Next you’ll be complaining about the ping sound every 3 seconds from the Praxis parked outside the station 15AU away.
I dont understand why dscan doesent cost cap. i mean i think i do. but imagine if it did. i imagine scanning up to 15 au away would be costly in terms of cap. especially if its 360 degree scan?
I’m aware there was more to the op than dscan, but don’t pretend like it wasn’t part of the post. I commented more about other facets of what the op spoke about, but other people had issues with the concept of auto dscan so that’s why that conversation took root.
It’s pretty simple. dscan requires a key press. And if the player is pressing that key, then they’re not going to be pressing other keys for other gameplay.
For fw plexing, imagine if a player had to drop marines into the central structure, and then use rts controls, or some sort of puzzle mechanic, or even the current hacking minigame - skinned for marines taking control of the compound. That would at least be more engaging than pressing “v” repeatedly.
The reason why auto dscan would be recommended for this, is many people don’t have the ability to split attention enough to run dscan while they’re doing something else with a cognitive load. Watching streamers hack cans should demonstrate that pretty clearly.
Having an audible chime could be a work around for this, but imo, it’s still not ideal.
Bluntly: None of your examples are convincing that automated D-scan is the reason that we don’t get more engaging gameplay.
All of the examples you cited — including the hacking minigame of today — are simply explained away by „players demonstrating skillful ability“.
Be good enough to „plex in FW marines in the structure and also periodically pay attention to manual/auto D-Scan.“
Be good enough to „do RTS minigame and also periodically pay attention to manual/auto D-Scan.“
Be good enough to „do some sort of puzzle mechanic and also periodically pay attention to manual/auto D-Scan.“
Be good enough to „do the hacking minigame and also periodically pay attention to manual/auto D-Scan.“
See how manual/auto does not matter?
Exactly: being able to spread players out and distinguish them based on their skillful ability is what’s important in games, and that cognitive overload is exactly where players can demonstrate their skillful ability. That skillful ability is not „remembering to press V or not“, it is „looking at D-Scan results“. So it does not matter whether D-Scan is automated or manual key press. What matters is how engaging the other gameplay is, to induce cognitive load. You know… that other gameplay that OP called boring and disrespectful of their time. The actual topic at hand.
This is your best actual argument: that D-Scan requires a keypress, and gosh — that new RTS minigame needs 30 hotkeys to do! There physically aren’t enough keys on a keyboard so the other gameplay can literally not be implemented unless there was exactly one more hotkey available, and the best hot key to free up is the D-Scan one.
And quite frankly, it is a really weak argument.
4 Likes
You really don’t understand the problem. A randomizer doesn’t help at all. You don’t have the slightest clue how complex the “patterns” are we are talking about. The usual idea of “just simulate hitting Dscan every so often with random delays” is complete and utter nonsense. Humans don’t function like that. The actual rate of “pings” would have upwards and downwards trends based on the actual content on screen, based on the number of clients open, based on the background apps running and requiring the players attention etc. pp. . So unless the bot could read out the memory/process of the EVE client and/or analyzes the GPU-signal (both woulr require highly sophisticated and probably bannable hacks), it can’t really simulate a ‘real player’.
And second: even the most desciplined Players who claim they Dscan constantly actually do Dscan barely over longer periods of time. If you would create a bot that would actually Dscan at a rate a normal palyer (or even an advanced player) does, it would actually not scan closly as much as people would expect it to do. And this raises the question if the effort really is worth the drawbacks.
1 Like
Those are all factors that can be accounted for. A simple key logger can be used to formulate a map to code for based on the scenario the programmer is attempting to emulate. It’s not nearly as complex as you think it is.
It’s not just about key presses. It’s about cognitive load in activities that are varying. It’s the whole pat your head and rub your stomach experiment… possible… but both activities show diminished performance.
And you are correct in that being an area where people can show skill, but I think you’d overload the vast majority of people to the point where the activity could only really be accomplished by those with a high skill cap.
Furthermore, as you say, the engaging part of dscan is the absorbing of information and translating it to actionable intelligence. Removing the mindless tedium of thousands of autistic button presses can only be an improvement to that paradigm.
I didn’t claim it was the reason for lack of compelling gameplay, I was just suggesting it’s a barrier to entry for the portion of the gameplay I referenced.
You can think of it like hands free mode for your phone while you’re driving.
auto dscan
audible ping for new information
It allows people to have attention for other things that are more engaging.
1 Like
Well, OP is talking about D-Scan as being the only thing to look at due to lack of compelling gameplay. OP isn’t talking about D-Scan in context of „barrier to entry of gameplay“.
Hence, why I and others keep saying „auto D-Scan“ folks are hijacking the thread. You’re ignoring OP and not engaging with what they want to discuss, and substituting it for your own idea — that already has at least 2 other threads, I might add.
Than you for confirming that your intention to ignore OP and hijack is true. We’ve now gone full circle. If you’d like to demonstrate that during the course of our interaction nothing was gained from anything I said, please feel free to restart from here by saying „but OP literally talks about it (D-Scan)“.
2 Likes
I only keep talking about dscan because anti dscan crowd are. As I said before, I spoke about other things in relation to the op, but dscan is the thing yourself and others gravitated toward.
Regardless, it’s not hijacking when it’s on topic. As I said in the previous post, just like the hands free feature on a cell phone allows the driver to focus on the road, auto dscan would allow the player to focus on other aspects of the game, thus opening the possibility for more interesting gameplay.
Just like a house needs to be built on a proper foundation, games need the proper systems in place to have their content flourish.
I like dscan as it is as a tool for hunting, but it’s a piss poor intel tool for those who are doing the content the OP was describing.
@Io_Koval, If you can’t see how the posts I’ve been making have been addressing this issue, then I can’t help you. Yes, there’s more to it than dscan, but you have to start somewhere, and foundational systems are the ideal place to start so you can build up from there.
1 Like
That’s the most naive excuse to continue hijacking a thread. „The people whose opinions I don’t like are doing it so I’ll do it too.“
I see where the misunderstanding is. From OPs quote, without it being artificially cherry-picked like you presented:
This is your interpretation:
This is mine:
Do you not see how your interpretation is hyper-fixating on your pet-favorite feature-in-waiting? Do you really think the complaint about „this“ is about „pulsing a button“ instead of his actual explicit „without making people stare at a little window“? (Hint: it’s in the thread title)
„Oh! He mentioned the D-Scan button! The button was explicitly mentioned! Focus on that! Write it down! Forget everything else, that must be exactly the topic at hand!“
Pulsing a button is not really the core issue to OP. It’s just the second part of their sentence complaining about staring at a window.
So thank you for quoting OP, and confirming I know how to read (I personally disagree with OP as a DScan window enjoyer, but that’s not a license for me to inject my belief while reading him).
Plus you have multiple threads specifically about auto DScan to explain it. People with an opposite opinion on it in this thread? It’s not an excuse nor an invitation to continue spamming the forums and mucking up threads like your idea is some sort of Virgin Princess in need of defending in thread number 3.
I’ve explained it now multiple ways. Including showing how you’re misreading OP to inject your pet idea in Yet Another Thread. If you can’t see how your posts are contributing to it I can’t help you.
1 Like
Look guy, people keep responding to me, so I respond back. It’s rather hypocritical of you to criticize me for it, while contributing to the “problem.”
lol, it’s not an interpretation. It’s literally what he wrote. I’m not negating anything he said, if anything, that’s what you’re doing.
So sure, agro on me more, for whatever reason you have.
If we’re trying to come up with with reasons why automatic d-scan may shift the gameplay into more active territory, I can think of one possibility. Before I explain, I am aware that this applies to me, specifically and there’s no guarantee (or even significant reason to believe) that automated d-scan would have a significant impact on the game world at large.
What I’m referring to is that because manually mashing that button is practically mandatory and because I don’t want to do it, I opt not to be in space. Since I am not in space, I am not going to be appearing on anyone else’s d-scan window. My being out and about could only decrease the span of time between interesting things that happen while dedicated to looking at the d-scan window for interesting things.
I don’t really want to get involved because this particular aspect of Eve isn’t something I thought was particularly bad. I would just do other things in other places, but this decision could plausibly be negatively affecting others who are looking for something to happen in their area of space, whether they are manually pressing a button or not.
3 Likes
Can confirm, this also impacts my decision making as well. I still do it from time to time, but I’d do it more if I didn’t have to deal with the tedium.
Ideally you want a contest of skill where people who are skilled can either catch or get away from people who are less skilled. Right now part of that skill gap is pressing ‘v’ when you need to, so I do understand why people want to keep that aspect of d-scan intact, too.
It’s not just d-scanning that makes me want to sit in the station. The entire game is basically an experiment to see how much of a person’s time it can waste. I find it harder and harder to undock, even when I know a target is coming. For what? Just so I can spend 10 minutes traveling to intercept someone’s jive-ass Occator with 2 billion ISK worth of useless PI garbage inside, half of which doesn’t even drop? Then I have to fly a hauler over to collect it, then fly not one but two characters back to base, then set up and baby-sit market orders? It becomes harder and harder to justify doing anything in this game when I can go play something else and get action nearly instantly instead of having to spend 30 minutes on a single kill.
Ultimately, that’s the nature of open world mmos. Which is something I mentioned in an earlier post:
I did have a concept for some sort of battle arena (specifially the WARZONE section of the post) modeled after Infinity Battlescape set in the frontline systems (though the proposal was made before uprising was launched,) that I posted about in the past. The driving force behind that was to get people into the action faster.
Ultimately though, as I said, EVE is an open world mmo, and there’s only so much you can do in that environment. The vary nature of it involves a bit of time wasting.
I was content to ignore you & only try to call out that we weren’t discussing any other bigger ideas, literally anything else, besides „pushing the DScan button“. That is, until you specifically called me out, so if you’re wondering why I’m replying to you specifically, and you feel bad enough that it „feels like Aggro“, grab a mirror and spend time reflecting.
