Patch Notes Update Elite Dangerous 2.2.03 - Update incoming.

Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.

ATrifleMiffed

A
Mephane said:
Given that the removal was planned to be temporary until (eventually) we get storage, there would not have been a need to touch anything but the blueprints themselves. The commodities could stay as mission rewards, in their markets where they are sold etc., just the blueprints wouldn't ask for them any more.
Click to expand...

That was the original plan, but as of the first 2.2.03 Q&A stream it was changed. Engineer commodities are being removed pretty much permanently (other than beta fish, I assume), and commodity storage is not coming in the foreseeable future. They're going to be either getting rid of mission commodity rewards or repurposing them for use in CGs or as rare goods-style super-valuable stuff that's occasionally handed out and can be sold for a big profit. The new plan does, like I said, entail a lot more work than the old one, which is probably why the removal hasn't been implemented in this patch.
 

Goose4291

Banned
Goose4291
Apos said:
To be fair, a cargo truck is quite durable.

Combat does not necessarily mean durability alone. Except if you are a fed. Then you are allowed to be durable and turn around like a vulture as soon as you buy a FAS with its magic unicorn engines.
Click to expand...

They are in terms of reliability and day to day use, but we're talking about not every day wear and tear, but someone ripping into you with kit designed to kill you. In real world terms what I mean is (and I hate drawing real world analogies due to the inevitable nitpicking they generate).

If you drive over an IED in a tank (something designed to take a kicking, and dish it out with no other considerations) you're likely to survive
If you drive over an IED with a up-armoured transport (something designed to go into light combat situations, and possibly transport people or materials) it's design means you have some chance of surivival
If you drive over an IED with a basic landrover, you're going home in a rubbish bag.

Luniticisi said:
I can say that if I were to drive a Ford transit van, loaded with goodies in an environment where I am likely to be shot at by big guns ..you can bet your best Turnip I'm gonna make that thing as armoured as a tank!
Click to expand...

And that's why you took the 'goodies' previously in a multi-role ship (i.e. an Adder instead of a Hauler, or a Cobra in lieu of a T-6). You compromised some of your cargo space for better survivability in terms of speed, weapons and a little better damage handling capabilities.

Kerrash said:
I get where you are coming from but the balance is that you can't fit a giant cannon to that transit van. :p
Click to expand...

You can't nor should you even try, A transit vans role is to get goods from A to B as cheaply as possible, not be able to absorb a kicking of the highest order when compared to something that potentially until recently could be fighting in a CZ.

My point, is this: I don't see how when there are two ships of a similar (physical) size, that the ship with a smaller hull mass (which means it has less hull plating) is more durable than the heavier one in a combat situation. It makes no sense, particularly in a community that champions the idea of immersion when it comes to say for example, time delayed ship transfers vs. instant ship transfers.
 
Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom