In these days, people only use Advanced Cargo Scanner
My suggestion is to remove all other scanners except for the lowest quality one "Scanner" which can be used on restarts
Adv.Cargo scanner only costs 2.5 K which is not such a big amount
As for BS Scanner, it should get some improvements i.e more long range scanning
Similarly BS Scanners shouldn't be used on snubs, lol in RP Snubs don't have large space for BS Scanners
(08-27-2013, 05:05 PM)KaiserDietz Wrote: not to compare apples to oranges, but they have changed the hard coding on powerplants, making them shut off after entering cruise speed, so it could take some tinkering but it could probably work.
Don't say things when you don't know. The powerplant drain was done by FLhook, and since powerplants CAN drain, all you have to do is give a command to drain them to the server and player. It's the same as saying that you have no hardcoded teleportation, yet admins can use .beam.
tl;dr : It's a go around, rather than changing the hardcoded thing.
However I think that it can be done that players go off-scanners in a smaller range if you enter a nebula, won't be related to a scanner type though.
(08-27-2013, 05:38 PM)Spike Seadra Wrote: In these days, people only use Advanced Cargo Scanner
My suggestion is to remove all other scanners except for the lowest quality one "Scanner" which can be used on restarts
Adv.Cargo scanner only costs 2.5 K which is not such a big amount
As for BS Scanner, it should get some improvements i.e more long range scanning
Similarly BS Scanners shouldn't be used on snubs, lol in RP Snubs don't have large space for BS Scanners
People do use other scanners as well.
True, battleship scanners should be restricted to battleships, maybe only use them on smaller ships with a srp or something.
A scanning range of 20k distance and lets say 10k for cargo would make the battleship scanner more rp wise, you know its a big scanner.
Why use a thing that costs so much when you can use discovery scanner or advanced cargo scanner which are pretty close as specs.
If it's possible to implement variable scanning ranges, it should deffo be done. ATM, there's no point whatsoever in having a better scanner unless you're searching for objects.