These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Gameplay design reason behind needing to spam d-scan?

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Doctor Mabuse
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#81 - 2017-01-01 23:12:27 UTC
Back around September 2009 CCP put a two second delay in the scanning cycle to prevent lag issues due to spam clicking, and that was just the people actively using the scanner; it caused a bit of an outrage at the time.

Now you want every ship in space anywhere to automatically spam click?
Sugar Smacks
Khanid Royal Navy
Khanid.
#82 - 2017-01-01 23:19:52 UTC
2017 and I still cant use D-scan in a station, and stations still don't have windows.
So therefore when I leave a station I leave it totally blind.

That really rings on the realism factor right? Biggest structures in the game and they have the least amount of mechanics.

Most the game wont really care about D-scan because they use the lame "use local" mechanic, to tell who is around without ever having to do any work at all.

Does that sting of complete unrealism too?

It is funny how you have to make lore up that is completely unrealistic to explain some of EvE's issues.

EvE where a window is too complicated, but when you enter a system they magically know it from a billion KM away.
Herzog Wolfhammer
Sigma Special Tactics Group
#83 - 2017-01-01 23:42:56 UTC
Beast of Revelations wrote:
I understand why I, as the game currently stands, need to spam d-scan (at least if I'm in a wormhole or something). What I'm asking is, what is the GAMEPLAY DESIGN reason for this?

There can be no lore aspect to this. In the real world, even our (relatively-speaking) low-tech airplanes - even el-cheapo ones - have continuously updating radars. The pilot doesn't have to keep reaching over and spamming the 'show objects' button while flying the plane.

The only reason I can come up with is some kind of misguided 'Starcraft' notion of having to click and spam buttons to expend APM to separate higher-skilled players from lower-skilled ones. Even in Starcraft, this notion is debated (although the spam-clicky side won), but I don't think there should even be a debate in this game, however. I don't think anyone thinks, or should think, of this game as a spam-clicky Starcrafty real-time tactical.

If that is the reason it is designed this way (the game should be a spam-clicky RTT kind of game), why stop at d-scan? What about the local chat window? Why not add a button to spam-click for updating it? What about the overview? Why not add a button to spam-click for updating it? What about the window you are looking at the 'game world' through? Why not add a button to spam-click to update that? Come on, let's separate the men from the boys here, and let's separate the wheat from the chaff. If we are gonna have a spam-clicky game, don't do some pathetic, half-handed approach. Let's go all out with it.

If I'm missing something as far as the reason for this, pray tell. Or, if the reason is "we need pointless APM sinks," give me an argument as to why. Otherwise, come on guys. Update the damn d-scan. Turn it into some radar-esque type of thing showing blips, or at the very least, keep it the way it is but make it continuously updating like local chat or overview or anything else. The way this thing is designed now is just dumb. And yes, I'm quite good at hitting the stupid thing every 5 seconds without forgetting, I just think it's dumb.



Love that name.

You have to remember that this is Eve. And a good part of the player base subscribes to hunt other players. Anything you do that might make it harder to do that might cost money. Somebody ran the numbers and noted that people who hunt other people pay more subs than the hunted. So someone who quits after being ganked because they used D-Scan every 4 seconds instead of 2....

(it's possible to get someone with probes using a combination of D-Scan and probe fu IF and only IF they are not using D-scan every 2 seconds back to the post...)


...is not paying enough for subs because chances are he is not using alts.

Of course things get interesting watching predators feed on each other. They had to make the game free.

Bring back DEEEEP Space!
Beast of Revelations
Pandemic Horde Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#84 - 2017-01-02 21:16:28 UTC
Whatever the truth of the matter is about how much load it would be to make dscan the way it should be, I think one thing could certainly be done without any added load (or, much).

Make a radar-like box or instrument which shows ships in local chat. The server is already calculating it. So just send it to the client and have it display it.
mkint
#85 - 2017-01-03 00:28:22 UTC
Beast of Revelations wrote:
Whatever the truth of the matter is about how much load it would be to make dscan the way it should be, I think one thing could certainly be done without any added load (or, much).

Make a radar-like box or instrument which shows ships in local chat. The server is already calculating it. So just send it to the client and have it display it.

Not sure what you're suggesting... that Local automatically shows the ship everyone is in? That would be Bad. Especially considering there is (or was?) a strong player movement to remove Local entirely, or at least set it to recent speakers like w space. Both extremes would be too much for most situations in the game, leaving us pretty good where we're at. And if you try to limit it to have a d-scan type functionality with a local update frequency, that's EXACTLY the thing that would wreck server performance because it has to calculate the information especial for each client, so that the client can't use data interception to gather intel they shouldn't have. (i.e. cheat, and there will always be somebody who's better at cheating than you, so you'd end up with something similar to Malcanis Law.)

