∞ probes?

Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.
Then we'll need a refinery, because internal consistency demands that anything mined from a ring needs to be refined before use.

Oh, wait....

[wacko] (this face is for ED's Frankenstein mishmash of rules, not your comment)
No, materials already drop out of mined asteroids for synthesis without needing a refinery.
 
It's what happens when nobody's actually tried a patch and pre-emptively complains based on imagination as to what will be upsetting.

I'm sure there will be much more important things to be concerned about once the patch comes out.

On testing... I've seen other people suggesting waiting for testing. I find it very disingenuous and somewhat dishonest.

Let's say Frontier test infinite probes in beta then decide to go back to finite? What do you think the forums would do then?

Suggesting infinite probes in the first place without testing finite probes was a mistake. Finite probes numbers could have been adjusted up or down during testing. Frontier could have said "we're testing infinite probes on the second week to see what happens". *That* would have been a proper test. That's not what we're going to get.
 
I don't think the debate is truly about "realism", but rather about resource management being a part of flying a spaceship.

Infinite probes means they are throwaway, you never have to consider how many you have or how many to use. You can toss them like candy because they never run out.

Finite probes means you need to mentally acknowledge how many you have left, and eventually you will have to change your routine to replenish them. This doesn't mean anyone wants that task to be super arduous or take hours of busy work, it just means it's a consideration which requires the pilot's thought and attention.

Imagine if SRV ammo was infinite?
Imagine if multicannon or missile racks had infinite ammo?
Imagine how ships having unlimited fuel would impact the game?
Imagine if heat sinks just had a cooldown period instead of ammunition?


None of these things are items which demand huge amounts of attention or grind to keep up with, but they are things to consider while playing the game. Finite probes would be similar, you might have a couple thousand in the DSS when leaving the station but in time you would need to bother with restocking the launcher.

It's not about realism, it's about challenge. It's about resource management. It's about making the act of exploring in our ships more thoughtful.

Infinite SRV ammo wouldn't bother me.
Infinite multicannon ammo wouldn't bother me (I quite enjoyed the bug!).
Infinite missiles would break the game IMHO. But I'd like to carry more as default. Unengineered run out too quickly.
Infinite fuel is already here. Aka, a fuel scoop and the billions of scoopable stars. Lol
Infinite heatsinks with a cooldown (ironically) is actually a nifty idea.

:p

CMDR Cosmic Spacehead
 
Just have them consume fuel. Done. Nobody is out without a fuel scoop.

I have to say, while I normally support games' implementations of mechanics for fun's sake over realism, this is a little bit weird.
 
On testing... I've seen other people suggesting waiting for testing. I find it very disingenuous and somewhat dishonest.

Let's say Frontier test infinite probes in beta then decide to go back to finite? What do you think the forums would do then?

Suggesting infinite probes in the first place without testing finite probes was a mistake. Finite probes numbers could have been adjusted up or down during testing. Frontier could have said "we're testing infinite probes on the second week to see what happens". *That* would have been a proper test. That's not what we're going to get.

Yep, that is spot on.
 
On testing... I've seen other people suggesting waiting for testing. I find it very disingenuous and somewhat dishonest.

Let's say Frontier test infinite probes in beta then decide to go back to finite? What do you think the forums would do then?

Suggesting infinite probes in the first place without testing finite probes was a mistake. Finite probes numbers could have been adjusted up or down during testing. Frontier could have said "we're testing infinite probes on the second week to see what happens". *That* would have been a proper test. That's not what we're going to get.

Give that man a....... Probe ;)

This is spot on. I wonder how many saying now don't complain until after beta actually complained when FD announced 200 probes and craftable a few months back.

I know those who want finite are in the minority and maybe infinite is the way to go for this for the good of the majority) but I too believe there is a lot of dishonesty going on.
Put it this way IF in beta FD gave finite a go, how many of those saying "just wait till beta" would suddenly rage
 
On testing... I've seen other people suggesting waiting for testing. I find it very disingenuous and somewhat dishonest.

Let's say Frontier test infinite probes in beta then decide to go back to finite? What do you think the forums would do then?

