what is the scan speed logic?

[Leper Messiah]

After saying I no longer scan the piffle of the galaxy I've been scanning moons again, but going mad with the slow scanning speed on what is basically lumps of rock and ice and have a low value.

So I thought of this: How about the scan speed is directly linked to value of the object being scanned, so piffle scans quickly (letting you know it's piffle) and longer scans for the valuable stuff, thus making long scans bearable because you know something juicy is being scanned?

 

[thehairymob]

I like it as is. You can see from system map what it is likely to be so you can decide if it is worth your interest or not. No need to change it

 

[Cmdr Raz]

I like it as it is as well, but if you want it discussed, maybe bring it up in the request list: https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php?t=141440

 

[Leper Messiah]

I like it as is. You can see from system map what it is likely to be so you can decide if it is worth your interest or not. No need to change it

Yup I do that as well, but sometimes I want to scan EVERYTHING!! Then it becomes a chore!

I like it as it is as well, but if you want it discussed, maybe bring it up in the request list: https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php?t=141440

Big thread, cheer for the link!

 

[Kancro Vantas]

Distance and size of the objects are variables to consider. The closer/bigger, the faster.

 

[Iskariot]

After saying I no longer scan the piffle of the galaxy I've been scanning moons again, but going mad with the slow scanning speed on what is basically lumps of rock and ice and have a low value.

So I thought of this: How about the scan speed is directly linked to value of the object being scanned, so piffle scans quickly (letting you know it's piffle) and longer scans for the valuable stuff, thus making long scans bearable because you know something juicy is being scanned?

I started out to say no to your proposal, but I ended up agreeing .
I think it would work very well actually.
It might be perceived by some as a bit gamey, but it is not at all difficult to make up all kinds of semi-technical explanations for why it would work this way for those who need such an explanation.
Although this looks like a minor tweak I do believe this would improve the scan experience significantly.
Of course the value of the target would not be the only value that influences the speed of the scan so in the end the difference might not always be discernible..

 

[Leper Messiah]

Distance and size of the objects are variables to consider. The closer/bigger, the faster.

I was wondering if that was the only way the game worked out scan speed....just seems a bit....not fun (for me I stress).

I started out to say no to your proposal, but I ended up agreeing .
I think it would work very well actually.
It might be perceived by some as a bit gamey, but it is not at all difficult to make up all kinds of semi-technical explanations for why it would work this way for those who need such an explanation.
Although this looks like a minor tweak I do believe this would improve the scan experience significantly.
Of course the value of the target would not be the only value that influences the speed of the scan so in the end the difference might not always be discernible..

Mind you sometimes I wish scan range was shorter to make us actually SEE what we're scanning up close and personal. I know I can do just that but Exploring is my main money earner in game and I get sucked into the credits per hour ethos (sacrilegious for an explorer I know!)