To randomly aside, limpets should be ammo under a revised limpet controller system and so not be a worry here
I know it's been asked for before but please..........some form of storage!
- Thread starter LOSBOT
- Start date
PP is so screwed as-is that this is not reasonable grounds to deny players the most basic of inventory functionality.
I'd certainly like a little storage, if only for all those guardian items you need for their sites.
Maybe provide limited specifically located storage that isn't transferable.
All the examples given are tantamount to wanting to cheat IMO.
Having played the game since pre-Horizons I believe may assessment that what is being asked for is unnecessary should carry some weight. In fact, IIRC every time this issue has cropped up FD have essentially denied the request.
Last edited:
No they aren't, wanting to park a ship without having to jettison your cargo so you can switch to another ship and go do something else is not cheating. So I really don't see where you are coming from, at all. Avoiding exploiting would be pretty easy, no transporting of ships that contain cargo. It's kind of like in real life. When I get home and park my car in the garage, I can leave my in it... If I'm moving half way across the country, and I'm paying a vehicle transport company to transport my car, they require the vehicle to be empty...
See, simple.
Why are you bringing real life examples into a game. In real life do you park your car and switch to a tank so you can drive down the road to kill people?
Any analogy that involves cars, trucks and other vehicles we use in real life instantly nullifies any argument!
looks at the number of times the pro storage side has used real life comparisons and falls out of his chair laughing.
"Cloud" Storage is a terrible idea. Especially if you plan on using it on a subscription based fee system. Regardless if it's real money or in-game. I think it would be more realistic if you had a certain reputation with the controlling faction then the option to store stuff at that station would make more sense. It's like your friend letting you keep your hidden purchases away at their house. Maybe checks every so often at random in case you're keeping any contraband in superpower held systems where x, y, z commodity is illegal. Nothing says "crimes against humanity" like keeping slaves in a storage locker
Yes....yes i do. Marvin Heemeyer did. But he was upset over a zoning dispute
Last edited:
There was another use-case a few days ago. Guy accepted a mission, swapped to his cargo-carrier, loaded up, got to the destination and there were no large pads.
As it is he is out of luck; the mission is burned.
If he could store the cargo, then he could swap it bit by bit to a small ship and complete.
It seems safe enough; all stored ships must be empty, all stored cargo must be declared and legal.
You could probably arrange so that it doesn't affect BGS. What is someone going to do, buy up the entire supply of some commodity and keep it on ice? Is that really possible? If so then that's a character-driven plot arc. The hoarders are named, hurried laws are passed, warrants are issued, the factions that control the storage are given ultimatums: hand it over or we go to war and take it. Player actions change the politics of whole regions. That's what we want, right? And it gives us something to do with the vast amounts of money some of us have. People with tens of billions in the bank are allowed to control markets.
As it is he is out of luck; the mission is burned.
If he could store the cargo, then he could swap it bit by bit to a small ship and complete.
It seems safe enough; all stored ships must be empty, all stored cargo must be declared and legal.
You could probably arrange so that it doesn't affect BGS. What is someone going to do, buy up the entire supply of some commodity and keep it on ice? Is that really possible? If so then that's a character-driven plot arc. The hoarders are named, hurried laws are passed, warrants are issued, the factions that control the storage are given ultimatums: hand it over or we go to war and take it. Player actions change the politics of whole regions. That's what we want, right? And it gives us something to do with the vast amounts of money some of us have. People with tens of billions in the bank are allowed to control markets.
Storing cargo at stations for either a galaxy-wide subscription fee, or a local per-use charge, would provide the advantage of being able to offload cargo when you're not yet ready to sell or use it. It may be possible to play the BGS with this feature, by stockpiling large quantities of a specific commodity at a station, possibly as a group effort, then being able to "flip the switch" by selling all the stock to that station at once, thereby changing supply/demand and impacting prices at the desired moment. I'm no expert on the BGS system, so this may not actually work, or may not have any concerning impact.
Otherwise, it's a relatively simple feature in scope, and a nice QoL improvement for players in general. Being able to transfer your cargo to the ship you're switching to, provided it has the required cargo space, would also be a nice to have, the lack of which functionality I know tends to bother a lot of commanders. Having the facility to outfit ships in storage without switching to them first, thereby allowing players to install the required cargo racks, among other benefits, would also be great.
None of that is cheating, even if playing the BGS in the aforementioned way were viable, as I think it would be a legitimate form of play. Also, the fact that this feature would mirror real life viability doesn't hurt the case. Making the argument based on analogies in the real world doesn't invalidate the case, though it doesn't necessarily justify it either, because the game-world concerns over any change need to be addressed as well, such as exploits and balance, among other considerations.
Otherwise, it's a relatively simple feature in scope, and a nice QoL improvement for players in general. Being able to transfer your cargo to the ship you're switching to, provided it has the required cargo space, would also be a nice to have, the lack of which functionality I know tends to bother a lot of commanders. Having the facility to outfit ships in storage without switching to them first, thereby allowing players to install the required cargo racks, among other benefits, would also be great.
None of that is cheating, even if playing the BGS in the aforementioned way were viable, as I think it would be a legitimate form of play. Also, the fact that this feature would mirror real life viability doesn't hurt the case. Making the argument based on analogies in the real world doesn't invalidate the case, though it doesn't necessarily justify it either, because the game-world concerns over any change need to be addressed as well, such as exploits and balance, among other considerations.
I don't know that realism is necessarily the best requirement in this case, but even if it were, storage space is a commodity, and would be an especially highly prized one on a space-limited orbital station, and I don't think it realistic that pilots would be offered cargo storage free of charge just because of reputation, though they may be given better rates.
In any case, storage can be charged on a per-use basis at the station, rather than a galaxy-wide subscription, which I think would probably be the more agreeable way to do it.
I could see a box when your in starport services thats something to the effect of "yes, i'd like to buy a dedicated warehouse to store my goods." and it's only good for that station. If one wanted to, yes, they could sit there and manipulate the markets but they would need to go and purchase each the warehouses in person. Or simply not make remote management of warehouses a feature or in a very watered down fashion, like can only trade within 10Ly of your current location.
The price of the warehouse could depend on the state of the economy. Booming could see cheaper prices of warehouses. An outbreak might have restrictions as to what can be stored for the duration of the tick. Anarchy they may be unavailable altogether and so on.
The price of the warehouse could depend on the state of the economy. Booming could see cheaper prices of warehouses. An outbreak might have restrictions as to what can be stored for the duration of the tick. Anarchy they may be unavailable altogether and so on.
And your point being? That thier arguments using real life analogies is also flawed isn't in dispute, but there are plenty of arguments and points against storage that don't use real life analogies. The argument for storage has yet to bring up a good argument for, it all simply seems to be, "because I planned my activities badly I want the game changed."
Point of fact;
The mission board tells you what landing facilities are available and warns you if your ship is unsuitable, so he took the mission in a small ship, it allowed him to take the mission because there are only small and medium pads, he then swapped to a ship that required a large pad and is complaining that he can't land? How will storage help here? Sure he can swap to a smaller ship, but the goods he needs have to be moved to the smaller ship anyway so storing them isn't going to help, he is just suffering from a terminal lack of planning and studying the mission board.
He needs something, but it's not storage!
No they are not. Just because YOU think storing cargo is somehow "cheating", that does not mean it's cheating. Lots of VALID reasons have been given and many of us who would like to see this feature are willing to accept limitations, despite how cumbersome or dumb they may be, just to satisfy the absurd concerns of people like you.
How is it cheating if I want to mine a small ship full of minerals, store them, then go back out to mine some more until I've got enough to fill my Type 9, so that I can I haul it all in just 1 trip instead of multiple trips? No, I don't want to take a type 9 for mining. I like the agility of a smaller ship.
