|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 17 post(s) |
Faulx
Brother Fox Corp
161
|
Posted - 2013.05.09 07:00:00 -
[1] - Quote
Here's a few things you may not have thought of:
From a mathematical perspective, our ships "knowing" the position in the sky of a signature would allow us to pinpoint the position of a signature simply by warping from one side of the solar system to the other (using parallax). Even just dropping one probe and getting a "distance to target" would pinpoint the signature. The whole idea behind probes is that they use Trilateration which uses distance only. Once you have a pair of angles to go with a distance, pinpointing is very easy. Basically, you're breaking "Verisimilitude" by allowing us to see the sigs before we've pinpointed them, because no one in their right mind would use 7 probes do what 1 probe and a ship scanner can.
Furthermore, the "Signal strength" values in the tool-tips are too truncated, you need to show precision out to at least 2 decimal places (the lowest being 1.25%). Also it should be called "Signature Strength". "Signal Strength" is what % your at while scanning.
CCP Fozzie wrote:The list view onboard scanner is still in this version of SISI, but we are planning on removing it barring any major problems with the sensor overlay. Ideally we want to keep the number of tools people need to learn the same with this change, not increase it. If you remove the list view of the scanner window, you will be making it unbelievably difficult to use. The list should still be there, and clicking on an element of the list should cause the "tracking" behavior currently avaible in the directional scanner. Sometimes more things to learn is more ways to learn, which is a good thing, not a bad one. Science Amongst the Stars: Project Compass http://truestories.eveonline.com/ideas/908-science-amongst-the-stars-project-compass |
Faulx
Brother Fox Corp
162
|
Posted - 2013.05.09 07:33:00 -
[2] - Quote
*moves his hands together as though they're trying to put two pieces of a puzzle together that just wont fit*
The handwavium answer for everything:
Magnets....
or Probes...
or Magnetic Probes...
also see... Jumping the Shark Science Amongst the Stars: Project Compass http://truestories.eveonline.com/ideas/908-science-amongst-the-stars-project-compass |
Faulx
Brother Fox Corp
163
|
Posted - 2013.05.09 13:32:00 -
[3] - Quote
mynnna wrote:You're an immortal clone pilot in a universe that features, among other things, FTL travel and instant communication across any distance. Try not to think too hard about it. Throughout the history of this game, there has been a great deal of effort spent making things at least sound plausible. The notion that someday technology might advance enough for FTL travel and communication is not beyond the realm of believability. The notion that people who make their living among the stars would use a complicated system of probes to "locate" something they have, practically, already found is ludicrous.
The minute CCP lets basic mathematics like this slide is the minute I know this game is no longer about science fiction. For me, this is as ill an omen for the future of Eve as "Pay to WIn". *shrugs* Science Amongst the Stars: Project Compass http://truestories.eveonline.com/ideas/908-science-amongst-the-stars-project-compass |
Faulx
Brother Fox Corp
163
|
Posted - 2013.05.09 21:25:00 -
[4] - Quote
Please look at this well crafted and elegantly linked example of how you should "get away from spreadsheets in space." Science Amongst the Stars: Project Compass http://truestories.eveonline.com/ideas/908-science-amongst-the-stars-project-compass |
Faulx
Brother Fox Corp
172
|
Posted - 2013.05.12 21:44:00 -
[5] - Quote
Sipphakta en Gravonere wrote:Pressing scan every x seconds isn't "work". If you want to bring back DSPS: shuffle up signal strength (completely randomize it) and limit to show only structures, not ships (to not act as 256AU dscan). That way the easymode provides some basic intel but people are encouraged to use Combat Scanners if they want details. Scanning down every Sig in the system to find what you want isn't "work" either. It's "busy work", which should never exist in a game. Things should be fun and/or challenging (in a way that doesn't involve tedium or fighting the UI). Removing signature strength's use in eliminating possibilities, is not a good idea. The system is dynamic, not "all-informative" (it slowly narrows things down as your signal strength improves) and it required a great deal of research by the exploration community to implement . Just because you're benefiting on to tail end of it, where many signatures are known, doesn't mean that a lot of true "exploration" didn't go into finding all this out.
If CCP wanted to really acknowledge the exploration of its players, they would integrate data that was once hidden, but that players "discovered", directly into the scanning system (which is, close to what they're doing by displaying signature strength).
Also, if CCP really wanted to expand upon true "exploration". They would need to release new things to be discovered. The problem with exploration in this sense, is that it's canned content. Once you make the unknown known, there's no putting the genie back in the bottle. On the other-hand, the current system is canned content that took 3 years to fully suss out (and some of it still hasn't been discovered/reported), and which required the cooperation of hundreds of explorers, working across every region of the game. Frankly, that's pretty epic.
In any case, the process of using scanner probes in exploration isn't very fun, and it isn't true "exploration". It's just busy work. True exploration happens when people delve into dark and/or dangerous environments, little traveled by others and then return with new insights. If CCP can create a system that allows that, then they'll have an expansion worthy of the title "Odyssey". Science Amongst the Stars: Project Compass http://truestories.eveonline.com/ideas/908-science-amongst-the-stars-project-compass |
Faulx
Brother Fox Corp
172
|
Posted - 2013.05.13 00:20:00 -
[6] - Quote
Daniel Plain wrote:...i disagree completely with the statement that vigilance, perseverance and, frankly, resistance to boredom should not be rewarded in this game.... I agree with you about vigilance and perseverance, but there's absolutely no reason scanning should remain boring. Challenging yes. Boring no.
