2 Months in; "We don't know"

I hate to say it but, I am against module or commodity storage. I never posted it but I am sure FD read my mind. Right now you can swap modules between ships and with the recent changes to RNGineers there is no need to have 50+ tons of commodities in a ships hold. Right now FD has fixed 90% of what made RNGineers unplayable, now they need to work on how to stop the game from disconnecting when info needs to be pulled from the server and 2.2 beta. Priorities, storage is not one of them.

Well firstly yes you can do that but you better hope that you aren't disconnected from the server before you've rebought the item and put it on another ship. Coz if that happens your modded equipment is gone.

Second, you also need to waste funds storing other ships and its far from a satisfactory solution. If we want to mod other ships we've then got to do the rounds of all the Engineers in each of them which will turn into a laborious logistical grind, particuarly for ships without much cargo space. And third, why should we have to throw away stuff we've collected or truck it round with us every where we go?

The game needs storage its a simple as that. If they want to restrict it to a certain number of stations ( to keep the db size down) and keep it for equipment or engineer commodities thats fine.
 
One and a half year in, and they haven't. Even. Decided. whether they want storage or not?

You've got to be fracking kidding me. You have got to be fracking kidding me.

*throws toys out of pram*

Edit: Sorry for throwing a tantrum, but I'm trying to bring myself to play the game again, and now this. I have tried to keep faith in the development of this game. I don't know if I kan keep it up.
 
Last edited:
What's going on? What is this?



I'll admit I haven't browsed through the forums much lately but where exactly can I find the arguments posed opposing storage?
No really, I'll happily join the debate if there even is one.

What seemed to be like a basic QoL pre-requisite to introducing the Engineers, has been awaited for quite some time, subject of discussion long before and the update is "We don't know"?

Did I miss April fools?

Balls of steel. No other words.


Perhaps there is a confusion here.

A.
What has been discussed since the dawn of Elite is general commodity storage, the hoarding of all commercial goods so to speak.
This would be very problematic for the general game mechanics some think.
I am not sure myself, but I do not think the game really needs this mechanic. (But I would like to have it :))

B.
What also has been discussed since the big bang that created this universe is storage of modules, whether they be engineered or not.
I do feel that storage of modules is mandatory for good game play, especially since the engineers have arrived.
Storage of modules would give us great freedom to experiment in the game with all kinds of ship builds and with all kinds of modified/engineered modules.
I think this is of great importance for game play.

C.
What is new since the arrival of the Engineers is the discussion about engineer commodity storage.
This too is a mandatory requirement for the game.
Currently we are forced to schlep around our hard earned engineers commodities.
This greatly frustrates gameplay because it clogs our cargo holds.
This in turn limits the missions we can take on.
And a bigger problem is the fact that it attracts pirates in droves.
It also limits the ship builds we can use.
Some builds, like pure combat builds cannot even carry cargo.
People who do a lot of combat would severely weaken their ships if they fit their Vipers, Vultures and FDL's with cargo holds for engineer goods.
In many cases having engineer commodities on board makes us a captive of our ships and we can no longer switch to other ships at will.

Because all of the frustration the lack of engineer commodity storage creates while playing the game I feel that this is the most important storage type of all. It should be a huge priority, because it would give us back a lot of our freedom to play the game the way we want it.
 
Last edited:
Pretty sure part of the reasoning is that the game designers expected us to fit out a ship for a certain role, then buy another ship (possibly of the same type) and fit that as another role.

Expecting people to be engaged with specific ships and feel they are their "mining ship" or their "combat ship" and keep them that way, would require there to be some kind of sentimental attachment though. And as we can't name a ship, this is highly unlikley in most cases.

I still find it entirely bizarre that this was the route chosen, but there it is.
 
Pretty sure part of the reasoning is that the game designers expected us to fit out a ship for a certain role, then buy another ship (possibly of the same type) and fit that as another role.

Expecting people to be engaged with specific ships and feel they are their "mining ship" or their "combat ship" and keep them that way, would require there to be some kind of sentimental attachment though. And as we can't name a ship, this is highly unlikley in most cases.

