Feature Idea: Ammunition Restock Limpets / Ammo Stock Module

So are trying to convince your self and others that the Basic Synthesis is not replenishing ammunition? It does and it uses Common easy to get Minerals.

We don't need an Ammo Tank. If you want to stay out in combat longer start use Synthesis and start mixing your weapon build some with lasers. Or if you want to stay out forever then use lasers only.
I think you are ignoring the fact that not everyone has ready access to synthesis or the associated materials for it. Horizons is a notional pre-requisite and the OP's suggestion need not be dependent on Horizons.
 
So are trying to convince your self and others that the Basic Synthesis is not replenishing ammunition? It does and it uses Common easy to get Minerals.

We don't need an Ammo Tank. If you want to stay out in combat longer start use Synthesis and start mixing your weapon build some with lasers. Or if you want to stay out forever then use lasers only.
We don't need repair limpets, fuel limpets, healing lasers, or ammunition-based weapons either, apparently. I didn't realize that if I wanted to balance my loadout towards longevity at the opportunity cost of more efficient modules, all I should do is fly a specific weapon type.

We also don't need Fleet Carriers - yet there is huge interest in them. We didn't need new mining tools, yet they have been heralded as excellent additions to the gameplay. We don't need the Krait Mk. II or Krait Phantom, nor any of the 'alliance' ships by Lakon - we were fighting Thargoids just fine with FDLs and Pythons, and exploring away in Anacondas and mining away in Asp Explorers.

We don't need repair and reboot - don't get caught in stars and fly safely.
We don't need synthesis boost - don't pick fights where you need more firepower than you have.
We don't need synthesis refill - don't pick fights when you're low on ammo
We don't need synthesis for life support - fly to station if you lost your glass / don't lose it in deep space you knucklehead
We don't need FSS, there's nothing wrong with ADS and super-cruising to every single planet you hope has signals worth seeing
We don't need distributor settings - just use the setup you have and manage your power levels, not charge rates
We don't need landing gear, it's fluff feature with more button presses involved
We don't need external lights - just leave them on all the time
We don't need night vision - your lights are always on anyways
We don't need headlook or VR - just turn your ship you lazy bum
We don't need six axis flight control, just 2D - Star Fox was a hit, why reinvent the wheel?
We don't need other weapons or sizes - just use lasers of one size and the best shot wins

We don't need an ammo tank you say. Hmm. There's a lot in this game you don't need but it'd sure be a boring game if it wasn't there, wouldn't it?
Go play Pong - I hear it has exactly the bare minimum materials to play.
 
I think you are ignoring the fact that not everyone has ready access to synthesis or the associated materials for it. Horizons is a notional pre-requisite and the OP's suggestion need not be dependent on Horizons.
To be honest, I hadn't even considered that nugget...but you're right. There is no ammo replenishment function for non-horizons owners. Huh.

I guess I just take new features for granted.
 
NOTE FOR THREAD

I forgot to include the discussion surrounding PAs, Railguns, and Torpedoes as not being restockable given their unique nature relative to other weapon types as well as acknowledging the existing engineering mechanics for PAs and Railguns in regards to ammo restocking. As stated in OP (now edited), I don't think the module should be limited in any way but highly encourage discussion around this topic.
I would also have to say no to the Op idea. A lot of the weapons you described can be considered one shot wonders. They should also be limited suppled in use.
 
To be honest, I hadn't even considered that nugget...but you're right. There is no ammo replenishment function for non-horizons owners. Huh.

I guess I just take new features for granted.
Personally, I rarely use nor see the need to use synthesis - I do on occassions though but more often than not just for my SRV(s).

Occassionally, I have used synthesis for either missiles or heat sinks but only occasionally.
 
Personally, I rarely use nor see the need to use synthesis - I do on occassions though but more often than not just for my SRV(s).

Occassionally, I have used synthesis for either missiles or heat sinks but only occasionally.
I used to mostly explore, and I was always surprised that Exploring isn't very dangerous unless you're not paying attention. Ironically, given how boring exploring can be if you're not in it for sight-seeing, not paying attention can happen a lot. Even then, same - I used synthesis for heatsinks (once we had them) or patching up my SRV because I like driving long distances to change the pace when in the black.

In combat, it's got its perks for sure - the PvP crowd particularly has a love/hate relationship with it because it does affect gameplay balance so much, but in a rather bizarre fashion with using menus mid-battle and requiring material farming. Synthesis can be used for ammo restock, but hardly anyone uses it for this - they use it for the bonuses. Currently, you don't need ammo in the black (which is a real shame in my opinion) so you're pretty much always within a few jumps of most combat. The Gnosis was a rare example, but it had restocking aboard.

Would have been quite interesting if it hadn't...but that would have required this feature to prevent a full-on riot, lol.
But, that's kinda my point: what if this feature had existed and the Gnosis had been rendered inoperable - no fuel, repairs, or restock?

