Login

The Lane Hackers · 08-24-2017, 12:34 PM,

Rebalance high-end scanners

Proposal

Revert Battleship Scanner, Spyglass Scanner, Spyglass Network Scanner to the same identical stats.

Comparison

Scanner	Price	Range	Cargo
Advanced Deep Scanner	0,08 M	15K	2K
Advanced Cargo Scanner	0,27 M	11K	9K
Spyglass Network Scanner*	50 M*	15K*	6K*
Spyglass Scanner	250 M	15K	3,5K
Battleship Scanner	250 M	18K	6K

* Spyglass Network Scanner has been introduced as an official faction perk. The scanner is limited to LH~ official faction ID (100% efficiency) and LH independent ID (90% efficiency). The significantly lower price tag has been proposed to conform to faction closed economy policy. This perk was introduced when technology compatibility plugin was actively limiting high-end scanners to battleships and cruisers only. The perk was meant to give unique edge to the faction ID of having a high-end scanner mountable on a small ship.

Thesis

Current values for high-end scanners are unbalanced.

Rationale

All three scanners used to have the same stats, but it changed somewhere during last two years following the deactivation of tech compatibility plugin. The main issue is that current values for high-end scanners make fabled Spyglass Scanner obsolete. There is no reason to pick Spyglass Scanner over Battleship Scanner. Both are open to everyone, cost the same, but the latter is simply better in every possible aspect.

At the same time I do not think that making Spyglass Scanner have better cargo scanning range than Battleship Scanner will really make up for lower scanner range in gameplay terms. Let's be honest, cargo scanning range is almost entirely unimportant. Due to game mechanics the only thing that matters is the scanner range since all contacts under 10K can always be inspected and their ship-class can be inferred from type of mounts and guns - which is the most important tactical information.

For these reasons we believe that all high-end scanners should have the same identical stats as it was before.

Alternative proposal

I believe that current balancing of all scanners does not take into consideration how unimportant tactically is the scanning range. Almost everybody is currently using Advanced Deep Scanner or Battleship Scanner if the budget allows it. Advanced Cargo Scanner use is extremely limited for the reasons I already mentioned earlier. If I was to differentiate scanners in terms of cargo and scanning range I would create three high-end scanners, each focused on either range, cargo or balance between the two. However, I would punish the higher range bonus with a significant cargo penalty.

Range focused high-end scanner: 17K (+2) range, 1K (-8) cargo
Balance focused high-end scanner: 16K (+1) range, 5K (-4) cargo
Cargo focused high-end scanner: 15K range, 9K cargo

I think bonuses and stats above would make three different scanners that would simultaneously find use by the players. For each additional 1K of range you loose 4K of cargo scanning. This low cargo scanning will become a reasonable hindrance if you want maximum scanning range. Some people will make a conscious decision to make this sacrifice to still be ahead of their enemies that one step. Probably the biggest group will pick a balanced high-end scanner with decent cargo range and this nice plus one. Still, the cargo scanner will have such a good cargo scanning range that various groups would find it beneficial to use it at pretty much limited hindrance of that 2K lower range.

The Lane Hackers

"Making the corporate weenies cry, so our kids can live in a free and just galaxy."

Information • Recruitment • Diplomatic Channel • Job Board • Encyclopedia • External Statements

SnakThree · 08-24-2017, 01:31 PM,

Lawfuls would take the new cargo scanners and wreck smuggling activity then. And smugglers wouldn't be able to use those 2k leeway of directional scanner to avoid lawfuls.

ronillon

Funny thing is, over the past few months, I have switched to "Advanced Cargo Scanner" on almost all of my ships, where the scanner even matters. If there was a scanner with higher cargo scanning range I would deffinitely go for it.

P.S.: Thanks for the heads up, http://discoverygc.com/wiki/Scanners needs to be updated. Edit: Wiki Updated.

Signature:

Yber · 08-24-2017, 02:43 PM,

Money sinks are always a good thing. I don't see why LH would need that perk if the rebalance does happen, if you do introduce this as a moneysink for people to invest their billions into, though.

SnakThree · 08-24-2017, 02:49 PM,

We already have that scanner now. It was introduced during the time when Battleship Scanner and Spyglass Scanner was only for capital ships.

**Antonio** · 08-24-2017, 03:39 PM,

As far as I know the plugin restricting Battleship Scanners to battlecruisers and battleships only is supposed to be reintroduced for over a year now. If I get confirmation from the dev team I'd immediately put them on quite a bit of my ships knowing I don't have to worry about getting a core nerf one day.

As for other two moneysink scanners, I agree they should be buffed.

SNAC Montage Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Thruster SNAC

Login
Username:
Password:	Lost Password?
	Remember me

Poll: How would you like to balance high-end scanners? You do not have permission to vote in this poll.
Make all have the same stats as it was before	47.62%	10	47.62%
Differentiate them with scanning an cargo range	28.57%	6	28.57%
Do not change anything	23.81%	5	23.81%
Total		21 vote(s)	100%