Page 3 of 10 FirstFirst 123458 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 141

Thread: FRONTIER - The Lemon Campaign of 3304 calling all Small ship CMDRs

  1. #31
    Originally Posted by Mengy View Post (Source)
    Agreed 1000%.

    My DBX has been mothballed now because I, once again, can't fit everything I want for exploration.
    Another argument for splitting some of those 2-slot modules so a 1-slot thing can fit in with the other 1-slot thing (i.e., Advanced Discovery Scanner and Detailed Surface Scanner should both be able to be fit in the same 2-slot module).

  2. #32
    Originally Posted by Leadfoot View Post (Source)
    Another argument for splitting some of those 2-slot modules so a 1-slot thing can fit in with the other 1-slot thing (i.e., Advanced Discovery Scanner and Detailed Surface Scanner should both be able to be fit in the same 2-slot module).
    I think it better to wait to see what becomes of FDevs ideas of Limpet Controller racks and Sensor Suite racks

    That might go some way to mitigate modules vs slots.

    But that said, the more stuff is more mass and the consequences there of.

    My Sidey is oft putting size 1s in the size 2s due to that fact.

  3. #33
    Can we unlock the two unused utility mounts on both Cobras please?

  4. #34
    Originally Posted by Un1k0rn View Post (Source)
    Can we unlock the two unused utility mounts on both Cobras please?
    Only after my Type-7 has its 6th small hardpoint unlocked.

  5. #35
    Originally Posted by CMDR Corlas View Post (Source)
    Only after my Type-7 has its 6th small hardpoint unlocked.
    5th

  6. #36
    Originally Posted by Zeeman View Post (Source)
    Just quietly, every "Exploration"designated ship should have 2 C1 exploration slots (ADS+DSS) because, you know, they don't make C2 and C3 variants of these items...

    Z...
    I'd go further than that.

    Any ship intended for exploration should ALWAYS have 2 x C1 slots, 1 x C2 slot and 1 x C4 slot in order to be compatible with both types of SRV bay while allowing a CMDR to bung an AFMU in whichever slot they don't put their SRV into.

    And then, beyond that, if FDev want us to use limpets while exploring then give the ships slots compatible with limpet controller sizes.
    Making limpet controllers in sizes 1, 3, 5 and 7 and then giving us C2, C4 or C6 slots in our ships is just taking the pee.


    Gotta say, though, I'm not fussed about fitting an FSDB to my exploration ships.
    Fitted one to my 55Ly runabout DBX and gained 9Ly at the expense of losing 16t of cargo capacity.
    Meh.
    The cargo space is more useful (especially since a C4 cargo rack can be a CR rack) so I binned the FSDB.

    The FSDBs are far more useful on stuff like T9s, Cutters and Corvettes.

  7. #37
    Originally Posted by space voyager View Post (Source)
    True, all the necessary navigation equipment is on the smaller boat, too. Your DBX has it, too. But on the larger boat you probably can fit a remote submarine (SLF) and a car (SRV), while the smaller one has no room for it. So, see, a small ship simply can not have all the equipment a bigger one can fit.
    ..
    Firstly the DBx (and other ships) canít fit the basics for long range travel - thatís the whole point of the thread, saying you donít need them is a load of rubbish itís like telling a sailor they donít need Charts for a solo ocean passage. Of course itís possible but but itís also irresponsible and silly

    and even the Maltese Falcon does not have room for a car or submarine, nor the requirement for one you have even contradicted your own argument by stating items fit in larger vessels which are not required for making passages on the ocean, and guess what (interesting fact time) most boats have a SRV mines an inflatable dinghy and lives in the aft locker with its outboard, the Maltese Falcon has a speedboat in a fancy garage but it serves the same purpose as a marina and beach taxi - thereís no SRV police telling us we canít use inflatables because our boats are too small

    fact is we all have keels and need to get to shore sometimes, if anything the large vessels are the ones restricted as they canít leave the channel nor can they hide in a protected shore during a gale due to their draft.

    The point is size of vessel does not limit you from exploring - cutting LY adding modules from small ships ( and using sailing again) is the same as saying small sailboats are not allowed to use gps / navtex / radar - pick one ... any

    yes you canít have a cinema or basketball court but they donít aid exploration just like that viewing deck on the conda... keep it we donít want it.

    this has veered of somewhat but you must see that your argument is solely based on hand wavium, thereís no logical reason to stop small ships fitting exploration components in ed other than to ruin someone elses day, there is no logical reason it wonít effect you in your leather upholstered dinning room sipping champagne in the orangery on deck 16

    so in the respect of better gameplay for all - add slots / ability to split large slots up / remove restrictions / A class scanners with 2 slots

    whatever the answer make it so, itís only going to be an improvement to the fd universe

