Module storage is too little to keep players long term

XScribeX

X
Please increase it to 1000 and revamp the whole system (such as Filters, etc)...... is there really 100+ people working on it? it's time to prove it, I can't wait for the patch notes of the 2020 DLC, oh, scuse me, expansion.

Btw, what ever happened to :
Sandro Sammarco

Frontier Lead Designer- Elite: Dangerous
Joined Sep 26, 2012
Last seen Nov 16, 2018

Buzy with the Dinosaur ?
 
Last edited:

Agony_Aunt

Agony_Aunt
I'd like to see the logic that connects current storage space with how long people play the game for.

I can think of a bazillion other factors that affect how long people might play ED for that have a greater impact on it.

I really struggle to imagine even a single person would say "oh, not enough storage space, i quit". Even when we had zero storage space i can't recall anyone saying they quit becuase of it.

XScribeX - apparently still at FD but no longer working on ED.
 

SurlyPlatypus

S
I agree. We really need more module storage space. As you engineer modules, as you get ships and want to switch out one function to another, especially with engineered modules, the storage space is a significant frustration. The thought of having to engineer a second/third/fourth dedicated role ship just because you cant store the various modules to have all the roles using one ship is soul crushing...
 

whitezephyr

W
Agony_Aunt said:
I'd like to see the logic that connects current storage space with how long people play the game for.

I can think of a bazillion other factors that affect how long people might play ED for that have a greater impact on it.

I really struggle to imagine even a single person would say "oh, not enough storage space, i quit". Even when we had zero storage space i can't recall anyone saying they quit becuase of it.

XScribeX - apparently still at FD but no longer working on ED.
Click to expand...

It's not specifically about the length of time played, but more-so about the play style of wanting to try different aspects of the game. I can attest to this as I'm one of these players. I red-lined my module storage about a year ago and have since resorted to buying ships to store additional modules on.

So in this case, you need to remember which particular ships you stored which particular modules on (with engineering/experimental combinations). This means you need some external method of tracking which modules are on what ships.

Does this method technically allow you to store higher numbers of modules? Yes it does.

Is this method frustrating and time-consuming? Yes it absolutely is.

I think additional space, and some better UI elements allowing more intuitive module management (maybe even some sort of loadout save/load system) would go a long way.
 

gorankar

gorankar
I would not quit over it, but, it is a royal PITA to buy ships just to use as module storage. With engineering and PP modules it is pretty easy to pass 120. That said, I would far rather have a much better system for sorting stored modules. How about the same system used for outfitting. In fact, I don't think increasing storage without an improved way of sorting those stored modules would be all that helpful to me.
 

PIX515E

P
I ran some numbers for the possible combinations of different types of engineered and non-engineered modules. Due to my Google Sheets having my IRL name attached to it and my unwillingness to create a new account here is a screen cap. A break down of the calculations is rather simple: Module Type and Size * Possible Engineering by Type, NOT Level * Possible Experimental Effects (If Applicable) If you want to do Engineering by Level put in another * 5 on applicable modules (some modules don't go to Level 5; change where applicable)
 

Attachments

  • unknown[1].png
    unknown[1].png
    61.9 KB · Views: 246

Tikanderoga

Tikanderoga
More module storage would go a long way.
But that's really not the reason someone stops playing the game. More because it's grindy and unnecessarily repetitive.
Just something simple as Powerplay pamphlets or whatever you are lugging: You can get 10 every 30 minutes. Or pay 100k to fast track and get the next 10. Why not fast track the next 728 and fill up my cargo hold? Here are 7.28m. Instead it takes 72 x 10 seconds to fast track and load 10 units.
 

BL1P

BL1P
Not so much more space (though that would not hurt) but better management tools for Modules and Stored ships.
Here is a good example of some filters Fdev can use https://inara.cz/cmdr-all-modules/21899/
Also show all module class #

Transfer of modules from stored ships to another ship would be nice. Having to swap ship then the goto Outfitting then goto hardpoints store a weapon then back to swap ship then outfitting then hardpoints then add a weapon, when transfer weapon/module from ship #2 to ship #1 is a bit better :)
Templates would be nice too.
 

Bigmaec

Bigmaec
whitezephyr said:
Yea that's the standard workaround right now. But it's still a workaround.

We can have 40 ships at each station. There are multiple thousands of stations with shipyards.

Yet we can only have 120 stored modules total.
Click to expand...
I'm at roughly 40 engineered ships and 90 modules in storage.
My take nowadays is I build a ship until I like it and then build the next.
I'm not switching many modules any more.
Workaround, sure, but for me it works.
More important then a storage increase (which I wouldn't reject by the way) would be
a better storage UI with filters for me...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom