Proposal: alternative to outright removal of ADS instascan & system map minigame for explorers

Looking back at previous threads on exploration, here's what I was saying 2 years ago...

https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showt...red-systems!?p=4588449&viewfull=1#post4588449

This has nothing to do with "having everything handed to you" - that's nonsense, as you still have to go and Detailed Surface Scan a planet in order to obtain its data, not just how it looks.

I suspect you misunderstand me - I'm not wanting everything handed to me on a plate - I want a properly immersive exploration experience, and realise at the moment that the exploration mechanics are bare-bones and have been that way since release.

Which is why I object to this idea - precisely because the exploration mechanics are so bare-bones means a change like this as suggested would remove a bit of intended coolness factor from the system map.

Why do people want to take stuff away rather than add to it? I'll never understand that.

I think folks are misunderstanding the mechanics in a small way, too, but it's sort of fundamental; when you honk a system, you are merely discovering the existence of a body. So you can have a look at the System Map and from that decide if you want to go and detail scan a body or not. Choice!

This proposal is basically saying "You need to play the game MY way and go and visit every body before you can view them on the system map" - see thing is, I don't think that's adding anything to the exploration gameplay, I think that's removing choice from a player in that they'd now have no choice but to have to go and visit every body just to view it on the system map.

At least with the current mechanics a player has the freedom to choose whether or not they wish to go and have a closer look at a system body - imposing this completely arbitrary change to the system map is removing that freedom.

Man, talk about predicting the future :/
 
Looking back at previous threads on exploration, here's what I was saying 2 years ago...

https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showt...red-systems!?p=4588449&viewfull=1#post4588449



Man, talk about predicting the future :/

Unforunately every time anyone says what you have there it seems to be taken as "waah I want all exploration data given to me on a plate.... etc". I honestly am beginning to wonder if anyone actually reads what's being written - some might be folk being argumentative for the sake of it, but I've just about given up on making any suggestions regarding this as it seems to be taken as either your 100% for the "new " system (whatever it will be ) or 100% against it.
 
Unforunately every time anyone says what you have there it seems to be taken as "waah I want all exploration data given to me on a plate.... etc". I honestly am beginning to wonder if anyone actually reads what's being written - some might be folk being argumentative for the sake of it, but I've just about given up on making any suggestions regarding this as it seems to be taken as either your 100% for the "new " system (whatever it will be ) or 100% against it.

That's the way it's always been here. You're not a True Scotsman unless you wear a blindfold over your eyes and play a minigame for X amount of time to slowly uncover the blindfold, to merely discover the mountain.

Then you can go and actually explore the mountain.

There is a difference between discovery and exploration - the two are connected but they are different. It shouldn't take X minutes to discover the mountain. It should take a while to go and explore the mountain and do things on it.
 
While I appreciate that the proposed changes will have a negative impact on the way some people play I think that for exploration play in general this is a good thing - exlporation really has needed much more of a skill based element and I think FDs approach is a good comprise.

That said your idea of providing some sort of highlevel information about a system makes sense - I don't think I'd go as far as populating a greyed out system map but certainly a break down giving some hints about the sort of bodies that may be present and their number seems a nice idea. We are already getting a % completed so some sort of types probability might be a reasonable further compromise, you'd still have to go through the process of tracking down the thing you are interested in but at least you'd have an idea it was actually there.

Still, for me personally I like the sound of where things are headed and eagerly await the Beta :)
 
When I first read about the proposed removal of the current ADS functionality my initial reaction was: 'horrified'. After thinking about it more, and reading through a lot of the posts on the mega thread and elsewhere I have calmed down and downgraded reaction to 'concerned'

I'm mainly one of the type c explorers that ObsidianAnt described in a previous post on this thread (occasionally also type b if I've got my 'completionist' hat on). But I really don't care about the credits (if i was doing cr/hr i'd be in my cutter trading not 12k LY from the bubble in a slightly accidental exploration trip). There seem to be some out there who can't seem to get their head round the fact that 'scan value' and 'thing of interest' can be utterly different things and what counts as 'interesting' is subjective and means different things to different people.

One of the things I've actually found fascinating from reading through a lot of the posts is just how wide and varied the things are that interest people when exploring, so much so there are actually now a lot more things that I look out in a system now! I've only just recently finally got the hang of finding/listening for the audio clues - typically i manage to do that just before things change, lol

I'm hoping there can be some compromise like the OP suggests and we can have some sort of general overview to help decide whether to spend more time in a system or move on without having to play the mini game for every single body. I was going to add 'first discover' tag to the list of things of interest - as that is something that is important for me. However, thinking about that more, we'll still get a good indication of that from the main star info (i hope - maybe this has been answered already).

