Allow use of pre 3.3 Advanced Discovery Scanner

Dear community.

I do realise that such topic has already been done to death. But please, hear me out. I've ben reading forums for a while and found quite a group of those like me, missing the old method of carrying out exploration. To put things simple : jump, honk, glance at the system map, jump away / stay.

What do i bring with me to support my request?
1 ) Miners are able to choose their playstyle :
a) Use old method of mining by beaming asteroids
b) Incorporate new modules to increase payouts and add some variety / challenge
2 ) A modlue slot is freed after the update therefore how about introducing a new module type(charter?) that would upon honk reveal system map, the way it used to happen with Advanced Discovery Scanner providing as little details as it did. I do recon though that such module should be balanced i.e.
a) be expensive
b) consume more power
c ) provide less credits per "honk"
3 ) Many new players alongside those who have already played significant amounts of time do seem to enjoy the new scanning method however main complaints i've come accross(myself included) is that
time to find that one, magnificient system is noticeably increased by enforcing players to perform whole scan and gauge whether it's worth staying(and now the important part - not for the credits but for the views). Oddities such as quaternary systems of moons and stars, odd orbits, bodies orbiting very close to eachother. As one of the comanders put it about exploration "a honk and a little brainpower would tell me if i wanted to stop. now im forced to stop ".

I am asking You, the Reader to look at this post as a proposal rather than me saying : "You should play my way, as i'm right". I only want to allow players who enjoy exploration to have a choice, same way miners do. Should You preffer FSS, sure, it's Your way. Do You see Yourself as a honker? Neat, buy a module and carry on. Allow choice.
If You do find my arguments reasonable please help this thread reach enough attention that we hear from the developers themselves.

Please, let's keep this conversation civil. I want to hear opinions, ideas and eventually - feedback.
 
Because the conversation died there. Buried beneath tons of other new threads.
I also wanted to introduce possible solutions to the aforementioned request as to, hopefuly, satisfy both parties (enjoying FSS, enjoying ADS).
Furthermore, felt like this matter needs a constructive debate with the concept behind the request being as clear as possible.
 
Last edited:
Translated: in those threads it also were always the same handful of people screaming against the new system, while many players stated that they actually are happy with the changes. But perhaps the people who are happy with the new system just get bored explaining the same things again, so this could be the thread where the crying and complaining could finally happen freely.
 
I wouldn't call it "crying and complaining". Just wanted to highlight the issue shared among a group of players. As stated above, I am not trying to try and enforce anyone to "play my way". I understand that many players are happy with the new scanning system and i don't need anything explained to me. I've had my fair share listening to both parties. I am trying to bring to light the possibility of varying the exploration gameplay methods. Miners can choose different loadouts based on what they want from mining gameplay. Combat oriented pilots can outfit a plethora of different weapons that suit certain style of fighting etc.

I am sorry that You took my first post as whining / crying / complaining. I'd hoped I clearly stated that all I want is to put forward some ideas to allow variety in exploration methods. A civil conversation about whether those could coexist.
 
The problem is that these two, by design, can't really reasonably coexist. There's been plenty of suggestions, but they all don't eliminate the core problem: if the old mechanics are still in place, there is no reason to even have the new ones.

While there's a good reason not to have both: maintainance effort. The more systems there are, the more the developers have to care for them. No matter how small they may seem, have enough of them and they will mess up something.
 
Those are truly, fair points to be honest. Although with mining update one can still go beaming about without bothering to find deep core deposits. There You could also argue, tat there is no point doing that since it pays less(Pardon me bringing up such shallow reason, it just seems to be the most widely used one) or whatever other reason.
Same would probably apply to combat in certain aspects. I can't seem to see why those would not coexist.