How is it cheating if I want to store items in the station because they were mission rewards that I'm now going to be stuck carrying around in my ships because they have to follow me everywhere? That's just STUPID and it's getting old. Storage is a basic convenience.
If you're trying to prevent cheating by just crippling the hell out of the players, then there's nothing "Dangerous" about this game. People trying to "cheat" the system will always happen. There's also tactics that are just smart or crafty, which of course the ones who didn't think of it, will describe as cheating.
Just because YOU feel the arguments are not to your satisfaction does not mean they're invalid.
What is so wrong about being able to store items? What are all the cons you mentioned? You want to deny others a basic convenience out of fear that someone, somehow might just benefit in some way that you don't agree with. I'm not talking about actual cheating either. I see your arguments as just being selfish by wanting to deny others a basic function.
Lestat
Banned
Problem OP. Instead of complaining about space, you could have taken a few seconds and look at your cargo. Remember, laziness is not a skill; it will never be a skill. It could tell you a lot before docking and changing ships.
Let get to the nitty-gritty. How can YOU EXPLOIT THIS?
1 I could see a player using a combat ship using a few cargo from a mission and beat the NPC. Then switch to a large trade ship because the Risk has been defeated. All because you have station storage.
2 I could see someone mining a large number of ores and wait for a boom after a while and sell it. Let take the Void Opal. If you sell it at the nearest station you drop it off it would be 600,000 credits if you hold on to it. It could sell for 1,650,000 each in an adjacent system by because the location could be running out of rare goods and looking for scarce products. Can we say exploit?
3 Please look at other topics and use the search feature before posting.
Let get to the nitty-gritty. How can YOU EXPLOIT THIS?
1 I could see a player using a combat ship using a few cargo from a mission and beat the NPC. Then switch to a large trade ship because the Risk has been defeated. All because you have station storage.
2 I could see someone mining a large number of ores and wait for a boom after a while and sell it. Let take the Void Opal. If you sell it at the nearest station you drop it off it would be 600,000 credits if you hold on to it. It could sell for 1,650,000 each in an adjacent system by because the location could be running out of rare goods and looking for scarce products. Can we say exploit?
3 Please look at other topics and use the search feature before posting.
Thing is I can see players like you cheating. I can view exploits. You might not like to see it but it true.
I don't know what the numbers were in this particular case, but let's say:
- You have 900 units of cargo in a large ship.
- No small or medium ship can hold the entire amount.
- You put the 900 tonnes into storage
- You swap to a ship with 100 tonnes of capacity
- You take 100 tonnes out of storage and take it to the destination
- Rinse and repeat.
To my mind, neither of these suggestions is an exploit. Both of them make the game world more realistic. The real world works like this and people do exactly this right now in the real world. The world's cargo terminals are full of goods waiting for the price to be high enough to sell them. Clearing the way for a cargo fleet has been a thing since at least World War II and if it was carried out by two people in multi-player it can be done in-game right now.
Lestat
Banned
Can we say an EXPLOIT. I could see someone holding onto 900 unit of Void opal to sell when a station near by. You know how much that would be. 1,485,000,000 That Billion credits. one run. That pennyless to Elite trader in one run.
This is where common sense come in to play. Dump your cargo first before switching ships.
I already pointed out the almost 1.5 billion exploit do I need to repeat it.
If you use common sense you would not have this issue. Accept smaller missions.
All I see is people exploiting the issue.
All I see is people using it as an exploit. You might not see it as an exploit or your willingness to ignore it so you could use it as an exploit. I look at ideas and point out the flaws. This has been pointed out when Elite Dangerous was released. I know the Devs see the real issue already. They have talked about it already and how it could be exploited. So they know the cons already.
Last edited:
Why is this an exploit? It seems to me like simple common sense and good planning.
How will it break the game? How will it affect anyone else?
What is to stop the same person, right now, checking EDDB for the prices, sitting in port until a nearby station has the right price, taking the mining equipment off his ship and oufitting it for combat, maybe even switching to Solo, and then selling the goods in the right market?