Well, it's possible. However, seeing how people leave FDev. Ed Lewis, Sally Moore, and others. I'm really starting to worry about both FDev and the elite (especially for her since there is no specific information on her future (I said this earlier, already).
o7
(just kidding)Is this in-game or Britain's version of Woodstock?
The slots could easily change name from military slots to defensive slots. Combat ships would still tend to have more of them, yes, but that's not the problem. The problem when two ships of the same model are horrifically mis-matched because one person has various modules needed to engage with the have world (cargo, srv, limpets, etc), while the other person has stuffed every slot with SCBs, Hill reinforcement, etc.
This causes problems even in a strictly PvE context, too: consider the enormous range of health a given ship can have, everywhere from stock, A-rated, engineered, to fully-stuffed with defensive modules. FDev has to balanced their PvE encounter difficulty around that huge range of health. What might be a legitimate threat to one Anaconda is a totally and completely trivial annoyance to another.
Restricting defensive modules to military slots only (or whatever you want to name them) would mean
1) Ships would have a far more predictable amount of health, giving FDev far more control over balancing the defensive capabilities of a ship, and make it far more practical to tune NPC threats
2) A ship can be fully capable of putting up a fight, without needing to sacrifice their ability to engage with the rest of the content in E
What makes sense in reality (warships just being set up to fight), doesn't always equate to the best game play. The more an encounter is decided at the fitting screen, the less thrilling and exciting a given encounter is. The more PvE equipment you have to give up to be on even-footing with a PvP aggressor, the larger the wedge that driven between the two groups. The greater the range in power and durability a given ship can have, the less practical it is to tailor NPCs to an appropriate threat level.You pretty much described the die-hard PVP crowd there. They are the min-maxers, the ones who put tiny FSDs on their ships to gain a few m/s extra speed, so they brought this pretty much on themselves. (Sorry, not being spiteful, just calling them as I see them.)
I USED to have stuff like collectors etc. on my fighting ships, but now, given that I might go to Open, I stripped all that out, put in the biggest SCBs on my corvette, and crammed it full of HRPs and MRPs.
It makes sense, too. A warship is bound to be geared towards that job, and ONLY that job. What on Earth would I want with THREE size seven slots if I couldn't put SCBs in two of them? Cargo racks? Nope. Warship. I DO have a corvette outfitted as a cargo hauler, but my fighting corvette is highly specialised.
I understand that balance is necessary, but the point is: warships should have a clear, dedicated advantage over less specialised ships, and, frankly, I yes, you could, obviously, severely restrict SCBs, HRPs, MRPs, SBs and so forth. What would happen? Inevitably, the PVPers would quickly find a way to max out their ships, and this time, the ordinary folks (like me) would have far less defences at their fingertips.
Naw, I think I'll pass.
It's the same mission statement that came with Beyond. But this time it has no content & only a thinly veiled rebuke of those who pushed the petition in the guise of improvements. They have leaned a lot from the Trump administration. 'Get the suckers to see backwards as forwards'
Her as in Sally? She left to take up a new job abroad. If you check her twitter account, looks great.
It will close by itself when the fleet carriers will be released.
![[VR] DDM_Reaper20](https://forums-cdn.zaonce.net/data/avatars/m/44/44021.jpg?1588332101){kind=avatar}
