FDL- Buff needed.

[Tusken]

You aren't listening either. Each combat ship can do exactly what you ask, at the expense of some of it's fighting prowess. You aren't willing to accept that, instead you want FD to make things easy for you. The entire premise of load outs is for the player to make choices. Taking away the price of these choices, by making them trivial with buffs, you remove one of the key aspects of the game.

I could go through the exercise of demonstrating all-'round builds for the combat ship, like I did above (Post #116) for an FdL, but you would just ignore those facts, while pressing for 'more'. You are no better than those that argue against you.

And what is a combat focused ship if you take away some of its combat prowess???
Yes, a trade ship with very little cargo space!
You do realise that without the ability to store the commodities that hold will have to stay on the ship during the entire upgrade proces... witch will be significant.


And again!!! READ! I don't want to change the FDL. I want commodities out of the upgrade equation.
The only change I want for the FDL is to change it back to the way it was before the buff.

 

[Mohrgan]

And what is a combat focused ship if you take away some of its combat prowess???
Yes, a trade ship with very little cargo space!
You do realise that without the ability to store the commodities that hold will have to stay on the ship during the entire upgrade proces... witch will be significant.


And again!!! READ! I don't want to change the FDL. I want commodities out of the upgrade equation.
The only change I want for the FDL is to change it back to the way it was before the buff.

Don't get uppity with me. I realize what you're saying. I just don;t agree. There have been numerous attempts to describe ways to get it done. You won't read those, nor accept them. What makes you think anyone should just read your words and capitulate? Please go ahead and attempt to influence FD, I will be here doing exactly the same thing.

 

[Mephane]

what do small ships with limited cargo space do? Should we just give everything 3x the cargo space? I don't disagree that having to lug commodities around for the engineers is annoying, but that in of itself isn't a reason why dedicated combat ships should become generalists.

I agree. Instead, remove the commodity requirement from all blueprints. It is annoying as is, even if you have a ship with ample cargo space.

 

[Martian Successor]

I agree. Instead, remove the commodity requirement from all blueprints. It is annoying as is, even if you have a ship with ample cargo space.

I think that would be one of the best tweaks to the Engineers. Commodity rewards from certain missions is just unecessary hassle. FD have already estsblished that materials (that do not take up ship space) are the way we will deal with Engineers so it would just be a simple case of removing commodities from Engineer recipies and substituting commodity rewards for specific material rewards instead.

 

[Davadin]

Well, Slave 1 could get around the galaxy just as well as the Millenium Falcon could. It just isn't going to be doing the Kessel Run in less than 12 parsecs

Fett had a ship for living in just as much as Han had with the Falcon. And that's something that I (and I think the OP) want in ED. Just a small allowance for quality of life now that the Engineers have made the game more about being versatile than ever before. There is now a cargo requirement from many missions for example yet the internals of ships have not been changed to accomodate this in the same way that landing on planets necesitated the addition of an extra internal slot on all ships for a planetary landing suite.

What if, for example, we get external cargo racks, or an external discovery scanner suit or external fuel tanks (that can be targeted by enemies)? This won't just benefit the FDL, it will allow everyone to do more things with any of their ships if they so choose.

lovely post.


+1

 

[Tusken]

Don't get uppity with me. I realize what you're saying. I just don;t agree. There have been numerous attempts to describe ways to get it done. You won't read those, nor accept them. What makes you think anyone should just read your words and capitulate? Please go ahead and attempt to influence FD, I will be here doing exactly the same thing.

Uppity? If you refuse to read, I'll keep saying read!

The very first thing I adres is your "it's possible" comment.

Yes it's possible but it will cut in the ships abillity to do what it's designed for.
I accepted that combat ships can't jump out of a paper bag.
I accepted that if I need to travel I need to refit it. Knowing fullwell I might be searching my butt off on the other side.
I accepted that I need to refit to drive on a planet to get materials.
I accepted that I can only do combat related work.

All becouse it's good at what it does when it is fitted properly.

Yes putting a cargo rack on there is no problem for a short time, but it's not going to be for a short time.
We can't store or buy those commodities so I'll need that rack through the whole upgrade proces, which will be lengthy with all that randomness. The commodities are random to mind you!

The list of things I happely exept for that extra bit of combat prowess becomes no longer exepteble if I need to cut into that prowess by mounting a cargo hold.

So if the commodities stay in and FD doesn't up ships cargo capacity, I'll end up flying a python.
Anticipating a "so?" comment.

Should a upgrade equipment game update make ppl abandon the ship they love?

I just wanna shoot ppl and I want to excel in that and so I want to make my ship the best it can be.
They way to do that is the problem.

Let's just loose commodities for upgrades and we can all go our marry way and be done with this bovine excrement.

- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -

I think that would be one of the best tweaks to the Engineers. Commodity rewards from certain missions is just unecessary hassle. FD have already estsblished that materials (that do not take up ship space) are the way we will deal with Engineers so it would just be a simple case of removing commodities from Engineer recipies and substituting commodity rewards for specific material rewards instead.

Reading the newsletters I though the missions would just give materials, as a alternate way to get them for ppl who don't like scavenging on the planets.

 

[Deadspin]

I wouldn't even bother, Tusken.

The general pop of this forum has a really hard time with reading comprehension.

 

[Mohrgan]

Uppity? If you refuse to read, I'll keep saying read!

<snipped for brevity>

Let's just loose commodities for upgrades and we can all go our marry way and be done with this bovine excrement.

I commented on changing the layout of ships to accommodate any aspect of the game. We should adapt to conditions, not call for changes from FD. If you cared to read you would have noticed that. I have not commented once on the idea to deal with the new items, the commodities. Since they are new, and some kinks need to be worked out, I could happily deal with losing them, or having them not require cargo space. If you Read what I said, you wouldn't have had to pull your wadded panties from that crack.

You are just as bad as those you argue against. Doctor, heal thy own self.

 

[Tusken]

I commented on changing the layout of ships to accommodate any aspect of the game. We should adapt to conditions, not call for changes from FD. If you cared to read you would have noticed that. I have not commented once on the idea to deal with the new items, the commodities. Since they are new, and some kinks need to be worked out, I could happily deal with losing them, or having them not require cargo space. If you Read what I said, you wouldn't have had to pull your wadded panties from that crack.

You are just as bad as those you argue against. Doctor, heal thy own self.

Again read. I do...
You say you don't care if they change the commodity thing... ok
I say I don't want the FDL to change, but for FD to loose the commodities... yes?

That means we are done, no need to argue if you don't mind that change.

That I can't get you to understand that it's not exepteble for me to be forced to equip a cargo hold as standaard on a combat ship... that's just unfortunate, but for me no reason for ferther discussion as changing the ships is not my goal.

I tried to explain that you need to make allot of consenses to fly a combat ship for a little extra combat capability... and it is a little. I don't mind at all, I actually like it... it makes the choice of ship worth making.
That's why I wasn't a fan of the FDL buff... love the fact my life support turned off the moment I deployed my weapons.
I feel that having having to add a cargo hold for long term the balance of pro and cons is lost and then why fly the ship at all?

 

[h347h]

There does seem to be an ever increasing need for internals as the game goes on. I foresee this becoming more and more problematic as new features are added. More so for combat ships. I think some features should be built into the ship, like the basic discovery scanner. Sure you can go to a nav beacon to scan for missions or mission updates, but how much of a chore is that compared to built-in scanner.

No not a need but a want. If you want lots of internals there are already ships out there for that such as the Mk IV series.

 

[Deadspin]

No not a need but a want. If you want lots of internals there are already ships out there for that such as the Mk IV series.

That's not the point of this thread.

Yeah, OP totally borked the wording of the title and could have written his initial post better.

This thread is about the inability to fully fit the FDL with engineer modified components for combat in light of commodity, ergo Cargospace, and endurance needs.

Not about turning the FDL into some kind of multi-purpose ship to rival the existing multi-purpose ships.

 

[Mohrgan]

That's not the point of this thread.

Yeah, OP totally borked the wording of the title and could have written his initial post better.

This thread is about the inability to fully fit the FDL with engineer modified components for combat in light of commodity, ergo Cargospace, and endurance needs.

Not about turning the FDL into some kind of multi-purpose ship to rival the existing multi-purpose ships.

You can easily get cargo space in an FdL. The fact that you don;t want to. Is where the need v. want discussion becomes relevant. Give up one HRP/SCB and you can have 16t of cargo. Problem solved.

 

[Deadspin]

You can easily get cargo space in an FdL. The fact that you don;t want to. Is where the need v. want discussion becomes relevant. Give up one HRP/SCB and you can have 16t of cargo. Problem solved.

Okay, let me explain this for the fourth time.

I, like many others, have no issue giving up HRPs for the cargo space and fuel scoops as required to get out to an Engineer in order to do the basic adjustments and modifications for things like Thrusters/FSD/Weapons. However, since there are engineers who will make adjustments to HRPs and many of the other optional internal modules, there comes a point where I need to reinstall those modules since they have to be equipped in order to be upgraded. At this point, we come to the dilemma where I can no longer travel to said Engineer to make said modifications to said ship because I've either given up cargo space, extra fuel, or a fuel scoop, to reinstall one or both of the HRPs.