I agree that the UI needs to basically be rewritten entirely from scratch for EVE to have any chance at all of surviving another 10 years. Intel channels and situational awareness would definitely need to be the central part of that. However, at this point the status quo is better than a halfassed change that ends up just making things worse, which is the far likelier thing to happen given CCP's track record on important things like this. There's a reason the best EVE maps are the ones CCP has nothing to do with.

Maxim 6. If violence wasn’t your last resort, you failed to resort to enough of it.
Beast of Revelations
Pandemic Horde Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#86 - 2017-01-03 02:44:15 UTC  |  Edited by: Beast of Revelations
mkint wrote:

Not sure what you're suggesting... that Local automatically shows the ship everyone is in?


Basically a d-scan limited to local, so I guess my answer is 'yes.'

Quote:
That would be Bad.


Why is that? You can already get the information if you hit dscan. The argument for not doing dscan 'correctly' is that there would be too much server load. Well this is a scaled-down version that would not entail additional server load, because the server already calculates local. So just make a continuously updated local dscan.

Quote:
And if you try to limit it to have a d-scan type functionality with a local update frequency, that's EXACTLY the thing that would wreck server performance because it has to calculate the information especial for each client, so that the client can't use data interception to gather intel they shouldn't have. (i.e. cheat, and there will always be somebody who's better at cheating than you, so you'd end up with something similar to Malcanis Law.)


I don't really know what you are saying here. Perhaps you can explain it better? Or perhaps you aren't understanding me. I'm saying that local is already being calculated - PERIOD. So no additional server load.
Diane Persis
#87 - 2017-01-03 03:14:27 UTC
We should make some more threads:

- gameplay reasons behind having to enable your weapons for each new target, it's so silly it should be automated. It's not the middle ages you know
- gameplay reasons behind probes, why not just make them like anomalies?
- gameplay reasons behind ratting, it's just too much effort so give us free isk?
- gameplay reasons behind sov, why all this effort?
Herzog Wolfhammer
Sigma Special Tactics Group
#88 - 2017-01-03 03:16:31 UTC
Beast of Revelations wrote:
Whatever the truth of the matter is about how much load it would be to make dscan the way it should be, I think one thing could certainly be done without any added load (or, much).

Make a radar-like box or instrument which shows ships in local chat. The server is already calculating it. So just send it to the client and have it display it.



In the 1990s I worked on electronic systems designed in the 1970s that would tell a fighter pilot if something, anything, was transmitting any signals that the funny little wideband on antenna on the back of the plane (usually a little white or gray dome) was was picking up. It had a display of "wingforms" to show what was transmitting, and it had a "threat library" as well. The ;pilot did not have to do anything beyond just switching it on.

But that technology was apparently lost between the 1970s and 23000 years into the future.

Bring back DEEEEP Space!
Verlyn
Kill'em all. Let Bob sort'em out.
Ushra'Khan
#89 - 2017-01-03 03:42:19 UTC
Realism in a video game?

Fuckoff.
Nat Silverguard
Aideron Robotics
Aideron Robotics.
#90 - 2017-01-03 03:53:31 UTC
Beast of Revelations wrote:
mkint wrote:

Not sure what you're suggesting... that Local automatically shows the ship everyone is in?


Basically a d-scan limited to local, so I guess my answer is 'yes.'

Quote:
That would be Bad.


Why is that? You can already get the information if you hit dscan. The argument for not doing dscan 'correctly' is that there would be too much server load. Well this is a scaled-down version that would not entail additional server load, because the server already calculates local. So just make a continuously updated local dscan.

Quote:
And if you try to limit it to have a d-scan type functionality with a local update frequency, that's EXACTLY the thing that would wreck server performance because it has to calculate the information especial for each client, so that the client can't use data interception to gather intel they shouldn't have. (i.e. cheat, and there will always be somebody who's better at cheating than you, so you'd end up with something similar to Malcanis Law.)


I don't really know what you are saying here. Perhaps you can explain it better? Or perhaps you aren't understanding me. I'm saying that local is already being calculated - PERIOD. So no additional server load.


and make it boring?

you carebears just want to fck up everything up. you are assuming that the only use of D-Scan is how you use it, set it 360 degress, 1AU, spam the sh!it out of it and warp when you get something. well, some of us actually use it to hunt WTs, we actually try to change the range to pin point the location of the enemy fleet.

with this, another mechanic should be introduced to retain the functionality i just mentioned above.



