I wish we had more module storage slots. Add your support for 240 slots per-head here!

[Deleted member 110222]

I'd love to add a Sidewinder Mk I & Eagle Mk II to my ship collection but I don't have enough module storage slots, for all the gear I want. ;-;

If, like me, you think we should have our module storage doubled, vote here!

 

[AP Birdman]

Yes, yes, yes!
Why has no one responded to this yet? The 120 module storage limit is ridiculous. I have 2 Anacondas that I use just for storing modules.
I vote Yes on proposition 240

 

[rootsrat]

Personally, I don't need that So my vote is to "no" (as I'd prefer for the dev time to be spent on something else).

 

[Burke]

240 sounds good to me. Now add some tabs and sorting tools so you can find what you are looking for... wait for it.... quickly and easily.

 

[Stigbob]

No, I've already doubled up on some stuff as I forgot what I had in storage. Any more gets unwieldy.

 

[Deleted member 110222]

Personally, I don't need that So my vote is to "no" (as I'd prefer for the dev time to be spent on something else).

You just disagree with everything I say for the sake of it.

And yes, I'm sure it takes 100 devs' 1k man hours to change a number.

 

[AP Birdman]

Personally, I don't need that So my vote is to "no" (as I'd prefer for the dev time to be spent on something else).

Because YOU don't need it? Wow, what about the MANY players that have multiple t-10s or anacondas for storing modules?
Yeah I'm sure it would take a ton of time SMH.

 

[Deleted member 110222]

Because YOU don't need it? Wow, what about the MANY players that have multiple t-10s or anacondas for storing modules?
Yeah I'm sure it would take a ton of time SMH.

Ignore him mate.

 

[Stigbob]

Because YOU don't need it? Wow, what about the MANY players that have multiple t-10s or anacondas for storing modules?
Yeah I'm sure it would take a ton of time SMH.

That sounds like hard work, those players probably enjoy micromanaging their 120 limit inventory anyway.

 

[CMDR Plexus Ironrot]

I hit that 120 CAP so much >.< I have shin full of drop ships for weapons and mod storage!

yes 1 vote from me for 240!

Or sell it to us like other MMO's Like a bag of holding oh...no..BOX OF STORING

 

[Fedora Master]

Every game that allows storing things inevitably has people demanding more storage space.
Compulsive hoarding is a mental problem.

 

[Deleted member 110222]

I hit that 120 CAP so much >.< I have shin full of drop ships for weapons and mod storage!

yes 1 vote from me for 240!

Or sell it to us like other MMO's Like a bag of holding oh...no..BOX OF STORING

I'd be totally fine with a bag of holding in the store.

It's not like stored modules give an active advantage.

I certainly didn't dominate Cyrodiil in ESO because I had a big bank vault... I sucked hard lol.

 

[Deleted member 110222]

Every game that allows storing things inevitably has people demanding more storage space.
Compulsive hoarding is a mental problem.

I mean, yes, I do have mental health problems. But the only reason you can say that about me is because I'm open about my diagnoses, myself.

Everyone else? You are not qualified to comment on their health.

That would apply even if you are a fully qualified doctor IRL, as this is not your office.

 

[Fedora Master]

I mean, yes, I do have mental health problems. But the only reason you can say that about me is because I'm open about my diagnoses, myself.

Everyone else? You are not qualified to comment on their health.

That would apply even if you are a fully qualified doctor IRL, as this is not your office.

Sorry, that may have come off as a bit insult. Not my intention. Hoarding IS a problem though and that means electronic hoarding too. Ask yourself: Do you really need all those things you've stored?

 

[CMDR Plexus Ironrot]

Every game that allows storing things inevitably has people demanding more storage space.
Compulsive hoarding is a mental problem.

*looks at ships and all the modules i have* >_> oh......I have a problem

 

[Deleted member 110222]

Sorry, that may have come off as a bit insult. Not my intention. Hoarding IS a problem though and that means electronic hoarding too. Ask yourself: Do you really need all those things you've stored?

In a word. Yes, I do.

Otherwise managing a Sidewinder & Eagle for me is, at best, very difficult.

This is a consequence of the huge customisation options afforded by the mechanics of the game, not a "hoarding problem".

 

[rootsrat]

You just disagree with everything I say for the sake of it.

And yes, I'm sure it takes 100 devs' 1k man hours to change a number.

No, it's not "for the sake of it". Like I said, the current limit is more than enough for me personally, so I disagree that we need more. Simple as that.

Because YOU don't need it? Wow, what about the MANY players that have multiple t-10s or anacondas for storing modules?
Yeah I'm sure it would take a ton of time SMH.

Yes, I personally don't need it therefore I am personally against this feature, as it would take dev time that could be spent on something else. Opinion. I can express it on these forums, no?

As for the time and effort required, I honestly doubt it's just a matter of changing a number in the code. I presume there are some more technical details involved, like performance, time it takes to read the data every time you access module storage and probably a few other related things we don't know about.

Unless you have a hard proof that it would take a simple change of the number - then I'm all up for it, even if I won't use it.

 

[Deleted member 110222]

No, it's not "for the sake of it". Like I said, the current limit is more than enough for me personally, so I disagree that we need more. Simple as that.



Yes, because I personally don't need it, I am against this feature, because it would take dev time that could be spent on something else. As for the time and effort required, I honestly doubt it's just a matter of changing a number in the code. I presume there are some more technical details involved, like performance, time it takes to read the data every time you access module storage and probably a few other related things we don't know about.

Unless you have a hard proff that it would take a simple change of the number - then I'm all up for it, even if I won't use it.

Good grief man. Talk about selfishness.

"I don't want it, so you shouldn't have it."

LOL. Thanks for showing your true colours.

 

[Deleted member 110222]

No, it's not "for the sake of it". Like I said, the current limit is more than enough for me personally, so I disagree that we need more. Simple as that.



Yes, I personally don't need it therefore I am personally against this feature, as it would take dev time that could be spent on something else. Opinion. I can express it on these forums, no?

As for the time and effort required, I honestly doubt it's just a matter of changing a number in the code. I presume there are some more technical details involved, like performance, time it takes to read the data every time you access module storage and probably a few other related things we don't know about.

Unless you have a hard proof that it would take a simple change of the number - then I'm all up for it, even if I won't use it.

I personally will never use a Mamba.

But you don't see me saying "How dare FD do something that doesn't directly benefit me!"

EDIT: Against the rules, apparently.

 

[Broon]

I don't need the extra module storage either. I might have 45 or so stored modules at the moment and I never topped out even when the limit was lower (wasn't it 60?).

But I will vote Yes so maybe all of you hoarders will quit singing the blues about it.

But then why stop at 240? Why not shoot for the moon and go for 1000? With 8 subsections to sort by class, with more subsections to sort by Core or Optional or Hardpoint etc?

I mean if you are going to dream, dream big like when you dream about what to do with 862 million dollars/pounds/euros etc of lottery winnings?

Cuz you know ain't either of those dreams gonna happen.