Just addressed this in the other thread (thanks for linking it @Iceacid_Frostpacker ) that’s more specifically about auto d-scan options.
As @Io_Koval has already pointed out, auto d-scan is a bit of a derail here. The thread is actually about respecting a players time investment in the game by not requiring long stretches of boring repetitive tasks.
One man’s boring repetitive task, is another man’s play time.
More accurately, 10 men’s boring repetitive tasks, is one man’s play time.
And that’s why EVE has lost 90% of its’ player base.
Seems to me an option to have d-scan automatically refresh + playing a sound if it finds something is a good way of respecting peoples time
The system already knows the distance to every object, via triangulation from a simple use of Pythagoras theorem. That is how it is able to populate Overview with the distance to planets, stars, asteroid belts, ships on grid, etc. All the information already exists. D-Scan simply ‘reveals’ it.
In fact, D-scan is probably a lot less laggy than working out ship velocities for the Overview, which would involve vector calculations.
Would be cool to have a module that cycles and d-scans for you. Maybe it could be scripted to have a longer range?
Losing a ship slot would be a fair exchange I’d say.
Not according to what CCP has already told the CSM, which is that dscan is incredibly server heavy and they don’t like it. I would bet money that if CCP goes any direction with dscan, it won’t be to make it all the time for everyone, it will be to disable it completely. Then you won’t have to hit it every couple seconds and CCP doesn’t have to program anything. Win/win! I can see the monkey paw starting to curl from here.
you realise that computers cannot multiply or divide? they can only add and subtract. multiplication and division are done via very quickly adding 2s together and subtracting the occasional 1 when appropriate. this is much simpler using binary logarithms, but the basic principle is the same.
so, in essence, 7^2 isn’t simply 7x7=49, rather it’s (2+2+2+2-1)+(2+2+2+2-1)+(2+2+2+2-1)+(2+2+2+2-1)+(2+2+2+2-1)+(2+2+2+2-1)+(2+2+2+2-1)=49. So your ‘straightforward application of Pythagoras’ suddenly turns into a huge amount of raw number crunching.
Yes, all the information already exists and yes, d-scan merely ‘reveals’ it. however, there is still some filtering to be done serverside to only reveal what your d-scan filter is set to and to only reveal what’s inside 14.3AU of your ship.
If D-Scan were to push out the position of every d-scannable object in the system and let the client do the filtering, that would be a MASSIVE hole into which you could drive a truck sized hack through. Simply packet-sniffing that ‘whole system position’ d-scan package and displaying it outside the client would give you a huge advantage of where everything is. Given that it would be done client-side, it would be exponentially harder for CCP to detect as a hack. Maphacks in games such as Diablo 2 in days of yore ran off this exact weakness (note D2 was coded up to be played on a dial-up modem connection).
Then there’s the issue that pushing out that huge packet of data, most of which would get filtered out at the client is a massive use of server bandwidth. Bandwidth I’m sure CCP doesn’t want to pay for.
got a link to this? I’d be interested to read it.
If you check this topic in the CSM thread there are links to various things CCP has said about it when it’s been brought up in various other years. Basically it comes down to CSM members saying “look, ccp has told us they don’t like dscan and it’s very server heavy”. I can’t imagine CCP putting more effort into something they have already expressed a dislike for, but this same topic seems to come up every couple years.
hmm, not a lot to go on in there, just one comment by one CSM member.
I don’t doubt he’s faithfully relaying what he was told by CCP. Nor do I have any reason to doubt that it is indeed server intensive.
cheers!
There’s also the vast majority of human players who know and have the dscan window open, but don’t dscan every 3 seconds. Combat scanning enemies goes from “I hope he forgets to dscan for these 5 seconds” to “I hope he forgets to look at the dscan window (which just popped out because of all the combat probes), or forgot to dscan for the past 30 minutes”. Combat scanning would be much less fruitful.
Also, for cloaky wormhole ships that cloak upon entering a wormhole, do you say they appear on auto-dscan or not?
(PS I agree with the pain points, being both a FW and WH player)
No it isn’t. There are algorithms for squaring in binary that make it much simpler.
My calculator can work out the square root of a 16 digit number in a fraction of a second. Once again using binary algorithms.