No, it is not a game breaking mechanic as the FDL will still be a power house, but the fact that the FDL is limited because of it's inability to move more than 60-ish LY without either stopping to scoop or docking to refuel, puts quite a damper on the gameplay of individuals who seek to use or explicitly use FDLs either due to funding restrictions (IE: They can't fit out an Asp or DBX to go make the adjustments there and bring them back) or for whatever other reason there could be to only use an FDL.

Potential remedies:
-Module Storage/transport: The ability to carry a module in a ship like the Asp or even a Type 6/7/9 out to an engineer outpost and store it there, applying upgrades to it there, before bringing it back to the ship its intended to be used on.
-A buff to the FDLs fuel tank size. Bringing it from 8 tons up to 12 or even 16: Seriously. A little more endurance in the long run gives the FDL no benefit over any other ship.
-Add one more size 1 or 2 internal module slot: This allows for the fitting of a scoop and it keeps it small enough to negate the bonus of any SCB stacks or HRP benefits.

There could be hundreds of other ways to deal with it but as it currently stands, if you fly an FDL and don't have the credits to also fit out an AspE for jump range and cargo space you aren't going to be doing much in terms of engineer modifications to your FDL due to the requirements of fitting both cargo racks and range extension modules unless you want to settle for half of the upgrades available to literally every other ship.

 

[Kestril]

Yeah. The necessity for more internal moduels has increased with horizons and engineers, and the FDL hasn't kept pace. I fully understand the need for a trade-off, but when a ship becomes so limited it is not upgrade-able, I think that is indicative of a problem.

In any case, adding module storage and transport, a larger fuel tank, or an additional class 1 internal would not suddenly make the FDL more appealing for trading than the python.

The DBX has the same problem the FDL does with limited module space. Although, it's less noticable due to its great jump range.

Out of all those I'd prefer a module storage and transport. I'd be really cool to buy a module, store it in the cargo rack of a t6, upgrade it at an engineer, and then truck it back to my FDL. There's some diversifying gameplay potential there.

 

[Derath]

Engineers is the update that really highlights why FSD range shouldn't be a balance stat, you can't actually do half the objectives anyway in a combat ship because of the super limited internals but they also made a treasure hunt expansion that really feels like your getting griefed if you do it any ship with a low jump range.

As to the grand dilemma of taking a FDL to get its HRP modded you sadly have to take it in a bigger ship, mod it, then move it back and do sell transfer to get it on your FDL - the engineers has a pretty strong multi-role bias, which is great if you own a conda but not so good if you have a limited range of combat ships.

 

[Mohrgan]

I don't need anything explained. I completely understand the issue, so take a step back. I disagree with you. That's something you'll have to deal with.

I fly an FdL. I see what my future holds. There are better ideas out there than altering ships every expansion. Kestril, points out an excellent alternative. Even Tuskin stopped telling what to do when he decided to just follow his own advice and do a little reading. I only object to altering a ship for convenience.

 

[Tusken]

I don't need anything explained. I completely understand the issue, so take a step back. I disagree with you. That's something you'll have to deal with.

I fly an FdL. I see what my future holds. There are better ideas out there than altering ships every expansion. Kestril, points out an excellent alternative. Even Tuskin stopped telling what to do when he decided to just follow his own advice and do a little reading. I only object to altering a ship for convenience.

I'm done with this. Either your English is bad or you do this on purpose.
I did indeed re-read to check if I missread something, I'm dyslexic, that happens.
But not this time.

Goodbye and good luck.... I got commodities to collect.

 

[Mohrgan]

I'm done with this. Either your English is bad or you do this on purpose.
I did indeed re-read to check if I missread something, I'm dyslexic, that happens.
But not this time.

Goodbye and good luck.... I got commodities to collect.

Later. Good luck out there.

 

[Deadspin]

I don't need anything explained. I completely understand the issue, so take a step back. I disagree with you. That's something you'll have to deal with.

I fly an FdL. I see what my future holds. There are better ideas out there than altering ships every expansion. Kestril, points out an excellent alternative. Even Tuskin stopped telling what to do when he decided to just follow his own advice and do a little reading. I only object to altering a ship for convenience.

You're disagreeing purely out of bias and ego at this point if you still fail to see a problem with the mechanics of engineers in regards to current ship implementation and abilities. As this is a game with a "10 year plan" I would fully expect all ships in the lineup and any ships that should come in the future to be adjusted numerous times over as flaws are brought to the surface with the delivery of more game mechanics.

FDev is a very slow moving developer in this regard as they are apparently a very small team. Mind you, I'm not complaining about this, but writing off any future adjustments to ships because you're content to play with a broken mechanic is asinine.

 

[vermu]

I have not visited engineers so I don't know how bad this commodities problem is. FD said that module storage is coming sooner or later. I guess that would take this problem away. You could collect and upgrade stuff with your asp and then store modules for the FDL. No problem then. We just don't know when the storage is coming.