Reasons for Scouts being Unknown ?

[N.ator]

I am wondering why we ever changed the whole scouts and mine system of making them unknown? Was this a group decision by the committee? Did the players ever have a chance to vote on this?

in my opinion i think this is a very dumb thing on the game. I believe that making forces seen by everyone made the game more fun! For example if you were looking to fight someone and found a scout you could always keep pinging him.. and as a trader you could see who was trading the route and hunting also if they left forces..

I think we need to change this back to the old way! or if not, at least make experience/level a factor. Implement it like the cloaking. if you are higher experience and lay down a force and a lower experience guy goes in it , it will be unknown but if not then it will be seen. or maybe make a new ship and if they drop forces then it will be unknown! maybe add that as an advantage towards a race! there is so much more we can do with this and i think something needs to be done. (i think this turned into more of a suggestion so i will post it in the suggestion thread also)

[Edgecrusher]

Your post here is more elaborate, so I'll respond here.

The fact that scouts are unknown is a result of a proposal I once did to make scouts and only scouts invisible. My idea was that this made hunting more challenging and trading more risky, because it had become too easy (see other posts for discussions on that). You may or may not like the idea, but it doesn't matter: I didn't manage to convince anyone. As an in-between option, forces were made unknown.

In my opinion, and I have given this some games to try out, is that unknown forces are complete bs for the following reason:

- *all* forces have been made unknown, which is idiotic: why would mines be unknown? Scouts are for hunting and have an element of stealth, mines are supposed to be in your face.
- Now, I would just advice a newbie to shoot all scouts to be safe. This means that unknown scouts have no benefit, and that newbies lose more turns. In addition, if you are a trader with scouts they are also destroyed, just because they could belong to a hunter.

So I completely agree with you: turn back scouts the way they were or make them invisible. And to solve your problem with not being able to ping anyone: makes invisible scouts a different technology that is only allowed on hunting ships and make them much more expensive than ordinary scouts.

[N.ator]

Your post here is more elaborate, so I'll respond here.

The fact that scouts are unknown is a result of a proposal I once did to make scouts and only scouts invisible. My idea was that this made hunting more challenging and trading more risky, because it had become too easy (see other posts for discussions on that). You may or may not like the idea, but it doesn't matter: I didn't manage to convince anyone. As an in-between option, forces were made unknown.

In my opinion, and I have given this some games to try out, is that unknown forces are complete bs for the following reason:

- *all* forces have been made unknown, which is idiotic: why would mines be unknown? Scouts are for hunting and have an element of stealth, mines are supposed to be in your face.
- Now, I would just advice a newbie to shoot all scouts to be safe. This means that unknown scouts have no benefit, and that newbies lose more turns. In addition, if you are a trader with scouts they are also destroyed, just because they could belong to a hunter.

So I completely agree with you: turn back scouts the way they were or make them invisible. And to solve your problem with not being able to ping anyone: makes invisible scouts a different technology that is only allowed on hunting ships and make them much more expensive than ordinary scouts.

i completely agree with you! it is a clever idea but in my opinion isnt benefiting the game.

I think we should change it back to the old method, and if we did want to make scouts unknown create special scouts that are more expensive? and could only be held on certain ships?

[RCK]

Your post here is more elaborate, so I'll respond here.

The fact that scouts are unknown is a result of a proposal I once did to make scouts and only scouts invisible. My idea was that this made hunting more challenging and trading more risky, because it had become too easy (see other posts for discussions on that). You may or may not like the idea, but it doesn't matter: I didn't manage to convince anyone. As an in-between option, forces were made unknown.

In my opinion, and I have given this some games to try out, is that unknown forces are complete bs for the following reason:

- *all* forces have been made unknown, which is idiotic: why would mines be unknown? Scouts are for hunting and have an element of stealth, mines are supposed to be in your face.
- Now, I would just advice a newbie to shoot all scouts to be safe. This means that unknown scouts have no benefit, and that newbies lose more turns. In addition, if you are a trader with scouts they are also destroyed, just because they could belong to a hunter.