Just Add Water
Steve Ronuken
Fuzzwork Enterprises
Vote Steve Ronuken for CSM
#91 - 2017-01-03 04:17:59 UTC
Herzog Wolfhammer wrote:
Beast of Revelations wrote:
Whatever the truth of the matter is about how much load it would be to make dscan the way it should be, I think one thing could certainly be done without any added load (or, much).

Make a radar-like box or instrument which shows ships in local chat. The server is already calculating it. So just send it to the client and have it display it.



In the 1990s I worked on electronic systems designed in the 1970s that would tell a fighter pilot if something, anything, was transmitting any signals that the funny little wideband on antenna on the back of the plane (usually a little white or gray dome) was was picking up. It had a display of "wingforms" to show what was transmitting, and it had a "threat library" as well. The ;pilot did not have to do anything beyond just switching it on.

But that technology was apparently lost between the 1970s and 23000 years into the future.



It could scan out to 14 AU in real time? I'm amazed.

Woo! CSM XI!

Fuzzwork Enterprises

Twitter: @fuzzysteve on Twitter
Herzog Wolfhammer
Sigma Special Tactics Group
#92 - 2017-01-03 07:29:28 UTC
Steve Ronuken wrote:
Herzog Wolfhammer wrote:
Beast of Revelations wrote:
Whatever the truth of the matter is about how much load it would be to make dscan the way it should be, I think one thing could certainly be done without any added load (or, much).

Make a radar-like box or instrument which shows ships in local chat. The server is already calculating it. So just send it to the client and have it display it.



In the 1990s I worked on electronic systems designed in the 1970s that would tell a fighter pilot if something, anything, was transmitting any signals that the funny little wideband on antenna on the back of the plane (usually a little white or gray dome) was was picking up. It had a display of "wingforms" to show what was transmitting, and it had a "threat library" as well. The ;pilot did not have to do anything beyond just switching it on.

But that technology was apparently lost between the 1970s and 23000 years into the future.



It could scan out to 14 AU in real time? I'm amazed.




Total range was classified. All I know is that at certain times of the day we could not switch it on when Soviet satellites were known to be overhead.

It did not always work well. I recall an Iraqi TV station that kept coming up wingform for a SAM site. We did once pick up Iranian F14 from Turkey.
(yes they have F14s)

Bring back DEEEEP Space!
Tipa Riot
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#93 - 2017-01-03 09:17:40 UTC
Allowing key binding for dscan was a mistake IMO.

I'm my own NPC alt.
Tyrana McBitch
Doomheim
#94 - 2017-01-03 13:05:07 UTC
I never spam dscan, only every 30 seconds to a minute. I also check for probes. If some one is in system & no probes pop up, I know I am safe ish. It also ads a bit of safety to an otherwise one sided winning situation if you didn't have a dscan.

Also it adds actually playing the game. I cant stand point & click games. They are lazy. Its nice to feel in control or your ship in a given situation.

Insane.
Sonya Corvinus
Grant Village
#95 - 2017-01-03 14:37:32 UTC
Beast of Revelations wrote:
You didn't explain why this wonderful button-mashing spam mechanic shouldn't also be added to overview, to local chat, etc.


Local chat needs to go away anyway. There's way too much free intel in the game.

Every game involves "button mashing". In a FPS, you "mash buttons" to shoot a gun. Why doesn't the game do it for you?
Beast of Revelations
Pandemic Horde Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#96 - 2017-01-03 15:10:48 UTC  |  Edited by: Beast of Revelations
Sonya Corvinus wrote:
Beast of Revelations wrote:
You didn't explain why this wonderful button-mashing spam mechanic shouldn't also be added to overview, to local chat, etc.


Local chat needs to go away anyway. There's way too much free intel in the game.


That's beside the point. Assuming local chat needs to stay, why not add the wonderful button-mashing mechanic to that too? And overview isn't going anywhere... why can't we add the wonderful button-mashing mechanic to that? What makes overview and local chat different?

Quote:
Every game involves "button mashing". In a FPS, you "mash buttons" to shoot a gun. Why doesn't the game do it for you?


Dumb comparison. Button mashing is fine if it is an on-demand thing you need, that isn't always wanted or needed in all circumstances - like firing a gun. But the screen should always be automatically be refreshed - you shouldn't need to sit there and mash a button constantly to have the screen refreshed. And the same for something like dscan, overview, local chat, whatever.

A gun needs a 'control.' So a button is fine as a control. But a dscan or local chat or overview does not need, and should not have, a control.