Let me try and clarify.
1) If one is truly interested in exploring everything, they would stick to FSS and scanning everything without even bothering to open the system map. That's perfectly fine.
2) If one is interested only in high valuable planets the FSS is great for that. Quick glance at the spectrum tells them all they need. It's fine too.
3) However if someone is interested in vistas, oddities in system generation, extraordinary orbits, well, with 400 billions star systems the time to find such is considerably increased.
And i know for a fact that this used to be a perfectly fine method of carrying out exploration too.
Having fully charted map doesn't really harm any of the aforementioned three. Cherry pickers would cherry pick the same way they do now. It would only allow one more method to be used. And it was fine for some. With veterans who'd seen it all they don't want to spend lots of time looking at blue blobs for couple of minutes even(depending on system size) to find it utterly disappointing in their eyes. This was in game for a long time. To me, the FSS is a natural improvement over the Advanced Discovery Scanner. With the whole thing feeling like a proper scanner now. With the existing mechanics FSS provides it would, in my opinion, perfectly balance eachother. People glancing at the spectrum or system map would be - arguably - pretty much the same thing(keeping in mind player group mentioned in point 2). With players wanting to perform a whole scan because they like it, so be it. See? Variety, to each their own.

Regarding Your second point, that is true. We've seen that many times. Yet Advanced Discovery Scanner has been in the game for a long time. It's been maintained through that time. Arguably ADS and FSS occupy one "system" as FSS took the former's place(somewhat). And if a system map reveal returned that wouldn't even have to be a new system per se. You see, that is one thing of revealing orbits and other information honking used to with bodies marked as unexplored. It still falls into the same system.

If i failed to see Your point, please, elaborate.
 
I’ve nothing to add, because I agree with you entirely - but I think this is a very well put description of the situation, which takes into account all sides in a reasoned fashion. Kudos, Commander.
 
It's a nice writeup. But there's one crucial sentence, where i disagree:

Having fully charted map doesn't really harm any of the aforementioned three.
The new FSS has a point by being a new exploration mechanic and activity. If it's more complicated and more engaging than pressing a button for a few seconds can be discussed. But if pressing a button for a few seconds would once again create the complete system map, the FSS looses a lot of it's meaning. It would not be an exploration tool any more, but only an optional confirmation tool.

I see and understand the problem that interesting orbits and configurations are harder to see in the new FSS than they formerly were. Finding those requires the additional step of going to the system map, which indeed could load a bit faster. But really, if the honk would once again complete your map, then why use the FSS at all?

Cherry pickers would honk, look at the system map, fly to the interesting places and map those, without ever touching the FSS.
Completionists in contrast would honk, fly to each place and map them, with the rest happening automatically. Never touching the FSS.
Those interested in vistas and the likes would also never touch the FSS, as the proposed change aims at exactly that: eliminating their need for the FSS.

This topic have been discussed a lot in the last months. Plenty of people contributed in those old threads. And while there were some people very passionately fighting against the FSS, i couldn't remember any suggestion which would not in the end result in what i just described: the FSS becoming absolutely optional and being a time wasting minigame while things can be done more efficiently by not using it.
 
The "fog of war" of an unrevealed or partially-revealed system map is a huge part of my exploration gameplay, so I do not want this taken away from me. If the ADS is brought back as a separate, optional module, leaving the current FSS alone (which means manually scanning the system to reveal the map for those choosing not to install the ADS), this would be acceptable to me. Making the FSS behave just like the old ADS would not.
 
It would not be an exploration tool any more, but only an optional confirmation tool.
That's a fair observation. Yet I beg to differ. FSS is far more efficient when it comes to scanning the system. It's vastly faster to scan everything. It loads faster than system map does. In the blink of an eye You can see what's in the system for cherry picking. Further accompanied by FSS ability to target bodies from within the FSS view. So cherry pickers wouldn't even bother with system map if they really didn't want. Body icons on system map can be misleading and it's not always clear whether at the first glance a body was an ELW or HMC. There FSS is superior.Since not only You know exactly what the body is also, where in the system it is, further accompanied by a revealing scan.
Completionists in contrast would honk, fly to each place and map them, with the rest happening automatically. Never touching the FSS.
Strongly disagree. Completionist wouldn't even have to engage in system map. Your example actually underlines that system map would be obsolete for them. From within FSS they'd see what is in the system. Also, accompanied by the scan. System map is not used for scanning really. It provides same if not less amount of information on the initial honk for this particular group of players. I'm not sure if You were around when old system was in place. Initial honk only revealed icons, orbits, distances of the bodies within the system marking them as "undiscovered". So You didn't really know what is in the system unless You scanned everything or took an educated guess. So FSS is not obsolete, it's still an exploration tool.
if the honk would once again complete your map, then why use the FSS at all?
That would be optional, as in being a separate module for the willing to equip one. Also, revealing system system map, as mentioned before does not mean "exploring the system". Have a read on how the old system worked. Honk provided Commanders with a view of bodies represented by icons an very little detail. Key system information was not revealed until further scanned. That is what FSS is for. It is not about eliminating anything. It is all about adding options.
 
