I understand the reasoning, but I still don't like it. It's the same reason cars with high speed in driving games have poor acceleration. It's necessary and it's nonsense
I disagree. We would end up with cookie-cutter builds.
"Move this slider to 20%, this one to 40%"
I like the way my ships are unique, with sliders we would lose that.
If anything needs changing its the spawn rate of some of those materials. Rare ones pop up too often, at the expense of less rare ones which are rarely seen as mission rewards.
I disagree. We would end up with cookie-cutter builds.
"Move this slider to 20%, this one to 40%"
I like the way my ships are unique, with sliders we would lose that.
If anything needs changing its the spawn rate of some of those materials. Rare ones pop up too often, at the expense of less rare ones which are rarely seen as mission rewards.
I hate the approach where if one thing is improved, something else has to be worse. I hate it. It's superficial balance.
Consider what we have the moment, where there is no reason not to G1-->G2-->G3-->G4-->G5?
You complain about balance but where is the balance when G5 is the defacto goto upgrade for any/all modules? Why? Because it's generally better in every way to G4, which is generally better in every way to G3, which is...
Imagine instead you built your ship and realised you wanted to specilise in X and Y so had to tinker and balance with numerous modules in various degrees to achieve the outcome you wanted?
How is mindlessly G5'ing everything (why not?) more interesting and skilful and balanced?
This is exactly the case. In fact, I'm pretty sure some g5 weapon mods make the weapons worse than the unmodded version. The cost to benefit ratios go backwards making everything beneath g5 pointless.
The current system we have doesn't allow customization in the way that balance would provide. All we have now is pure upgrades which is really unhealthy for games that include PvP.