The Compromise to End All Compromises - Exploration Scanner Edition
- Thread starter Ziljan
- Start date
That old chestnut.
Shall I also fly a Sidewinder because I find the AI to be too weak?
Kneecapping yourself for challenge is not the way to approach developing gameplay. Developing better gameplay is.
Actually, I didn't, but I kind of expected you to go there. The reason that I didn't is because I never discluded a gravitometer or whatever label gets slapped onto a gravity sensor, I simply supplied an additional element to the theoretical sensor suite. Even if you limit yourself to today's technology, modern shipping uses more than one type of sensor. That is why you see several antennas on ships.
At this point, I am fairly certain that Frontier made boasts they are not able to substantiate, and, rather than be honest and admit that they had schedule slippage, they are publishing fecal matter and saying, "Look, gameplay!" My reasons for this impression are the total lack of Focused Feedback, the loss of what seem to be the two most desired elements (fleet carriers and better planetary surfaces), and the fact that this "improvement" is nothing more than a time waster before the player can make a decision on whether they want to invest in the star system.
Last edited:
It does makes sense actually because even if you only look at it from a gameplay perspective, the current magical sensor is a placeholder that should never have existed in the first place. Telepresence is another bucket of worms, but we can allow for some SciFi signals that are wholly unnatural to have capabilities that go well beyond natural signals.
Radio sources come from as far as 12 billion LY away. But radio photons in 3304 are still radio photons, and subject to angular resolution limits, which means the resolution is limited by the size of your scope. In our own solar system with a radio telescope that could fit on a sidewinder, you'd be able to see the direction of the Sun and maybe the band of the Milkyway.
If you managed to mount something like THIS on top of a sidewinder:
Not an individual telescope, I'm talking the whole #$%&ing array of scopes on the back of a sidewinder. 
Then you'd be able to see Jupiter all of this glorious detail:
Forget about the smaller stuff unless you strap on another gigantic 70 meter radio transmitter
Last edited:
Making serious sense as ever cmdr, thanks for the input.
It's certainly the best thing to do, but since the devs are keeping quiet it seems impossible for anyone to do anything but speculate or argue why their concept of exploring mechanics is the one true way
This goes back to me stating multiple times FD really should reconsider the DDF.
I think they did that to some extent with the Focused Feedback Forums. aka= new expanded DDF.
But have they done it for Exploration mechanics enough?
Will they do it for the new paid expansion mechanics they are working on?
Will they keep hammering away at the old DDF items that are still extant?
Etc. Etc.
I think FD have course-corrected vs. Seasons 1&2, which they probably had roadmapped out for Console deployment and considerations for which we are not privy. But I hope that is correct and FD aren't falling back into old ways of implementing major headline features like Power Play with zero customer input. For a live game with a much smaller base than the billion-dollar-a-year World of Warcraft machine, this would seem to be more in the lifeblood and DNA of FD and ED.
By the time the Beta is released, Frontier will be completely committed to their path, making a wait and see approach equivalent to acquiescence. Beta is a place for catching flaws and bugs, not for soliciting the customer's input on what they want.
It does makes sense actually because even if you only look at it from a gameplay perspective, the current magical sensor is a placeholder that should never have existed in the first place. Telepresence is another bucket of worms, but we can allow for some SciFi signals that are wholly unnatural to have capabilities that go well beyond natural signals.
Radio sources come from as far as 12 billion LY away. But radio photons in 3304 are still radio photons, and subject to angular resolution limits, which means the resolution is limited by the size of your scope. In our own solar system with a radio telescope that could fit on a sidewinder, you'd be able to see the direction of the Sun and maybe the band of the Milkyway.
If you managed to mount something like THIS on top of a sidewinder:
Not an individual telescope, I'm talking the whole #$%&ing array of scopes on the back of a sidewinder.
Then you'd be able to see Jupiter all of this glorious detail:
Forget about the smaller stuff unless you strap on another gigantic 70 meter radio transmitter
First, your argument ignores the fact that any emitters of this nature are literally going to be screaming in your ear because of their proximity.
Second, your technical examples are designed to cover a conical volume measured in cubic hundreds, if not thousands, of light years.