On cherry pickers, that's disputable. If i'd go around, i would use my approach. I mean yes, at some time i scanned water worlds in the hope of them being earth like with very little land mass and metal worlds in the hope that they'd be water worlds which just glitter a bit more. But that's a question of experience. This happens to you a few times, then you learned the difference. It doesn't take long to learn, either. And once you learned the difference, honk-and-map would be faster, despite the map taking a little to open.

Strongly disagree. Completionist wouldn't even have to engage in system map. Your example actually underlines that system map would be obsolete for them. From within FSS they'd see what is in the system. Also, accompanied by the scan. System map is not used for scanning really. It provides same if not less amount of information on the initial honk for this particular group of players. I'm not sure if You were around when old system was in place. Initial honk only revealed icons, orbits, distances of the bodies within the system marking them as "undiscovered". So You didn't really know what is in the system unless You scanned everything or took an educated guess. So FSS is not obsolete, it's still an exploration tool.
I am around since the beta. There's a slim chance that i might know the old system. :D
Edit: Amused sidenote: i find it very funny that somebody who has TODAY as join date tries to educate somebody who has 2014 as join date on how things were in the past.

That out of the way, i think your assessment is wrong here. The completionist would:
  • Honk
  • Use the new orrery map to plot the fastest route through the system. Neither the left hand panel nor the FSS really allow you to optimize your path like that. Only with the orrery map you can really see how the planetary bodies currently are arranged so you can get a reasonable route.
  • Fly to each of them and start launching probes. While launching probes, the traditional "point nose at object, wait for scan" would just run automatically, no further effort.
No reason to use the FSS in this procedure, which would be the most efficient approach for a completionist.

That would be optional, as in being a separate module for the willing to equip one. Also, revealing system system map, as mentioned before does not mean "exploring the system". Have a read on how the old system worked. Honk provided Commanders with a view of bodies represented by icons an very little detail. Key system information was not revealed until further scanned. That is what FSS is for. It is not about eliminating anything. It is all about adding options.
Module slot or not, it would eliminate the use of the FSS. I really don't need to read up how the old system worked. The honk filled my left hand panel with all systems and gave me a system map, representing all bodies. At that time still only in the old map format, the orrery map only was implemented when the FSS also came around. But even in the old system it was not that hard to learn which planetary body was which. No need for FSS or something like that.

And as already mentioned: before orrery. Which means you still had to figure out the best route by yourself, which best was done by tooling around on the left hand panel while first flying a bit in random directions. Now you can easily figure out the best route on the orrery. It saves you much more time than opening the map takes. And then you can, after a minimal learning period, go about without the FSS again.

So yes. We'd still have the FSS in the shape of code to support, for the mere sake of having it in game. While everybody really into exploration (for mere efficiencies sake) would feel the pressure to bring that new module, not ever use the FSS any more but return to the old placeholder and weak excuse of game mechanic which the old honk actually was. Only the poorest of the poor, who can't afford a dirt cheap module, and perhaps one or two "exploration roleplayers" would still use the FSS.

But yes. There's plenty of people around who want convenience over gameplay. I mean, there's always the "a mile wide, an inch deep" trope. The old honk-and-scoot was the absolute evidence for that by many people. It was bland and boring, having to just press a button for a few seconds really wasn't the ultimate challenge of skill. FD didn't change this for no reason. The honk was often and rightfully criticized. Replacing it was a step forward in terms of gameplay and atmosphere. (And no, the new FSS also is not ultra-deep. But it sure is more than "hold button for success". )

Tastes may differ, but between boring convenience and at least some gameplay, i rather have gameplay.
 
