[Suggestion] Making Sensors Important

[Hawkflight]

Dear FDev,

I don't know if this idea is practical to implement this late in the game, but I had an idea about how long-range sensors could be more useful. What if the sensors you had influenced how far you could scan for undiscovered stars? So a higher class of sensors would allow you to detect undiscovered stars from further away, instead of just being able to see them on the other side of the galaxy regardless of what sensors you have. Additionally, maybe higher-class sensors could allow you to plot a route further away, so instead of simply having a 1,000ly cap on how far you can plot a route on the GalMap, the cap would depend on your class of sensors. I feel like this would not only give people more incentive to use a higher class of sensor, but it would also give a passive buff to larger ships in an exploration role. Suddenly the Anaconda has an advantage over the Asp Explorer in that it can detect undiscovered stars from further away and can plot longer trips on the galaxy map, making it a better choice for exploring than it already was, while still sacrificing in maneuverability and jump range. It would also be more immersive.

Just an idea I had, but I'd like to hear everyone else's thoughts on it.

 

[CMDR Cosmic Spacehead]

Not a bad Suggestion!

It could be carried over in to combat, and effect missiles lock speed, gimballed and turret accuracy, and target scan speed.
As well as better and faster USS detection, and a passive buff to all sensor related modules, such as KWS, manifest scanners, wake scanners, etc

CMDR Cosmic Spacehead

 

[Allchemyst]

It's unlikely that galmap navigation will ever be expanded in the way you propose, because the route plotting is already limited by server information and also the sheer weight of route calculation (figuring out the best route amongst thousands of neighboring systems with filters on is actually quite a feat), and also because the navigation data isin't "scanned", but rather part of the Ship computer's database.

However, I think - considering their weight, which can be immense in the largest ships - that everything which is remotely related to sensor modules and functions should be affected by the ship's primary sensor quality. KWS, WS, DS, DSS, MS and all their friends should see different levels of efficiency depending on wether they are attached to an Anaconda with an 8D or an 8A sensor suite.

Likewise, sensor range should vary a lot more between different sensor classes : An Eagle's A-rated sensors and an Anaconda's A-rated sensors shouldn't have a range so similar (both max at 8km, typical range being 6240 for the former, and 7440 for the latter). Scanning angle should be influenced as well.

And of course, all forms of weapon targeting from missile locking to gimbal and turreted aiming should be dependant on sensor class as well.

Right now, long-range G5 turrets are absolutely, utterly useless because it is pretty much impossible for them to hit anything at even half their range unless you're shooting at an asteroid... Ships that might want to employ such tactics would now be able to choose between lighter, more power-efficient close-combat builds (That we're all pretty much forced to have, unless you go the fixed route) and slower, less power-efficient scanner-heavy long-range builds.

Quite honestly, however, I really hope FD makes scanners as meaningful as possible. that additional 180 tons and riddiculous power draw should mean buisness.