So I completely agree with you: turn back scouts the way they were or make them invisible. And to solve your problem with not being able to ping anyone: makes invisible scouts a different technology that is only allowed on hunting ships and make them much more expensive than ordinary scouts.

i completely agree with you! it is a clever idea but in my opinion isnt benefiting the game.

I think we should change it back to the old method, and if we did want to make scouts unknown create special scouts that are more expensive? and could only be held on certain ships?

Better alternative would be to pay for a system that "scrubs" your forces, disabling the "owner" to be seen.

[JettJackson]

Here's an idea might be bad might not be, but it would probably create revenue. Have a piece of technology that you can buy for say 2 smr credits that lets you see the owners of scouts. Kind of the opposite to RCK's idea.

Beyond that, I really think putting the owners back to scouts would be for the best. It just benefits hunters too much, and anyone who wants to see the scout has to shoot it, which is 3 turns, it doesnt cost the person who laid the scout anything to do so.

[Edgecrusher]

Here's an idea might be bad might not be, but it would probably create revenue. Have a piece of technology that you can buy for say 2 smr credits that lets you see the owners of scouts. Kind of the opposite to RCK's idea.

Beyond that, I really think putting the owners back to scouts would be for the best. It just benefits hunters too much, and anyone who wants to see the scout has to shoot it, which is 3 turns, it doesnt cost the person who laid the scout anything to do so.

The idea of giving people a device to see unknown (or even invisible scouts) seems like a nice idea, but then make it so that they cost time to be used. Say, 2 credits gives you an EMP device, then that device should take 2-5 seconds to load and reveal the forces owners or make them visible. This is to ensure that seeing the owners or the scouts themselves does not give you an unrteasonable benefit.

As to your second comment: you didn't listen to what I said: unknown forces don't give hunters any benefit. Worse, they are a disadvantage, for traders will be quicker to shoot a scout.

[Harry Krishna]

Even though the scout mask applies to all players, I think it is not fair to traders. Traders protect themselves by knowing who scouted their route and by checking the cpl for that player. They are forced to burn 3 valuable trade turns to find out who scouted their route, or they have to chance it and risk dying to the unknown hunter they are pinging.

From the perspective of the person laying out the scout, they are more likely to lose it because players will shoot it to find out who the owner is. So by all sides, this seems a bad feature.

[JettJackson]

Here's an idea might be bad might not be, but it would probably create revenue. Have a piece of technology that you can buy for say 2 smr credits that lets you see the owners of scouts. Kind of the opposite to RCK's idea.

Beyond that, I really think putting the owners back to scouts would be for the best. It just benefits hunters too much, and anyone who wants to see the scout has to shoot it, which is 3 turns, it doesnt cost the person who laid the scout anything to do so.

The idea of giving people a device to see unknown (or even invisible scouts) seems like a nice idea, but then make it so that they cost time to be used. Say, 2 credits gives you an EMP device, then that device should take 2-5 seconds to load and reveal the forces owners or make them visible. This is to ensure that seeing the owners or the scouts themselves does not give you an unrteasonable benefit.

As to your second comment: you didn't listen to what I said: unknown forces don't give hunters any benefit. Worse, they are a disadvantage, for traders will be quicker to shoot a scout.

Edge unfortunately you are wrong on the 2nd part, hunter's benefit from the unknown scouts way more. The reason being, if a hunter pings a scout they have a way to defend back if the other hunter is on, the traders have 2 things they can do, shoot the scout then fed or fed without shooting it. It is not balanced at all.

[Infinity]

Good traders dont waste their turns, instead they use forces and all the other methods for safer trading. (knowing the hunters, checking the CPL, moving over local etc etc).

I am tho indifferent on the matter. Leave them, or make then visible again

[Edgecrusher]

The reason being, if a hunter pings a scout they have a way to defend back if the other hunter is on, the traders have 2 things they can do, shoot the scout then fed or fed without shooting it. It is not balanced at all.

Sorry, JJ, I really want to disagree with you, but you're not making any sense here. In other words: HUH?

I am tho indifferent on the matter. Leave them, or make then visible again

...or make them invisible.