Last edited:
During the beta it was pitched that the FSS be an additional function of the ADS but that the ADS provided a much reduced information set - no pretty pictures but basic structure (planets and moons) so you could decide whether to FSS the system to "pad out" the sytem map or not. This was supported by quite a few but fell upon deaf ears at FD. I doubt they will change their minds but at least these repeated threads are not wasting paper and decimating our forests.
 
....... I'm not sure if You were around when old system was in place. Initial honk only revealed icons, orbits, distances of the bodies within the system marking them as "undiscovered". So You didn't really know what is in the system unless You scanned everything or took an educated guess. So FSS is not obsolete, it's still an exploration tool.
.........
Oh dear, what a misrepresentation. There a are a plethora of resources showing you how to interpret the "icons" you dismiss. Once you got to know the rough "goldilocks zone" of star types you could even venture whether there were terraformable bodies.
 
And as already mentioned: before orrery. Which means you still had to figure out the best route by yourself, which best was done by tooling around on the left hand panel while first flying a bit in random directions. Now you can easily figure out the best route on the orrery. It saves you much more time than opening the map takes. And then you can, after a minimal learning period, go about without the FSS again.
Implying that majority of the players do scan and map every body they find. Should they feel like it, why not allow them to go on without FSS?
Those who preffer being done with scans with FSS can jump right to the next system. I'd also risk saying that most players do not go about mapping each body in the system. Many are satisfied with so much as discovering bodies with basic FSS scan. Mostly mapping the most valuables or only a certain body type, say ELW for example.
It's a matter of prefference really. If someone preffers FSS the'd use it. If someone, say, found a more efficient way of exploring as You described, well, why not? People did find old method boring and placeholder, yes, myself sometimes included. However seeing how much lack of system map reveal influenced me and many people I spoke with I had to at least try and explain our point of view about the whole matter. Why not allow players to devise their own style and methods to encourage building up efficiency?
Then again, I do not want to remove FSS from the game as I mentioned before, it is quite fun extension of what ADS used to be.However, it's aimed mostly at making credits at reasonable pace without moving every now and then 350k ls from the main star. Which with FSS can be done right from the entry point. So no, FSS would not be rendered useless. There are a bunch of players who preffer that over what exploration used to be. But so are those who really miss the initial map reveal.
Regarding You being since the beta, pardon me, i've just recently decided to drop into forums to post something myself.
I would like You to notice that I just would like people to have choice of their playstyle here. If majority did decide to go with system map, well, let them. For most people i suppose FSS would still, however be the ultimate and only tool. About the orrery view, yes, it is a powerful tool, maybe then limit system map to its default view after honking then?
Similar arguement could be held about miners(sorry for bringing it up so often, just seems like the best analogy). You could argue that even after bringing new tools into the game mining beams are better and the only solution since most asteroids don't seem to contain high paying deposits and new tools are just a gimmick.
Or the other way, that the deep core deposits are the only way to go and mining beams are a thing of the past.
See, all groups have choice in how they carry out their favourite gameplay loops. If a reasonable balance between map reveal and FSS was introduced, i.e. not reveal orrery and other possibilities mentioned in posts above, I strongly believe that all parties could be satisfied.
 
Module slot or not, it would eliminate the use of the FSS. I really don't need to read up how the old system worked. The honk filled my left hand panel with all systems and gave me a system map, representing all bodies. At that time still only in the old map format, the orrery map only was implemented when the FSS also came around. But even in the old system it was not that hard to learn which planetary body was which. No need for FSS or something like that.

And as already mentioned: before orrery. Which means you still had to figure out the best route by yourself, which best was done by tooling around on the left hand panel while first flying a bit in random directions. Now you can easily figure out the best route on the orrery. It saves you much more time than opening the map takes. And then you can, after a minimal learning period, go about without the FSS again.