At this point it’s bad faith interpretation on your part, as I’ve demonstrated from the very thread title (it ain’t about „pushing a button“ and all about „staring at a boring window“) and the literal text of OP (it’s about „staring at a boring window that happens to be driven by a button press“ and not „the act of pushing a button“) that the intended meaning is not the one you want to have.
If you want to continue to die on that hill for no reason that’s no longer my problem: horse and water and all that, and I have absolutely no worries about how readers will come away from our conversation.
I’m glad to see we’ve moved on; good riddance.
That makes sense for you, but I don’t think that’s the common case. As Destiny already mentions, there’s many barriers to engaging and skillful gameplay that feels rewarding. Auto DScan or not, is irrelevant. There needs to be gameplay added to the other side that makes it feel rewarding, regardless whatever state DScan is in.
How this new engaging gameplay looks for hunting for fights, evading hunters, explorers, ninja miners, mission runners, etc is a rich area. How much of the rewards should come from planning the perfect fit, and then grinding endlessly, versus having very dynamic gameplay where fits matter less and manual instructions to your ship are required? That gives OP something to pay attention to and DScan is no longer the focal point due to sheer boredom.
This is specifically diving into hunting and hunted dynamics. While DScan one of the top tools for this, existence of other modules like ship scanning, bubbles (HIC, anchorables, and Dictors), and combat probes plus warp scrambling modules / defense indicates we could discuss richer sensor / counter-sensor gameplay balance rather than „should there be a button press“.
I for one would like to tinker with the idea of ship fitting unlocking more (and in absence having less) tool capabilities, and other avenues for players to come into explosive contact and fight back in this hunter / hunted dynamic.
Unfortunately that’s not how conversations play out here, or on Discord, or in other in game chats.
In the one hand: Anything that could perceive to increase player interaction of the explosive kind is derailed and resisted by „think of the new players who need to be protected“, „think of the PCU“, and yes also „this is just tedium and exceeds my threshold for it“.
On the flip side, adding in hurdles to hunting (that isn’t prearranged blob warfare) also elicits responses of the kind „this is just tedium and exceeds my threshold for it, so I won’t hunt anymore“ and a lot of players would dance on that grave.
I would simply love more choices. But even that gets repelled for A) tedium (by both hunters and hunted) and B) not-newbie-friendly (which is everything in this game anyway). So I’m not optimistic of these conversations.
1 Like
Nonsense, you made the accusation that we were hijacking the thread. My response (which wasn’t even entirely directed at you,) and the ensuing conversation, was a defense for it being on topic. Clearly you don’t agree, but ultimately that’s irrelevant.
As for your other ideas:
You’re being rather abstract. Do you have examples of these choices? Or is it just more? I see you mentioned the desire for more tool capabilities. Do you have examples of what you’re talking about?
In general, I’m also in favor of more choices, but as they say, the Devil is in the details.
Agree.
I have ideas, all of them almost certainly bad. I’m not a game designer. I am just a player. None of these are meant to be combined. They are all half baked.
- High sec anchorable bubbles with ACLs. If you’re a friend you don’t get caught in it. Slow down „not friendly“ trade, make local geography matter more, give something to shoot and bait with. Set up soft tolls.
- Nothing has D-Scan by default. Modular system to customize it.
- As many warp stabs as you want. Each one fitted slows down your warp speed by 50%. Tradeoff: guaranteed warp with slower travel time, easier to catch up to but slippery on grid.
- Allow any ship to be DScan invisible, but through module fitting that has tradeoffs like lock time.
- Proximity mine deployables, suspect action to shoot them in high sec.
- Burst warp disruption.
Off the top of my head. A lot of these ideas are bad but at least they are more interesting to discuss around affecting the hunter / hunted dynamic. There is never eliminating the vigilance („tedium“ or „cognitive overload“) of being prey.
Edit to add: this would be in addition to whatever activity OP is doing in Eve. Maybe it’s exploration, mining, or actively hauling. Or now enforcing tolls, working to bust tolls, maybe it is indeed the little marine men in a plex.
Note: minigames are generally disfavored by the community. Especially mining, the big nullsec bloc 10+ multiboxed fleets ensure no mining minigame will ever happen.
1 Like
Why should CCP respect your time when you yourself don’t respect it?
If you dont like hitting D-SCAN every second, don’t. There is no obligation. If you keep doing it of course they’ll think it’s okay to have you do it.
Don’t want to hit D-SCAN all the time? Then don’t fly what you can’t afford to lose. If that means flying only in corvettes then so be it.
Or… You could always see how hard and fast you can hit that button 
2 Likes
I get your point, but it’s not really a contest of skill is it? It’s more of a tedium barrier, an endurance test to see who can keep up the donkey work the longest. I believe this is the core of the OP’s complaint, that too many ‘features’ of EVE aren’t about skill or talent or challenge, they’re simply a long string of mindless repetitive button-presses and waiting periods.
That’s the key element of “the game design doesn’t respect my time” - not that the process is impossible or “too hard”, but simply that the game basically treats you as/rewards you for being, a simple automaton.
2 Likes