Ability to house multiple modules in slots

[zipline]

Hi fdev,
Can we have the ability to store multiple smaller opt internal modules in larger slots?
This would mean cmdrs could carry more and get involved in things like distress calls, etc, as I would like to routinely carry things like refuel and repair limpet controllers but just don't have the space.
You could introduce a size 1 slot divider that can be purchased and would allow say 2 size 2 modules to go in a size 5 slot for instance.
o7

 

[ebbrell]

This has been asked for several times in the suggestion section. I'm sure it will turn up one day

 

[Lestat]

Hi fdev,
Can we have the ability to store multiple smaller opt internal modules in larger slots?
This would mean cmdrs could carry more and get involved in things like distress calls, etc, as I would like to routinely carry things like refuel and repair limpet controllers but just don't have the space.
You could introduce a size 1 slot divider that can be purchased and would allow say 2 size 2 modules to go in a size 5 slot for instance.
o7

What ship are you using.

I think you need to start thinking about what you are going to do that day and set up your ship at that task at hand.

 

[Kissamies]

Generally, no, but for limpet controllers... Well, there are many people who think the number of them is a bit of a problem. One of the solutions suggested is bit like the OP. Personally I'm more partial to the idea that the various limpet controllers should be software put in new kinds of slots, software slots, but the limpets would still need a control and storage unit, which current limpet controllers would turn into.

 

[metatheurgist]

If FD intended for that then there would be no point in having module slots. They would have just given us ships with a total module space...like they did with Frontier. Which they wisely realised would be a terrible idea for a multi-player game.

 

[zipline]

If FD intended for that then there would be no point in having module slots. They would have just given us ships with a total module space...like they did with Frontier. Which they wisely realised would be a terrible idea for a multi-player game.

That approach would give cmdrs maximum flexibility on how to outfit their ships so why is that such a terrible idea?

 

[Lestat]

That approach would give cmdrs maximum flexibility on how to outfit their ships so why is that such a terrible idea?

I could see super tanks being made Using hull reinforcements or Module reinforcements. So yes it a terrible idea. Maybe next time you use the search feature on splitting Module up.

 

[zipline]

I could see super tanks being made Using hull reinforcements or Module reinforcements. So yes it a terrible idea. Maybe next time you use the search feature on splitting Module up.

Yes, I know its been asked for before, but it does no harm to remind. I have no problem with people building hull tanks if that's what they want to do, you know, play your own way, blaze your own trail.

 

[Lestat]

Yes, I know its been asked for before, but it does no harm to remind. I have no problem with people building hull tanks if that's what they want to do, you know, play your own way, blaze your own trail.

Why not use one of the older topics. So people don't have to repost their views.

 

[[VR] Goooost]

Hi fdev,
Can we have the ability to store multiple smaller opt internal modules in larger slots?
This would mean cmdrs could carry more and get involved in things like distress calls, etc, as I would like to routinely carry things like refuel and repair limpet controllers but just don't have the space.
You could introduce a size 1 slot divider that can be purchased and would allow say 2 size 2 modules to go in a size 5 slot for instance.
o7

Or have an engineer that can split storage while sacrificing space, or take space from one slot and put it into another. So if you wanted bigger shields you could sacrifice some space from a different internal to get there or completely merge the two. Required internals could be done as well but maybe you have to take it from other required internals and cap the modifications at whatever the lowest operating standard is for the sacrificial slot. So you could have a bigger FSD if you take your life support to the smallest size it allows.

 

[zipline]

Or have an engineer that can split storage while sacrificing space, or take space from one slot and put it into another. So if you wanted bigger shields you could sacrifice some space from a different internal to get there or completely merge the two. Required internals could be done as well but maybe you have to take it from other required internals and cap the modifications at whatever the lowest operating standard is for the sacrificial slot. So you could have a bigger FSD if you take your life support to the smallest size it allows.

You dared to ask for the moon cmdr, yes I agree, an engineering solution like you have laid out would be even better.

 

[Micha]

I think you need to start thinking about what you are going to do that day and set up your ship at that task at hand.

Congratulations; you've -completely- missed the OP's point.

Having said that, there are serious balance issues with just letting us split/rearrange/merge slots. Mostly because certain modules can be stacked. Most of these problems would disappear if you prevented module stacking. Which would cause no end of outcry, so that's a non-starter.

However, specifically for limpets and scanners, there are far too many types and they unnecessarily restrict adhoc gameplay. Nobody is ever going to fit fuel limpets just to go and rescue NPCs. Or mount -all- the scanners (and have a ship able to do so) so that when they stumble across an interesting find while exploring they don't have to do a 20kLY round-trip to return with the correct scanner. So yeah, my vote is definitely for some mechanism to let us fit more of these modules to let us engage more with the game world in an adhoc instead of preplanned manner.

 

[Lestat]

Congratulations; you've -completely- missed the OP's point.

No congratulations for asking to have everything in a ship even a Swimming pool. LAME.

However, specifically for limpets and scanners, there are far too many types and they unnecessarily restrict adhoc gameplay. Nobody is ever going to fit fuel limpets just to go and rescue NPCs. Or mount -all- the scanners (and have a ship able to do so) so that when they stumble across an interesting find while exploring they don't have to do a 20kLY round-trip to return with the correct scanner. So yeah, my vote is definitely for some mechanism to let us fit more of these modules to let us engage more with the game world in an adhoc instead of preplanned manner.