They could for-instance, introduce "counter-scanning" as a form of information PVP. Science Amongst the Stars: Project Compass http://truestories.eveonline.com/ideas/908-science-amongst-the-stars-project-compass |
Faulx
Brother Fox Corp
176
|
Posted - 2013.05.14 01:40:00 -
[7] - Quote
@Logan LaMort
Check out the link in this earlier post. For a map idea that might lower your neck craning quotient.
Science Amongst the Stars: Project Compass http://truestories.eveonline.com/ideas/908-science-amongst-the-stars-project-compass |
Faulx
Brother Fox Corp
176
|
Posted - 2013.05.15 02:56:00 -
[8] - Quote
I see you've added a "square-y boxy glowy haze" around the unknown sigs. I suppose this is to give the impression that it has yet to be pinpointed. However, the exact position of a signature can still be seen during a warp as the bracket flies past. If you want to keep this information hidden, you might consider hiding sigs that have yet to be located for the duration of the warp. Then reveal them again with another sweep of the scanner after (or just before) the warp finishes. That way the parallax wont be so obvious. Science Amongst the Stars: Project Compass http://truestories.eveonline.com/ideas/908-science-amongst-the-stars-project-compass |
Faulx
Brother Fox Corp
176
|
Posted - 2013.05.15 03:21:00 -
[9] - Quote
On a separate note, you're still calling what should be "signature strength" (or "signature size") by the title "signal strength", which has previously been used to describe the % your scan is at.
Also, you're not displaying enough precision, on this value.
What you show | What actual strength is 20% | 20% 10% | 10% 7% | 6.66r% 5% | 5% 4% | 4% 3% | 2.5% ?% | 2.22r% (haven't found one yet, I'm assuming you show 2%) ?% | 1.66r% (this band only had gravs in it, so it's gone) 1% | 1.25%
... that is, assuming you haven't actually changed these values. Science Amongst the Stars: Project Compass http://truestories.eveonline.com/ideas/908-science-amongst-the-stars-project-compass |
Faulx
Brother Fox Corp
176
|
Posted - 2013.05.15 03:38:00 -
[10] - Quote
In the "Scanner Window", in the field where the probes are located, it would be nice if the probes' sensor strength was displayed somewhere so users don't have to go into "Fittings > Show Charge Info", which is, frankly, very hard to find for newbies (and very annoying to find for vets). Science Amongst the Stars: Project Compass http://truestories.eveonline.com/ideas/908-science-amongst-the-stars-project-compass |
|
Faulx
Brother Fox Corp
179
|
Posted - 2013.05.19 04:01:00 -
[11] - Quote
- I've noticed that a signature's actual position is not where the signature's icon is displayed, by up to 7 AU, so bravo: uncertainty in position achieved. It would be nice if the position of the signature in the sensor overlay changed as you scanned it down in the probing system, but I realize the two systems aren't connected yet. One strange thing though is, that the signature remains at one spot, no mater where you are in the system. Shouldn't scans from different points in-system have it bouncing around inside its field of uncertainty?
- You're still calling "Signature Strength" (or "Signature Size") by the confusing name "Signal Strength"... this term is already in use in the probing system, where it is the % to which you've scanned a signature. Please change this so you're not using the same term twice for different things.
- You're still displaying too few decimal places in your "Signal Strength" field. The actual strength goes out to 2 decimal places of precision. There's a host of tools already built which display to this precision (e.g. siggy, the wiki, swiftandbitter), you're just going to confuse newer players who are directed to these sites if you continue to only display one significant digit of precision. (7%, 3%, 2%, 1% should be 6.67%, 2.5%, 2.2%, and 1.25%)
Sorry for repeating myself, but you don't seem to be addressing these are important issues. Science Amongst the Stars: Project Compass http://truestories.eveonline.com/ideas/908-science-amongst-the-stars-project-compass |
Faulx
Brother Fox Corp
185
|
Posted - 2013.06.01 17:22:00 -
[12] - Quote
CCP Greyscale wrote:...This achieves two things. Firstly, we remove the confusion caused by the initial probe scan on higher-strength sites invariably resulting in a signal strength decrease, which is ugly and unintuitive.....
This could be done simply by having a different column showing "Signature Strength/Size" (as an optional column for instance).
CCP Greyscale wrote:...Clearly, this makes the sort of DSP look-up tables that advanced explorers are used to somewhat more difficult to leverage, as there's no longer a handily-exposed variable for this (the information can still be largely derived from the [clamped] range deviation visible in the tooltip, but you'll have to do a bit of math in your head to figure it out). The new "spread formation" allows this to be somewhat mitigated by acting as a poor man's DSP, but it's nevertheless a reduction in available information at this specific stage of the process. Given the efficiency gains elsewhere, though, we're of the belief that this shouldn't, in practice significantly disadvantage probers relative to the current TQ system....
Do you realize that those look-up tables were the results of true exploration (discovery -> documentation -> publication)? It's ironic that you're cutting off access to the fruits of real exploration in favor of repetitive faux exploration. Rather than encouraging players to use their minds to reduce their workload, you're encouraging them to scan through dozens of unrelated sigs to find what they want. I hope you can see the irony in that:
CCP Greyscale wrote:...we're not huge fans of systems that require tedious and repetitive manual busy work....
... |
Faulx
Brother Fox Corp
185
|
Posted - 2013.06.01 21:15:00 -
[13] - Quote
So the solution is to replace it with tedium? |
Faulx
Brother Fox Corp
185
|
Posted - 2013.06.01 22:43:00 -
[14] - Quote
For systems whose radii are bigger than 32 AU, a lot is about to change... any signatures further than half the sphere radius will appear to be in a lower band. The spread formation does not replace DSPs in their ability to accurately place signatures in their respective bands. Players who have previously used DSPs in this way ("flesh and blood" or otherwise) will be having to change. |
|
|
|