Suggesting infinite probes in the first place without testing finite probes was a mistake. Finite probes numbers could have been adjusted up or down during testing. Frontier could have said "we're testing infinite probes on the second week to see what happens". *That* would have been a proper test. That's not what we're going to get.

Give that man a....... Probe ;)

This is spot on. I wonder how many saying now don't complain until after beta actually complained when FD announced 200 probes and craftable a few months back.

I know those who want finite are in the minority and maybe infinite is the way to go for this for the good of the majority) but I too believe there is a lot of dishonesty going on.
Put it this way IF in beta FD gave finite a go, how many of those saying "just wait till beta" would suddenly rage

Agree.. There are a lot of people rejecting limited probes without having even tested them...so they have no point too...
 
On testing... I've seen other people suggesting waiting for testing. I find it very disingenuous and somewhat dishonest.

Let's say Frontier test infinite probes in beta then decide to go back to finite? What do you think the forums would do then?

Suggesting infinite probes in the first place without testing finite probes was a mistake. Finite probes numbers could have been adjusted up or down during testing. Frontier could have said "we're testing infinite probes on the second week to see what happens". *That* would have been a proper test. That's not what we're going to get.

Give that man a....... Probe ;)

This is spot on. I wonder how many saying now don't complain until after beta actually complained when FD announced 200 probes and craftable a few months back.

I know those who want finite are in the minority and maybe infinite is the way to go for this for the good of the majority) but I too believe there is a lot of dishonesty going on.
Put it this way IF in beta FD gave finite a go, how many of those saying "just wait till beta" would suddenly rage

Why do people reject finite probes? The downsides are obvious without need to test them. There are no upsides ( aside from immersion for a few ) of adding an extra layer of pointless busy work. We know what mat scavenging is like and frankly it's not that engaging an activity. I don't think I've seen anyone claim that there isn't enough grind in ED. FD made the right call, we already sacrificed some of the convenience of the honk for this
 
Why do people reject finite probes? The downsides are obvious without need to test them. There are no upsides ( aside from immersion for a few ) of adding an extra layer of pointless busy work. We know what mat scavenging is like and frankly it's not that engaging an activity. I don't think I've seen anyone claim that there isn't enough grind in ED. FD made the right call, we already sacrificed some of the convenience of the honk for this
I think I agree with infinite probes. BUT, there's something about the efficiency bonus in the planet surface scanning that now just seems daft, given probes are infinite. ie: Who cares where/why if it takes six or seven probes to map 90+% of a planet?

If we want want probe usage to matter there needs to be a reason. An accountability. And that's either they're finite/slow to regenerate, or their individual usage counts for something. But this contrived bonus usage score just seems to grate with me (now). Especially as I suspect all you need to do is log off to menu, and log back in to reset the mini-game (we'll need to test this in beta)?


I'd prefer if the whole thing simply felt less like a mini-game and more purposeful/accountable. Let's simply say:-
  • When you shoot a probe it discovers a "circle" of sectors on the planet.
  • Depending on how many of these have been scanned by you before (via a previous probe) you get an efficiency rating for that probe. ie: If they are all newly scanned sectors then that's 100%. If most have been scanned by you before that witll be a very low %age efficiency. The CR exploration data value of the new sectors scanned is adjusted by that efficiency so when you sell your exploration data they're adjusted accordingly. There's handwavium involved on how clear the data is yadda yadda.
  • The sectors you've scanned are stored immediately (for you).
  • Any features in the sectors you've scanned are revealed immediately (to you).
  • The 90% rule still applies, so one you've scanned something like 90% of the sectors, the rest are revealed.
  • Done

So it simply makes more sense to try and be as efficient as possibly with your probes, scanning as many previously unscanned sectors/regions as possible to give you the best CR reward when you sell your exploration data for the sectors you've scanned.