Looking forward to testing things out in the Beta. In the meantime I'm going to enjoy my honking as it is now before things change. This will be difficult after so many years of getting used to the honk=>reveal (I remember the good/bad old days pre-scanner where you had to find things and that got pretty tedious pretty fast for me). If the changes are really worth it though, then great. Time will tell, it always does.

(\(\;;/)/)
 
Yeah, the new system seems far too....grindy. Big surprise. ADS should detect everything, then give hints about things worth investigating further, if you so choose.

Define "grindy"? Grindy is Super-cruising towards a planet 100,000 Light seconds away, & passively waiting for the secondary auto-scan to kick in. Grindy is flying over a planet, at altitude, desperately trying to eye-ball a geyser field.
 
We still need to see the details of course, but as I understand it, we will be able to recognise (at least potential) ELW/WW/AW from the honk. In that regard, and if that's true, the new mechanic won't take longer than it does now. Instead of checking the sys map, you check your electromagnetic signatures, and move on if no candidates are available.

Plus, when finding an ELW (or candidate) you don't have to fly towards it to scan it, you can do this straight away.

Although I suspect there will always be "a tell" for each kind of planet type. I do hope it never becomes a 100% guaranteed thing, just from looking. It'd be nice if distance had a mild "distorting" effect on the signal. Not enough to make a Gas Giant look like an ELW, but maybe enough to make an HMC look like an ELW.
 
Exploration should be as skillful and activity as high level PvE, successful trading, etc.

Neither requires skill. Killing brain dead AI does not require skill, just leveraging the pathetic power creep PvE players have balefully demanded over the last few years. Trading? Not a skill. Just determination in the face of Frontier trying to make that a redundant occupation, as they have done for Piracy.

Frontier are not introducing "skill" into exploration. They are making it a "process" with "procedures" that will consume time. The people who are concerned, aren't of the money making variety. They are of the "I have eyes, I would like to see" variety. Between "skill cap" comments from people who may not have explored in any extended fashion (where doing the same thing hundreds, or indeed thousands of times is not out of the ordinary) and wouldn't dare because it's not their bag anyway, and people for whom the perfect game, has absolutely nothing in it at all, Frontier have tried to deliver the impossible.

Frankly, until Beta, most of this sort of conversation is personal projection of what sounds cool but is completely unworkable. The original guardian stuff was lauded as being all about skill and rewarding this and that, and it turns out it was just do the same thing twenty-five times.

Frontier. Has. Form.

Beta will make it abundantly clear if Frontier have learned anything or not. I certainly, have long since stopped expecting the "forum base" to have done anything of the sort; because it's the same elitist nonsense every time. And the handful that believe, surely, this is the time the developer will absolutely get it. Maybe? I hope so. But I've seen enough, lived enough of these changes to not just ignore Frontier's habitual approach to mechanics.

I look forward to Beta, with great interest. I hope it's held after the fact, as well. But maybe it's time to recognise the developer is only ever going to do a thing, a particular way. And that, as they say, is that.

I want to be blown away; I don't want to see the same outcomes as before. I want Frontier to have their Hello Games moment. And I won't be alone, in the slightest. The vast majority of players, who do not come here, are counting on Frontier; Q4 is exploration. This was the update that mattered.

Frontier are building for the entire community - not just this corner of it. It's time the developer remembered that.

--

More than ever before, I firmly believe the less Frontier listens to this place, and the more they listen to the broader community, who can communicate just fine, the better the game will get. Because that's who they are doing all this for. The greater community. And I think Frontier should really own that, a hell of a lot better than they have in the past.
 
Last edited:
More than ever before, I firmly believe the less Frontier listens to this place, and the more they listen to the broader community, who can communicate just fine, the better the game will get. Because that's who they are doing all this for. The greater community. And I think Frontier should really own that, a hell of a lot better than they have in the past.
All of this
 
Anyone who jumps in, refuels while scanning, then jumps out - and call this 'exploration' - is plain wrong. Right now, that IS how it works, and it is clear this was not the intended end result.

You are partially correct, however this preliminary information allows me to quickly separate those systems that have certain characteristics I'm looking for from those that don't. A system that I find interesting after a quick look at the system layout (and mousing over bodies), I will then "properly" investigate; a system that doesn't interest me I can move on from quickly without wasting too much time.