I still find it entirely bizarre that this was the route chosen, but there it is.

If that's true, then why do we have so many multi-role ships?
Besides, right now that's one of the main problems... we can't use some ships (example: combat FDL) because they have no cargo. And we have the pockets full of commodities, many of which are hard to get.
 
What speaks against Engineer storage? I don't see a reason why I shouldn't be able to store my nanobreakers.
The key part in that sentence was: "if you need one". :)

Seriously, with the engineer mechanics it's imperative that module storage is implemented. Commodity storage is less important and more prone to have unknown (to us) effects on BSG, so I don't have a solid opinion on that.
 
Don't believe anything on the Internetz, actually don't believe what you read in the newspapers, I would go as far to say don't believe everything you read in books.
That covers it. /s

If you cant find a thread on the forums, it probably is not very relevant. Probably...:rolleyes:
Many threads YOU can find are rubbish too ....:D

Cheers Cmdr's
 
Personally I don't see the need, but I'm not against it if others want it. Struggling to think of a reason not to implement it other than dev time being diverted from something else. Even then it would just be a lower priority rather than 'don't know'.
a friend of mine is the example "use case"
as he's mid-range in combat and in the process of engineering his ship ... he has to carry a lot of stuff about with him
having this stuff on board gets him attacked exponentially more
would you leave your house each day with the entire contents of your safe kind of thing
he lost his ship the other night due to this...and all his stuff that had taken him 2 weeks to collect to give to the dodgy engineer a second time as his first roll for a level 4 FS upgrade got him 1%.
just my 2c
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The key part in that sentence was: "if you need one". :)

Seriously, with the engineer mechanics it's imperative that module storage is implemented. Commodity storage is less important and more prone to have unknown (to us) effects on BSG, so I don't have a solid opinion on that.

I don't really see how having a storage system where we can keep a hundred odd items is going to break the game.
 
I don't really see how having a storage system where we can keep a hundred odd items is going to break the game.
Me neither. And break the game might be putting it too strongly. Influence it beyond an acceptable level would describe it more accurately. 100 items won't influence the BSG much, but I simply do not know whether many CMDRs storing 100 items will. And of course there will be players who will organize to see if they can push the BSG one way or the other.

To state it more unclearly: I am not saying it will, I'm saying I'm not saying it won't.
 
Being able to store commodities and stockpile them to influence should DEFINITELY be part of the BGS simulation as it adds to emergent gameplay. This sounds like a perfect new way to enable players to influence the game more. [up]
 
Seriously, with the engineer mechanics it's imperative that module storage is implemented. Commodity storage is less important and more prone to have unknown (to us) effects on BSG, so I don't have a solid opinion on that.

Off the cuff comment:

- Remove commodity requirements from recipes. (and add more exotic materials if FD feel like they're being shortchanged with their 100+ currencies already in game :rolleyes:) This would completely negate the need for recipe storage
- Implement 1 (one) module slot at a station of your choice, unlocked some how. One mind - just to keep it simple for Frontier
 
Off the cuff comment:

- Remove commodity requirements from recipes. (and add more exotic materials if FD feel like they're being shortchanged with their 100+ currencies already in game :rolleyes:) This would completely negate the need for recipe storage
- Implement 1 (one) module slot at a station of your choice, unlocked some how. One mind - just to keep it simple for Frontier

FD are chasing their tale here, they have already over simplified their own process with the latest patch. Worrying about Cmdrs having an undue influence on the BGS because of some limited commodity storage is laughable in comparison to the 'Bull in the China shop' approach they have taken to AI nerfing and dumbing down of the game.
 
Last edited:
FD are chasing their tale here, they have already over simplified there own process with the latest patch. Worrying about Cmdrs having an undue influence on the BGS because of some limited commodity storage is laughable in comparison to the 'Bull in the China shop' approach they have taken to AI nerfing and dumbing down of the game.
lol Yeah and paintjobs for all ships with pirate and powerplay decals will ruin gameplay too. lol But they can completely change the meta game.
 
Back
Top Bottom