  8. #38
    Originally Posted by Kenneth Mcgrew View Post (Source)
    Firstly the DBx (and other ships) can’t fit the basics for long range travel - that’s the whole point of the thread, saying you don’t need them is a load of rubbish it’s like telling a sailor they don’t need Charts for a solo ocean passage. Of course it’s possible but but it’s also irresponsible and silly

    and even the Maltese Falcon does not have room for a car or submarine, nor the requirement for one you have even contradicted your own argument by stating items fit in larger vessels which are not required for making passages on the ocean, and guess what (interesting fact time) most boats have a SRV mines an inflatable dinghy and lives in the aft locker with its outboard, the Maltese Falcon has a speedboat in a fancy garage but it serves the same purpose as a marina and beach taxi - there’s no SRV police telling us we can’t use inflatables because our boats are too small

    fact is we all have keels and need to get to shore sometimes, if anything the large vessels are the ones restricted as they can’t leave the channel nor can they hide in a protected shore during a gale due to their draft.

    The point is size of vessel does not limit you from exploring - cutting LY adding modules from small ships ( and using sailing again) is the same as saying small sailboats are not allowed to use gps / navtex / radar - pick one ... any

    yes you can’t have a cinema or basketball court but they don’t aid exploration just like that viewing deck on the conda... keep it we don’t want it.

    this has veered of somewhat but you must see that your argument is solely based on hand wavium, there’s no logical reason to stop small ships fitting exploration components in ed other than to ruin someone elses day, there is no logical reason it won’t effect you in your leather upholstered dinning room sipping champagne in the orangery on deck 16

    so in the respect of better gameplay for all - add slots / ability to split large slots up / remove restrictions / A class scanners with 2 slots

    whatever the answer make it so, it’s only going to be an improvement to the fd universe
    They aren't the basics though.
    You can do it with the Fuel scoop, and ADS as the absolute basics.
    Heck if it is long range travel, have fuel scoop will travel.
    It isn't the same as telling a Sailer they don't need charts, as no one said go without the Galaxy map or route scanner.

    If you want to make a compelling arguments make your arguement for having all the extras rather than asserting you can't do without everything and the kitchen sink.

    You want there to be no opportunity cost, explain why even the smallest ships shouldn't have to chose and priorities what they outift.

  9. #39
    Originally Posted by Vasious View Post (Source)
    5th
    Oh yeah.

    I mean... You're thinking too small!

  10. #40
    The guardian FSD booster is special module apart with guardian tech. I suspect the lore makes it separate as a module because it's not compatible with the machinery in the regular FSD drive, but is able to affect the hyperjump field. That's why it's a separate module and not a core FSD module itself.

    OP post is funny seeing the fox's fistpumps in victory "winning" his campaign to stuff another optional slot, lol. But now, asking for another slot for no 'opportunity cost' as mentioned, no drawback? I don't think it fits with the DBX lore and stretches incredulity to enable an extra 5c slot for the DBX to carry the guardian FSD booster. I mean, it's a smaller, much cheaper ship with very small cost in rebuy. All the other ships have to sacrifice a slot for the fsd booster. The booster helped FSD range across the board but at a cost. I'm glad FD did so with this booster module as I disagreed with threads always wanting a free fsd boost for their particular favorite ship with no drawbacks.

  11. #41
    Planetary approach and docking computer shouldn't need a slot (just make 'em built in extra's), all scanning equipment in one slot, two one ton modules fit in a two ton slot - bingo, slots to spare for everyone.
    IMHO.

  12. #42
    All scanners should be on the OUTSIDE of a ship and take up utility slots. Having internal scanners is just daft.
    This is more plausible, and would allow all ships to be exploration ready.

  13. #43
    FD keep throwing more types of modules at us. Supposedly, the technology is increasing. Yet the main thing that happens with technology improvements is that it gets smaller for the same or better capability. But this doesn't happen in the game.

    So we are left with two choices:
    1. Ignore most of the gameplay
    2. Only fly an Anaconda

  14. #44
    Originally Posted by Jingar00 View Post (Source)
    All scanners should be on the OUTSIDE of a ship and take up utility slots. Having internal scanners is just daft.
    This is more plausible, and would allow all ships to be exploration ready.
    No thanks.

    Explorers might not have much use for utility slots. But most other forms of gameplay do.

  15. #45
    Originally Posted by taotoo View Post (Source)
    I'd give all ships an extra two small slots. Won't break anything and everyone will be happy.
    i thought the same thing as an asp scout pilot. but i'd gather some ships would run into power problems or really get used to turning things on and off.

    which i hope explorers are flying with the absolute minimum hardware powered on to save fuel

Page 3 of 10 FirstFirst 123458 ... LastLast