Page 4 of 9 FirstFirst 12345678 ... LastLast
Results 46 to 60 of 134

Thread: FDEV PLEASE more STORAGE !!

  1. #46
    Originally Posted by Nidhöggr View Post (Source)
    still the old limit.

    guess fdev still needs to look at stuff and annoy the sht out of the playerbase even more.
    fdev likes to look at stuff for ages, because looking is better then changing.
    There is SUPPOSED to be a challenge involved in material storage management. You're supposed to have to know what you need and what you don't. You're supposed to have to plan what engineers you intend to visit, what reloads you think you'll need, what items are extremely rare and what items you need to purge because you can get mountains of them whenever you want. I get that. I understand why people don't want to have to deal with it, but I get it. It's a design choice made by FD for the game.

    That being said, they added new engineer recipes in 2.3, they also added Unknown items and Ancient items in 2.3. Now they are adding synthesis recipes in 2.4 as well as additional Thargoid items (some have replaced Unknown items from 2.3). We are also seeing CGs come along which require storage.

    Somewhere there is a balance, between the drain on our storage and the available space. I'm seeing the drain on storage space rise, but I'm not seeing the space rise. It's far from unplayable at this point, but if they felt the balance was correct in 2.1 at 1000/500 then I think that storage space needs to be increased in 2.4 to maintain that same balance.

  2. #47
    I'm going to vote for less storage, mostly out of spite but also to limit all the gambling going on at the Engineer bases. Gambling isn't healthy, think of the children.
    Marking exit vector; I'll save my final breath for another world.

  3. #48
    It doesn't help that the game pretty much tries to drown you in mats and data. If you aren't actively using the engineers things quickly build up. Do missions and half the time they include something in the rewards, go mining and almost every asteroid will yield common mats, fight anything and they leave a pile of stuff when they die or go bounty hunting and half the ships you scan will drop some common data item. Even worse if you start doing planetary scan missions.

  4. #49
    What do we want "more storage"
    when do we want it "storage"

    Flimley

  5. #50
    Originally Posted by CMDR _BigJay_ View Post (Source)
    There is SUPPOSED to be a challenge involved in material storage management. You're supposed to have to know what you need and what you don't. You're supposed to have to plan what engineers you intend to visit, what reloads you think you'll need, what items are extremely rare and what items you need to purge because you can get mountains of them whenever you want. I get that. I understand why people don't want to have to deal with it, but I get it. It's a design choice made by FD for the game.
    there is no challange in this, none at all.

    "managing" this is horrible, you have to lookup at the internet what stuff you can drop because they aren't even used.

    this is one of the things where fdev is horrible bad, any kind of comfort functions is not wanted at all or need forever to get ingame or even changed.
    who ever does this design choices, should be forced to play this way frequently, every day for a few hours. i bet he/they don't. they play yes, but not that mutch as many others do.

    by just guessing i would say there are a way more people who hate stuff like this, then people who are ok with it.
    yes there are people who like to use pen and paper or some spreedsheets to work around the not so less flaws, but they ain't the majority.
    stuff like this makes this game so painfull at times, i ask myself often if it's really worth the time to even bother with those letdowns anymore.
    ⚔ JOIN THE EMPIRE ⚔
    ☣ RETRIBUTION IS AT HAND
    LET FURY GUIDE YOUR WEAPONS LET VENGEANCE BE YOUR SONG ☣

  6. #51
    Originally Posted by Raile View Post (Source)
    I'm going to vote for less storage, mostly out of spite but also to limit all the gambling going on at the Engineer bases. Gambling isn't healthy, think of the children.
    It wouldn't be a gamble if FD hadn't implemented it like a casino.

  7. #52
    Originally Posted by Y2K View Post (Source)
    Pls take this opportunity with 2.4 to at least double the storage of mats + data... 2000/1000
    If they would just hurry up & give us a Material/Data brokerage, then it may well be a moot point.

  8. #53
    Originally Posted by andrak View Post (Source)
    It wouldn't be a gamble if FD hadn't implemented it like a casino.
    Funny, the results I get are always an improvement on what I had previously. It would be nice to use favours to tweak a stat-here & there-but that is only because I want more of a role-play aspect to it.