So yes. We'd still have the FSS in the shape of code to support, for the mere sake of having it in game. While everybody really into exploration (for mere efficiencies sake) would feel the pressure to bring that new module, not ever use the FSS any more but return to the old placeholder and weak excuse of game mechanic which the old honk actually was. Only the poorest of the poor, who can't afford a dirt cheap module, and perhaps one or two "exploration roleplayers" would still use the FSS.

But yes. There's plenty of people around who want convenience over gameplay. I mean, there's always the "a mile wide, an inch deep" trope. The old honk-and-scoot was the absolute evidence for that by many people. It was bland and boring, having to just press a button for a few seconds really wasn't the ultimate challenge of skill. FD didn't change this for no reason. The honk was often and rightfully criticized. Replacing it was a step forward in terms of gameplay and atmosphere. (And no, the new FSS also is not ultra-deep. But it sure is more than "hold button for success". )

Tastes may differ, but between boring convenience and at least some gameplay, i rather have gameplay.
I don’t think that having a mutually exclusive ADS type module would eliminate the FSS here, especially if the modules were mutually exclusive, as Old Duck reasonably suggests.

One of the benefits of the FSS is that it reveals the compositon of the body scanned, which the ADS did not, and this can be a crucial piece of information when out looking for materials or surveying for biologics, etc. Plus, the ADS didn’t tell you what the bodies were, they were only confirmed by flying up to them and scanning (though the hologram always gave it away once targetted of course).

So I see two complementary styles of play here that result in the same end eventually:

1: Use the FSS from one position, gain the system layout and material composition in full after maybe 5 - 10 minutes of zooming.

2: Use the ADS, gain a system layout immediately, but no material composition or body type confirmation or tags until having flown there to scan. Takes a long time (upwards of 30 minutes) in a heavily populated system.

Both options can result in a fully scanned system for composition, type, and tagging purposes: The FSS is rapid and does not require flying to each object. The ADS is slow, because it does require flying to each object (some of which could be 100’s of kls away). So there is the trade-off decision point for what module you want to take with you :)

Also, if you liked flying up to objects to discover them and have the thrill of seeing them resolve as you approach them, the ADS gives that gameplay. If you don’t want to take the time to do the flying, and enjoy the gameplay that the FSS provides, that would be available instead. I see both as valid gamestyles for different people: I used to really enjoy the flying to scan, and that was valid gameplay to me, so I don’t think it is fair to label that as “boring convenience” or to view the FSS as providing gameplay where there was none before :)

It is all rather academic though, since I very much doubt that any change will be made at this point. I spent 12 months out in the black, during which I hadthe FSS replace the ADS, which was not a fun experience for me. It was only when I returned to the bubble and saw how the FSS had been tightly integrated into locating USS sources that it made much more sense to me - I think this was always it’s main focus, and given that, it is highly unlikely to be altered, as it would impede that area of gameplay now.
 
There a are a plethora of resources showing you how to interpret the "icons" you dismiss. Once you got to know the rough "goldilocks zone" of star types you could even venture whether there were terraformable bodies.
Aye, I acknowledge that and am familiar with the concept. What I meant is that it's around the same amount of information You can get from pointing FSS at bodies within the system.
 
Once you got to know the rough "goldilocks zone" of star types you could even venture whether there were terraformable bodies.
That was actually one of my main gripes with the FSS, in that using it to completion gained all the CFT worlds in one go! As it was with the ADS, you had to exercise some judgement and knowledge in choosing which bodies to fly out to if you were hunting CFTs - there were many occasions where I bagged CFTs that had been overlooked by previous travellers (for whatever reason) through the system, which was always very satisfying :)
 
Aye, I acknowledge that and am familiar with the concept. What I meant is that it's around the same amount of information You can get from pointing FSS at bodies within the system.
... but it is not. Absolutely not.

By using the FSS you get what in the old system would have been detailed surface scans of the bodies if you resolve the signals. If you don't actually zoom-in on each signal source on the FSA graph then you have no idea of how many of that particular type of body exists. So although there might be signals for HMC you could have one or a dozen, not only that but you wouldn't know how far away they were (or even if they were part of a secondary star's system).
 
Top Bottom