Lets look at what the current ADS "Honk" scan gives us:
1) Near instant identification of bodies (due to the visuals), WW's and ELW's can easily be differentiated.

2) How those stars/planets/moons actually look.

3) Which planets/moons are Landable.

4) The full configuration of the system's moons, planets and stars (we know which moons and planets belong to which bodies, orbital types (binary, trinary, etc) and how far away they are from the entry point to the system).

5) A detailed break down of 4 of the basic stats of the body (Radius, Mass, Orbital Period &....I can't remember the 4th, as it's usually the first 3 I'm looking at).


The new ADS "Honk" will probably give us:
1) With a bit of practice, we should hopefully be able to decipher different signatures quickly and decide what type of bodies are present.

2) Will have to scan all bodies to see this information.

3) Not sure about this.

4) Will have to scan all bodies to see this information, although some guesses can be made by looking at the gravitational anomalies and tuning into certain frequencies to see whether that body might be present.

5) Will have to scan all bodies to see this information.

For me personally, 4) & (especially) 5) is the information I will miss the most. The OP's suggestion I think would be a reasonable compromise.


I also made a suggestion in another thread that would give me 5) and a bit of 4), but with the new interface here, although it would still wouldn't help with certain types of exploration:
https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showt...-ain-t-broke?p=7021846&viewfull=1#post7021846

If I'm not being selfish however and thinking about what other explorers might want, then not having number 2) can be difficult to deal with. eg What if I might be looking for deep canyons on ice moons, or certain combinations of colours on a metallic/rocky planet for some photography, but those particular features I'm looking for seem to only appear in 1 of every 100 systems that I "Honk" in?

Well now instead of a quick 30 seconds looking at the system map while lining up the next system, I will need to waste time exploring the system in detail to see whether it has those features I was looking for....If not, I have spent time in a system that I would otherwise of not explored, and have tagged bodies that I would of left untagged to figure out it didn't have those desired features. Now multiply that by x100.

Now this is not to say that with the new exploration mechanics in place, that there will be no other interesting features worth exploring, but taking away one method of exploration and replacing it with another isn't necessarily going to be a "win-win" in all cases. Sometimes the whole thing has me sometimes thinking "Lets just see how it goes, maybe the extra challenge will make exploration much more satisfying", but I like the idea of looking into alternatives that could possibly work well for all involved and still be a satisfying experience.

Another argument is to wait for the beta, but I also think there is merit in bringing up these concerns, not only because they could be true, but because FD may not of actually considered what another finds a problem to be a problem at all. More awareness of these problems earlier will hopefully lead to a better result in beta.
 
It's going to be interesting what people think of the new mechanic after 100 systems.

What is going to be more fun and engaging? Flying a space ship through a system enjoying the sights (current method) or not moving, playing a waveform mini-game that takes you out of the pilot's seat and literally separates you from being a space pilot (new method).
 
It's going to be interesting what people think of the new mechanic after 100 systems.

What is going to be more fun and engaging? Flying a space ship through a system enjoying the sights (current method) or not moving, playing a waveform mini-game that takes you out of the pilot's seat and literally separates you from being a space pilot (new method).

Yeah, I think this is overdoing it a bit (as usual). Having to shoot probes everywhere just to see there's nothing worth visiting is a pain.
 
Yeah, I think this is overdoing it a bit (as usual). Having to shoot probes everywhere just to see there's nothing worth visiting is a pain.

And instahonk to see everything a system has to offer is boring.

I'd rather they overdo it and then tweak later than plunge into compromise and mediocrity right off the bat. Still, as I said, the OP has some points worth considering.
 
It's going to be interesting what people think of the new mechanic after 100 systems.

What is going to be more fun and engaging? Flying a space ship through a system enjoying the sights (current method) or not moving, playing a waveform mini-game that takes you out of the pilot's seat and literally separates you from being a space pilot (new method).

While I would prefer to have it as a HUD overlay we already get pulled out when we examine the system map. I just imagine it's a virtual screen thrown up right in front of my eyes or on my helmet. We get pulled out of it during emergencies after all (interdiction, jumping, taking damage)
 
While i like keeping things easy, rushing through unknown space with instant scanning results is not, what exploration should be. I really like Frontiers approach.

A nice addition would be, if a system was deeply scanned by some explorer - the one who got the "discoverd by" tag - all following CMDRs could get a more complete result on all deeply scanned bodies on first scan, maybe the result the OP proposed. That would give real meaning to exploration as it makes spaceflight for other CMDRs safer and faster.
 
Back
Top Bottom