  9. #54
    Originally Posted by Marc_Hicks View Post (Source)
    Funny, the results I get are always an improvement on what I had previously. It would be nice to use favours to tweak a stat-here & there-but that is only because I want more of a role-play aspect to it.
    "Always an improvement" - Either you are doing a mod only once and hitting apply then flying off or you haven't used engineers that much.

  10. #55
    Originally Posted by Marc_Hicks View Post (Source)
    Funny, the results I get are always an improvement on what I had previously. It would be nice to use favours to tweak a stat-here & there-but that is only because I want more of a role-play aspect to it.
    Really? I have several grade 4 modifications that I haven't been able to improve using grade 5 rolls yet.
    CMDR Carbo

  11. #56
    +1 for more storage.
    We want more storage, and if somebody has to make a new thread every day, will do until we get it.
    CMDR Carbo

  12. #57
    I am absolutely gutted that there have been no RNGineering improvements this Beta. More storage would have been the least of my hopes, but it would have been something.

    Why oh why do I keep foolishly deceiving myself that things could change...?
    Federal Vigilante PvP Executioner Friend and Supporter of Adle's Armada

  13. #58
    Originally Posted by Marc_Hicks View Post (Source)
    Funny, the results I get are always an improvement on what I had previously. It would be nice to use favours to tweak a stat-here & there-but that is only because I want more of a role-play aspect to it.
    The results I get are everything from "Hey, friend, check this highly lol worthy outcome out" which is usually followed by foul language (eg 55% FSD range, with 5% fuel increase). Or I can throw away several hours worth of collection and watch the engineer obsess over either applying extra integrity. Which is automatically more weight. On every roll. Including lightweight. Or deciding that the only secondary effect will be to pull a random stat to values fast approaching '0', for every, single, roll.

    This is the problem with highly variable RNG. Some days, it's a great (ie very broken) day. Other days it's throwing away those great days worth of effort, because the engineer has some sort of personality disorder combined with rapid onset alzheimer's leading to brain trauma which means they are ostensibly unable to do their job and apply stats even remotely related to the blueprint.

    Most other games will have variations on the same theme; crafting usually has some sort of RNG, but the values are far from extreme and there's usually not four or five stacked layers involved. 3-5% here, 9% there. Frontier it's 50% here, 15% there, <oh baby a triple> crazy train secondary someplace else that literally creates a module so broken it's statistically implausible that anyone will ever get that again. It's not creating moderate variation; it creates massive disparity. And monster outcomes that have just obliterated any sense of balance.

    There is variation, and then there is rampant mutation. ED sits squarely in the second camp. They do this, because the game rewards it.

    --

    Back on topic; Frontier have elected to make engineering credits 2.0 from a time sink perspective. It's another economy; ergo that means constraints on supply, variable outcomes, and so on. Because this is designed purely to keep people pumping coins into the slot machine. They actually have a roulette wheel; they aren't even trying to hide that it's essentially gambling.

    And the truly dumb thing? is that it works. More storage, reduces the time spent; and that makes it less of a sink, which would run counter to the purpose.
    cmdr kofeyh | http://twitch.tv/kofeyh | "The universe is run by the complex interweaving of three elements: Energy, matter, and enlightened self-interest." – Citizen G'Kar

  14. #59
    I also think more storage is needed, I have to throw away stuff every times !
    My Exploration albums : http://sensai25.imgur.com/

  15. #60
    More storage would be much better but it only solves the main problem temporarily.

    No matter what limit is set we will always hit it and we will always then be playing "Elite: Throw Away Mats & Data"

    If a generous limit was set per material, say 100, we could collect away happily knowing that the mats we have 100 of will not increase and when we do find the mats we are looking for they will increase. Removing the constant throwing away of mats.

    Also when is this going to get fleshed out... This weightless space dust thing with magical arbitrary limits? Probably about the same time as the explanation for why we fly our ships at all when we have instantaneous "telepresence" projection galaxy wide. But... want paid without going personally to the person who is paying... Can't have that.

    I hope a serious look is taken at the placeholder mechanics making sure things obey the rules of the elite galaxy, during the QOL, whatever those rules are.

Page 4 of 9 FirstFirst 12345678 ... LastLast