Finally, again, you want to be selective about the idea that there is progress possible in the technology. If you can project a "forcefield" to prevent damage from incoming energy sources, that same technical base should be part of the sensor suite to detect incoming emissions AND allow your computer to give you at least gross impressions of what they are.
Last edited:
Not really, even if the new scanner didn't rely on infinite range and hence lack of proximity (which is does), and further even if you bounced a signal off the Moon with something the size of the VLA, two ridiculous assumptions for as small as a sidewinder, you'd see this gloriously detailed image:
That depends on how they're aligned. You can use the VLA to get pretty semi detailed images when the array is put in it's largest configuration over 36 km wide, and you bounce Ghz frequency signals off planets. There is no way you're even fitting that on a Coriolis, let alone space ship though.
Which reminds me, why don't we see gigantic telescope arrays in elite?? Maybe you're on to something below...
It's definitely an interesting Sci-Fi idea, but if that was true, shouldn't there be some of extreme blackhole type lensing centered on the ship that happens every time you honk your ADS? And for that matter, shouldn't shields distort the crap out of any incoming light the whole time they are up?
I agree................but also disagree for one reason, if it goes to beta they may buff a few things, nerf others and find a few bugs to play with. But what we see is what we will get (historically).
If we have to take the new system which will affect the entire game and make the whole thing longer, more grindy, for the same information eventually. Stupid. It is beyond me why explorers want things more difficult, not just for themselves but everyone else as well.
If they want more things to find why not add a weapon or utility such as a Probe Launcher with the ability to do various things like planet mapping over and above the current surface scanner. Add the ability to scan space for different things like dead ships with info to collect for the BGS, USS's etc using different ammo or something. All this could surely be added to the existing keeping the ADS, DSS, galaxy map and more importantly to all other players the system map. Before the beta they need to provide somewhere we can ask questions and receive answers from the developers. It should be fully moderated where it allows questions only and no slanging matches between posters like we have at the moment and somehow explain for instance where for the rest of the players being able to see what they want to see on a nav panel when we enter a system is NOTHING like looking at the system map. They may have other thing to do requiring further information. That means re-scanning the entire system to find somewhere with, say, Arsenic when we have already used the same planet a hundred times before. Deciat springs to mind here, if they (we) are a bit short of this Arsenic for Farseer we currently know from the system map that ample supplies are just next door. If we have to do the new scans to find it again then it makes this whole new system a very bad joke. That is just one example though, every single thing in the game is dependent on the galaxy and system maps. Everything. I see no logical reason why explorers get the right to change the entire game for everyone just because everything should be harder than it is. While that may be fine for them, it may be less acceptable for many more players.
Just remember that this is a game, there is no rule to say it has to be lifelike is there?
From the beginning I didn't mind the proposed changes to the ADS and I still don't. It's just a different UI. I will learn and adapt.
I don't like that surface mapping uses a consumable. You're all going to be synthesizing probes for your DSS. I don't like that.
A new recon fighter would mean that explorers using a ship with a SLF bay could surface map with a fighter instead, avoiding the synthesis needed to resupply probes for the DSS. If they can use the fighter to surface map, maybe they won't even have to bring a DSS at all, just the fighter bay.
I don't like that surface mapping uses a consumable. You're all going to be synthesizing probes for your DSS. I don't like that.
A new recon fighter would mean that explorers using a ship with a SLF bay could surface map with a fighter instead, avoiding the synthesis needed to resupply probes for the DSS. If they can use the fighter to surface map, maybe they won't even have to bring a DSS at all, just the fighter bay.
The DS honk tells you something about the system.
The FSS tells you whatever you still don't know about each body.
So there is a huge range of possibilities about what the something is.
Pretending that there are only two extremes is very very silly.
The FSS tells you whatever you still don't know about each body.
So there is a huge range of possibilities about what the something is.
Pretending that there are only two extremes is very very silly.
Last edited:
Most of the time if you're actively looking for USSs, you are in a populated system that has a Nav beacon. Scanning the Nav beacon reveals all the USSs in the system. You don't need the FSS at all in that case.
Which compromises are you talking about?