Consider an application like Universe Sandbox ( which I have ). There you can have up to 200 objects all gravitationally interacting. It has to not only work out the distance between each object using Pythagoras…but then has to do n-body calculations on gravity between each object. The infamous n-body problem that gave even Isaac Newton nightmares. In other words, for every object it has to work out the gravitational force from every other object. Various algorithms can approximate it all…and a good computer can actually cope with n-body calcs for 200 objects…which is FAR harder than anything EVE could possibly be called to do.
I did mention binary logarithms and l conceded they do simplify the process.
Citation to study that came to that conclusion needed.
I would very much like to read it.
Isn’t it curious how you feel comfortable making unbacked statements yourself, but demand verified proof from others? You do it a lot, you might think it makes you look clever.
You’d be wrong.
And?
I can request citations as much as I want, and not have provided any for myself.
What you have there, is called “false equivalency.”
Now you may say I’m being hypocritical, and to an extent that may be right. But I don’t recall you asking me to provide citations, so I guess we just won’t know.
But nice try!
If you click on any module, you can click the “show variations” tab, it’ll show you the various meta options.
Many of the modules have been tiericided, but weapons have not (except for light missiles.)
scoped = longer range than base t1
compact = better fitting
restrained = reduced drawbacks (ie: less cap reduction on mwds)
enduring = less cap need for activation
ample = more available charges
ex:
Hopefully when they get back to doing the weapons, they’ll add another prefix for better damage. Meta 4 weapons have the same damage modifier and rof than t2 do but do overall less damage than t2 due to t2 ammo and skills. So it would be a bit of a blow for the meta weapons if that was removed.
Edit: ahh my bad, someone already commented on this. Well, at least the images should help a bit.
Getting back to the original topic…if you are using d-scan to avoid being ganked then you are likely wasting your time.
By the time your d-scan picks up that there are a dozen catalysts on the way, they may well already have been on the way for 3 seconds or more. There is then your response time, which is not going to be instantaneous. And on top of that, your barge align time of 15 seconds or whatever. So you are basically stuffed if the gankers are closer than 32 AU or so.
I long since gave up on d-scan…preferring to simply add ganker groups to bad standing. That notifies me the minute they enter the system. And I don’t have to press some button every 3 seconds !
Math.random (or w/e your chosen programing language uses) more or less makes that argument moot. It would be easy enough for someone who knew what they were doing to scrape their own dscan usage, and then program those “patterns” into their script. I’m sure bots already are using it, because it’s really not that hard to code. Building the actual bot would be far more difficult.
And that’s the thing, denying auto dscan to the normal player base does nothing against bots. As I said before, a basic auto hotkey script is a single line of code, and if you want to get fancy with it, you’re talking like less than 5.
You’re assuming that information isn’t already being sent to the client. Destiny alleged that it might be.
But even if it isn’t, how many people are actually using dscan? Would that change that much even with auto dscan mechanic, especially considering EVE’s session change mechanics would by default reset auto dscan every time the player jumped a system or docked / undocked? I find that doubtful.
The proposed auto dscan would still require the player to activate it (because not being able to freeze dscan so you can actually read fleet numbers / ships is a non-starter.) So you’re talking about a fraction of the total.
People in highsec, by in large, don’t use dscan.
The op literally talks about it.
If players aren’t focused on constantly hitting the dscan hotkey, gameplay elements can be designed around other facets of the game to make the experience more engaging. There’s less room for the developers to move around in that space when players feel the need to keep kitting the same key every few seconds.
Agreed, an audible chime would be a welcome addition, even if ccp bows to the “no auto dscan” crowd. Bonus points for making use of that radar ping sfx from the 80’s - 90’s movies.
Well, enlighten me with all the non-boring game features that could be implemented today if only D-Scan were automated, and the optional pressing of the v-key (or spacebar) is somehow preventing the gameplay today.
At least then we’d be back on topic — and arguing about whether manual D-Scan is blocking those features can be a fruitless exercise for those interested.
The OP talks about being bored to death with nothing to do except staring at the most interesting thing: DScan results. If you actually absorb OP‘s intentions instead of injecting your own, one can see their complaint does not rest upon whether the most-interesting D-Scan window results is because he pushed a button or not. Its the fact that the very boring D-Scan is the most interesting.