And if you know there's some brain trees around a huge crater on the planet, you need only shoot one or two probes at that area to find the exact location of them. No need to probe 90% of the planet, as features are revealed to you immediately for sectors you've scanned.

fyeho7I.jpg
 
Last edited:
I do not understand why people want infinite probes. if they're infinite, why should we have to play the probe minigame at all? There is absolutely no sense in this, because it does not matter whether I have to fire one, two, five, ten or a hundred probes on a planet to map it, as long as I have an infinite number of them at my disposal. The whole game mechanics is completely useless and there's no challenge in this, no motivation in improving skills, e.g. trying to use as few probes as possible to scan a planet. People complain about the need of grinding for materials to create new probes. But why don't these people complain about having to play the mapping minigame at all? Why does FD not just leave the scanning process as it is now, i.e. pointing the ship to the planet, waiting a few seconds and that's it? The immersion thing is one point, but gameplay is another. If I do not need fulfilling some kind of task for those probes, why do we introduce them at all and why should I improve my skills in using them?
 
I do not understand why people want infinite probes. if they're infinite, why should we have to play the probe minigame at all? There is absolutely no sense in this, because it does not matter whether I have to fire one, two, five, ten or a hundred probes on a planet to map it, as long as I have an infinite number of them at my disposal. The whole game mechanics is completely useless and there's no challenge in this, no motivation in improving skills, e.g. trying to use as few probes as possible to scan a planet. People complain about the need of grinding for materials to create new probes. But why don't these people complain about having to play the mapping minigame at all? Why does FD not just leave the scanning process as it is now, i.e. pointing the ship to the planet, waiting a few seconds and that's it? The immersion thing is one point, but gameplay is another. If I do not need fulfilling some kind of task for those probes, why do we introduce them at all and why should I improve my skills in using them?

Sort of agreed - Hence the suggestion of giving importance/value/meaning to each probe used. See [url="https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php/451413-probes?p=7100606&viewfull=1#post7100606]#818[/url] above...
 
Why do people reject finite probes? The downsides are obvious without need to test them. There are no upsides ( aside from immersion for a few ) of adding an extra layer of pointless busy work. We know what mat scavenging is like and frankly it's not that engaging an activity. I don't think I've seen anyone claim that there isn't enough grind in ED. FD made the right call, we already sacrificed some of the convenience of the honk for this


You should read the following comment:

I do not understand why people want infinite probes. if they're infinite, why should we have to play the probe minigame at all? There is absolutely no sense in this, because it does not matter whether I have to fire one, two, five, ten or a hundred probes on a planet to map it, as long as I have an infinite number of them at my disposal. The whole game mechanics is completely useless and there's no challenge in this, no motivation in improving skills, e.g. trying to use as few probes as possible to scan a planet. People complain about the need of grinding for materials to create new probes. But why don't these people complain about having to play the mapping minigame at all? Why does FD not just leave the scanning process as it is now, i.e. pointing the ship to the planet, waiting a few seconds and that's it? The immersion thing is one point, but gameplay is another. If I do not need fulfilling some kind of task for those probes, why do we introduce them at all and why should I improve my skills in using them?

Infiinite probes = mindless by design
Finite probe = skill evolvement by design
 
But FINITE probes don't have to mean GRIND. It's all a problem of implementation. There are ways to make both camps happy.

The only problem was "just don't make the damn things INFINITE":
1. Have the ship replenish a finite amount of probes automatically over time.
2. Have a huge but finite number of probes, so that in practice you never need to replenish them during an exploration trip.
3. Make the probes reusable. After doing their job, they return to the ship.
4. Make the probes very easy to manufacture, from very common materials, each manufacturing operation producing them in the thousands.
 
I really wanted to quit this thread, but....

I do not understand why people want infinite probes. if they're infinite, why should we have to play the probe minigame at all?

This is just like asking a hunter, "If you don't want to make your own bullets, then why hunt at all?" I'm not saying bullets are infinite, but in general they are not something that normal hunters have to worry about making while hunting. I personally go exploring to explore, not craft probes. There is also this misperception that explorers with infinite probes will just spray probes all over the place in wanton abandon.

GQ2Z9H.gif


Yet I don't know any self-respecting hunter, regardless of the amount of bullets they can afford, who would actually hunt this way, nor will I as a self-respecting explorer "spray probes" to map a planet.

So to answer your question, I personally do not want to press my own bullets - that's a separate "hobby" from hunting (planets in this case). If the vocal minority win this debate and Frontier goes back to finite probes, then I ask that these probes be purchasable at any station that has an advanced maintenance tab. I already own plenty of games where I have to craft my own probes arrows, I don't want ED to become yet another one.
 
Last edited:
Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom