some do not, they are all just suggestions though. In the end it's not that easy to balance a game like this, with all of the gameplay elements it has. Many things have to be considered and compromises have to be made.

There are 400 billions stars out there, lots and lots of very interesting systems and planets, so in this case I totally support the way Frontier decided to handle exploration. I simply don't like inconsistencies within the game, especially when they serve no purpose and one other thing I'd like to see is more variety in terms of objects to discover, but I do realise that last task is not an easy one.

 

[DocLooshkin]

+1. ED could do a much better job of just being consistent in this regard, as it's a bit random at the moment. Even more so, when we consider that almost every solar system in the galaxy has to have been scanned by at least one unmanned probe, at least once in the last century.

At the least, it would be better to have a clear distinction between rescanned systems and genuinely new ones. If new suns and planets aren't going to be popping up any time soon, the game should freely communicate at least the broad strokes of a solar system, IMO.

I'd also like better articulations for scans of systems that have obviously been scanned before, such as all those within the bubble. Curerntly the game pretends that such systems have never been scanned, which just comes across as utterly silly and artificial, particularly once the 'first discovered' tags bacome visible. Lampshading the fact that a system's been scanned - and giving a minor payout - would not only not hurt the game but would actually add to it's sense of verisimilitude... or so I would have thought. It's exactly the kind of subsidy that UniCart would need and want to do, to get as many pilots as possible into exploration as a career.

The way I see it, there should be four types of system, ideally:
• high-population systems, scanned regularly by the inhabitants and the results shared with UniCart - universally available data, maps always available, worth nothing to players;
• low- or zero-pop systems in the bubble, maps purchasable, the game should keep track of time since the last player scan, paying to a simple scale;
• zero-pop systems out of the bubble, maps purchasable only for nearer and recently-scanned systems, paying reasonably well;
• ultra-rare never-scanned systems, no map even exists until a player finds, scans, returns and sells, paying a small fortune - proper jackpot prizes for explorers.

If I were running Universal Cartography, this is what I'm sure would get the best results - so this is the way I'd do things.

 

[Psycho Romeo]

Alternatively, if they are to be secret and mysterious, then perhaps it would be best if both the hologram and the system map were showing these squares of mystery instead of the factual objects....

Why it wasn't this way to begin with is beyond me. It's an oversight that should be addressed.

Regarding the ADS, it is far too powerful and needs to be cut back to be more in line with the BDS/IDS. That is, not infinite.