You said a lot in this 84 pages, but nothing that convinced me. But don't worry, I couldn't convince you either, so all what's left is the brutal voice of the majority or - the decision of the devs.
All there ever is is the decision of the devs.
You said a lot in this 84 pages, but nothing that convinced me. But don't worry, I couldn't convince you either, so all what's left is the brutal voice of the majority or - the decision of the devs.
There is no good reasen why both systems should exist either. It's all down to personal preferences.There is no logic to that at all, there is no good reason why the two systems could not co-exist.
[EDIT]Also there is the point you would probably annoy most FSS users unless you add yet another optional slot to EVERY ship in ED.[/EDIT]
There is no good reasen why both systems should exist either. It's all down to personal preferences.
That's just an empty statement that never was thoroughly explained but about 500 times repeated, which makes up for a good brain washing attempt at best. Followed by a very speculative weak argument. It's not an optional slot as you comfortably say, it's the consequence any decision should bring. You want more options but no consequences? Good luck with that. In the end you'll get nothing cause you are hanging your fruits way too high. But that's your decision that I have to accept of course.
I would think that an explorer sets out to be an explorer, and therefore designs the ship with this in mind. As such, I'd prefer to see a situation where ships have only very basic discovery tools. If you want to explore to a greater degree, then it should require using dedicated ship modules and utilities - not in-built systems and scanners (I can't stand all these scanners that have been added).
If a ship has no exploration tools available, it should not be possible to explore a system, except by a very drawn out process.
That's true with all modules in the optional slots. But I can't think off the top of my head any modules with overlapping functionality that can coexist in the optional slots. That's the difference.
Then explain. If you can't, then I will assume you are talking out of the place where the sun doesn't shine.
That was the way it used to be, FD wrecked that - FSS is the new basic.I would think that an explorer sets out to be an explorer, and therefore designs the ship with this in mind. As such, I'd prefer to see a situation where ships have only very basic discovery tools.
That's true with all modules in the optional slots. But I can't think off the top of my head any modules with overlapping functionality that can coexist in the optional slots. That's the difference.
I would think that an explorer sets out to be an explorer, and therefore designs the ship with this in mind. As such, I'd prefer to see a situation where ships have only very basic discovery tools. If you want to explore to a greater degree, then it should require using dedicated ship modules and utilities - not in-built systems and scanners (I can't stand all these scanners that have been added).
If a ship has no exploration tools available, it should not be possible to explore a system, except by a very drawn out process.
Well, if FD fixes this, I'd like them to re-level the PvP playing field to pre-engineer standards. Otherwise it isn't right. You explorers get to go back to the way it was, us PvP'ers have the same right.
They'd have to remove the engineers to do it. That's the point. They aren't willing to remove the engineers.Create a thread in the Suggestions forum. I'm sure you'll get plenty of support. I certainly wouldn't object.
They'd have to remove the engineers to do it. That's the point. They aren't willing to remove the engineers.
What argument? I am just pointing something out. When people say these things, they need to realise it can be used the other way, which it can be.There's no other module that can't coexist with every other module, so you'd need to justify why the FSS/ADS situation justifies being different. Your argument so far has come down to "I don't like it", which isn't particularly convincing.
You won't because you can't. The picture has no context with what I was saying. It's meaningless.Not being able to and not wanting aren't the same things.
You won't because you can't. The picture has no context with what I was saying. It's meaningless.
Ba ha ha ha. That's rich coming from you.Nah, I can, I'm just not willing to because I know you'll ignore it and get confused.