You can compare it to driving a car. Steering wheel and gearshift and gas and brake should be 'buttons' in the sense that those are the 'controls' for your car. But the speedometer should not be a button that needs to be mashed to get the refresh on how fast you are going. It should always be automatically updated.

I do wonder about the average intelligence level on these forums when this kind of simple concept cannot automatically be understood.
Sonya Corvinus
Grant Village
#97 - 2017-01-03 15:18:23 UTC  |  Edited by: Sonya Corvinus
Beast of Revelations wrote:
That's beside the point. Assuming local chat needs to stay, why not add the wonderful button-mashing mechanic to that too? And overview isn't going anywhere... why can't we add the wonderful button-mashing mechanic to that? What makes overview and local chat different?


what? I'm not assuming local chat needs to stay. That was my point. Learn to read. also, lowering yourself to use reductio ad absurdum won't make anyone take you seriously in any conversation.

Quote:
Dumb comparison. Button mashing is fine if it is an on-demand thing you need, that isn't always wanted or needed in all circumstances - like firing a gun. But the screen should always automatically be refreshed - you shouldn't need to sit there and mash a button constantly to have the screen refreshed. Same for something like scan, overview, local chat, whatever.

You can compare it to driving a car. Steering wheel and gearshift and gas and brake should be 'buttons' in the sense that those are the controls for your car. But the speedometer should not be a button that needs to be mashed to get the refresh on how fast you are going. It should always be automatically updated.

I do wonder about the average intelligence level on these forums when this kind of simple concept cannot automatically be understood.


I also wonder about the intelligence of people. d-scan isn't always needed in game. You get rewarded for putting more effort in, so you have to hit a key to get more intel through d-scan. This isn't rocket science.
Beast of Revelations
Pandemic Horde Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#98 - 2017-01-03 15:34:24 UTC
Sonya Corvinus wrote:
Beast of Revelations wrote:
That's beside the point. Assuming local chat needs to stay, why not add the wonderful button-mashing mechanic to that too? And overview isn't going anywhere... why can't we add the wonderful button-mashing mechanic to that? What makes overview and local chat different?


what? I'm not assuming local chat needs to stay. That was my point. Learn to read. also, lowering yourself to use reductio ad absurdum won't make anyone take you seriously in any conversation.

Quote:
Dumb comparison. Button mashing is fine if it is an on-demand thing you need, that isn't always wanted or needed in all circumstances - like firing a gun. But the screen should always automatically be refreshed - you shouldn't need to sit there and mash a button constantly to have the screen refreshed. Same for something like scan, overview, local chat, whatever.

You can compare it to driving a car. Steering wheel and gearshift and gas and brake should be 'buttons' in the sense that those are the controls for your car. But the speedometer should not be a button that needs to be mashed to get the refresh on how fast you are going. It should always be automatically updated.

I do wonder about the average intelligence level on these forums when this kind of simple concept cannot automatically be understood.


I also wonder about the intelligence of people. d-scan isn't always needed in game. You get rewarded for putting more effort in, so you have to hit a key to get more intel through d-scan. This isn't rocket science.


Yeah, just what I thought - absolutely nothing constructive or intelligent to say whatsoever, and could not answer my questions, most likely because you couldn't even understand them.
Sonya Corvinus
Grant Village
#99 - 2017-01-03 15:40:32 UTC
Beast of Revelations wrote:
Yeah, just what I thought - absolutely nothing constructive or intelligent to say whatsoever, and could not answer my questions, most likely because you couldn't even understand them.


You do realize insulting people more experienced in the game than you when they disagree doesn't help, right?

Are you 12 years old?
Beast of Revelations
Pandemic Horde Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#100 - 2017-01-03 15:53:53 UTC
Sonya Corvinus wrote:
Beast of Revelations wrote:
Yeah, just what I thought - absolutely nothing constructive or intelligent to say whatsoever, and could not answer my questions, most likely because you couldn't even understand them.


You do realize insulting people more experienced in the game than you when they disagree doesn't help, right?


1) Experience with the game has absolutely nothing to do with rational thought, reading comprehension, IQ, etc. We aren't talking about an issue here that has anything to do with experience. I'm not asking "how do I do such-and-such?" Or "what's the best way to approach X?"

2) Noting that you have nothing intelligent to say and cannot answer questions is not an insult. Well, it is, but it's completely incidental. It's merely noting observations and facts.

3) It's a logical fallacy (appeal to authority) to cite your experience or anything else in the context of an argument. You can either make an intelligent rational point, and respond to such, or you can't. Period. Paragraph. End of story.