One thing I hated about Skyrim. You had one player. That can do Everything at the same time. They had 10 different sets of armour and 15 different weapons for a different type of combat. Plus whatever they decided to pick up.

Now we have Elite. With an Extra 1 or two Modules with the last update depending on the ship. Players can decide what they want to do. On my Mining Python. I could remove one or two Module that deals with Cargo and add a Fuel transfer unit and a Repair hull unit with the extra Module slot and still have a slot to spare.

See Micha Players has to use common sense when they build a ship and ask them self what they want to do. Whatever they add you have to deal with a sacrifice on other things. This game is not SKYRIM.

 

[Agony_Aunt]

It would kind of defeat the whole module size thing, which is there to restrict loadouts.

If they changed it, they might as well go back to the old system we had in the earlier games where you just had total capacity and you could outfit how you wanted up to that tonnage and whatever was left was cargo space.

I presume FD moved away from that system for a reason, probably balance.

I still remember my Panther Clipper with 400t worth of shield boosters with much fondness.

 

[Sylow]

I wouldn't mind if limpets would be converted from modules to software or something. There's little relevance if somebody can launch prospectors and fuel transfer limpets. Only for very few limpets (hatch breaker) there's relevance in player interaction and only for a few more (removing caustic damage and hull repair) combat setups could ever so slightly be affected.

For the rest: no go, sorry. The current scaling of modules and how engineers work would make this madness. Just picture a big ship, where you split down one of the bigger slots to put a pack of fully engineered HRPs in there. Reaching the resist cap with just one slot used, while also getting a pile of hull from that. I think that just asking for players to not take damage any more would be the more sensible request...

 

[zipline]

I see many concerns here about shield & hull tanks, but stacking all that gear adds weight, or power draw, or both, so there are still downsides and balance.

 

[Micha]

No congratulations for asking to have everything in a ship even a Swimming pool. LAME.
...
See Micha Players has to use common sense when they build a ship and ask them self what they want to do. Whatever they add you have to deal with a sacrifice on other things. This game is not SKYRIM.

That is a separate topic. And yes, you have a valid point for it, but it is a separate (although related) topic from the OP's.

We can debate the pros and cons as to whether we should only allow highly specialised ships and how that impacts interacting with the game world which has been expanding since the original release. Not only do we have far more items to interact with, we also have far more equipment with which to do so. Whereas the ships have barely changed. Yes, we've gotten a few bits and bobs added but the increase in equipment has outranked the increase in slots/built-ins by a large margin.

At the end of the day, unless you're flying one of the bigger ships (and yes, your mining Python qualifies), you are incredibly restricted in what you can and can't interact with for a particular loadout. Constantly having to duck back into a station (assuming you're near one which, for most explorers, is not the case) is just a PITA just to interact with a USS or <thing> which you've just encountered is something most players won't do.

Thus most of the content added by the Developers does not get interacted with. And Content which doesn't get interacted with appears to get no further development.

The original Elite was all about being a lone wolf in a small multipurpose ship, the Cobra MkIII. A ship which, while not perfect at anything in particular, could hold its own in most situations. That is gone. These days you have the uber-builds for a specific purpose, the min-maxed Combateers or Traders or Miners. Flying without shields just to cram 4 more tonnes of cargospace in? Seriously? Or stacked with 20 SCB's? Ridiculous. I can't stand Munchkin games personally.


Please bear in mind I'm not advocating a complete free-for-all here; so no ships which can be a complete miner,trader,fighter,etc all in one. But I am advocating for letting us add more of the tools which just let us interact with stuff in the game world. Which is scanners and limpets.

 

[Velixar]

Um the python a medium ship not a large ship. I don't think small or medium ships should be able to do all. Being small or medium-sized ships should have some limitation.

 

[Ethaidan]

I see many concerns here about shield & hull tanks, but stacking all that gear adds weight, or power draw, or both, so there are still downsides and balance.

Actually, you couldn't be more wrong. Just for an example...

One 5D HRP, G5 HD with Deep Plating: 738 Armour, 15% damage resistances, 22.4t
One 2D HRP, G5 HD with Deep Plating: 359 Armour, 14% damage resistances, 2.8t

So, the same armour 738 vs 718, but 15% vs 28%, and 22.4t vs 5.6t - that's a massive drop in weight. You get the same massive weight reduction with minimal shield loss and no power draw increase with 5D Shield R vs 2D Shield R.

This idea would be the worst defensive power creep yet, unless you want every single PvP ship to be able to keep/increase their current hull & shield levels while adding a massive speed boost. So, no.

 

[zipline]

Actually, you couldn't be more wrong. Just for an example...

One 5D HRP, G5 HD with Deep Plating: 738 Armour, 15% damage resistances, 22.4t
One 2D HRP, G5 HD with Deep Plating: 359 Armour, 14% damage resistances, 2.8t

So, the same armour 738 vs 718, but 15% vs 28%, and 22.4t vs 5.6t - that's a massive drop in weight. You get the same massive weight reduction with minimal shield loss and no power draw increase with 5D Shield R vs 2D Shield R.

This idea would be the worst defensive power creep yet, unless you want every single PvP ship to be able to keep/increase their current hull & shield levels while adding a massive speed boost. So, no.

But really that is a bug or just a bad implementation. The fact that multiple smaller modules can provide the same advantages as one larger module but with much lower disadvantages has always felt like a nonsense to me and I would expect that to be adjusted if what I have asked for was built because it is wrong now and would just be exaggerated then.