Now you have a recipe for a rescue-effort from the bubble - not just a bunch of ticked off commanders with largely non-combat ships sitting around as Thargoids bottle them up. Missed Opportunities.
 
I am going to just start picking at the Topic. First, I agree we don't need another Limpet controller so why ask to add another one?
To use the Ammo Stock Module, you will go to module list and select the desired weapon to reload. In addition to the usual options will be 'Reload'. Selecting this deactivates the weapon and begins the reloading process, which takes twice as long as when the weapon is online. The reload can be interrupted if the weapon is powered on prematurely. Once fully reloaded, you power the weapon back up and get back to shooting!

Ammunition in the Ammo Stock Module is quantified in 'units' much like the AFMU - it doesn't carry 'X missiles, X small rounds, etc.' but just a raw 'unit count'. The cost of replenishing ammo is dependent on the weapon type and size of the weapon. This is not a detailed list or researched count...just an example for explanatory purposes:
Just like we have right now with synthesis right? Just with no Grind. You know I feel Mining the minerals levels playing field. It prevent players having unlimited ammo so they have to mine for more minerals.

By providing these two modules, support ships can be outfitted to extend the longevity of a wing in the field. Obviously support oriented ships like the Keelback (and other SLF capable ships, to be honest) can rely on their optionals to support their wing and fight from afar. Wings of commanders engaging in combat zones can greatly increase their staying power (and enjoyment) if a commander will play the role of support.

Thoughts?
Yes a a few I can see this exploited in Powerplay and I would assume in BG in a Wing. We will have ships that stay in a area indefinitely. A type 10 or Cutter that can Repair the Hull and Supply Ammo. Shoot they don't even have to be in the same wing to repair hulls. So I bet you would not need a wing to Supplying Ammo.

I could also see 1 player exploit running 2 computer So he has that extra ship in a combat zone or Res site doing nothing other than Repair and Rearmed. Bummer I don't have a few computers to exploit this or even Elite Dangerous on a PC :(. I am only an X box. I could also see more Open mode solo players moving to Solo only and PVE because Wing players have to much of advantage.


You know I think frontier trying to keep some thing limited for a reason.
 
Wisely use your ammo padawan. There is no excuse.
You can't have unlimited ammo like Yosemite Sam and Elmer Fudd.
If you are paying attention to the proposal it is not suggesting "unlimited ammo" at all, merely a means to increase available stocks via means other than synthesis. This would have value as part of the base game since synthesis requires horizons.

As for the Limpet controller part being unnecessary, you could say the same for a number of existing limpet controllers and at least some other ship upgrades.
  1. Fuel Limpets - manage your fuel appropriately, no explicit need for it
  2. Cargo Limpets - pick up the items yourself, no explicit need for it
  3. Hull repair Limpets - learn to not get shot, no explicit need for it
  4. AFMU - don't over heat and learn not to get shot, no explicit need for it
I could go on with numerous other examples. The only valid arguments against the proposal would be purely relating to balance rather than anything else but the OP seems to be willing to adapt their proposal to address any balance related concerns.
 
Last edited:
I could also see 1 player exploit running 2 computer So he has that extra ship in a combat zone or Res site doing nothing other than Repair and Rearmed.
Not necessarily a valid argument, in CZs/RSs you would need to have continuous control of both ships simultaneously which would mean two players would be required in most cases.

Further more, their proposal includes/included provisions for the single player having an auto-reload facility thus it would not necessarily just benefit wings of ships.

[EDIT]I am not a big fan of their proposal, but I do see the merits to FD implementing it or something like it. Balancing would be the key concern of course but it could be done.[/EDIT]
 
Not necessarily a valid argument, in CZs/RSs you would need to have continuous control of both ships simultaneously which would mean two players would be required in most cases.
It not hard to run two Computer at the same time. The Ammo box (ship) has to do is logs on when your Combat ship need ammo and log off when you are full so it not in use most of the time. Frontier will have to Move that Ammo box (ship) 5 or 8 stars away or a set LS to prevent Cheating. I am looking at a real exploit. Let say the person lag and logs off. Even if they had just one of the modules the Op suggesting they are sent 2 to 5 systems away or a set LS. Is that fair.

Just reading up on Cheating. They have this thing called Dual boxing. It can run on a single computer or multiple computers and run more than one account using one set of controls.

If they add this feature. I going to have to find a way to get multiple computers and Accounts. Just to show people the real issue.
 
Just reading up on Cheating. They have this thing called Dual boxing. It can run on a single computer or multiple computers and run more than one account using one set of controls.
Your concern on the most part is moot in regard to this specific proposal though - and if you talking about players having an advantage over others then there is already Synthesis and Engineering that is exclusive to Horizon owners. The proposal put forward by the OP is no more imbalanced than that and may allow the associated balance concerns to be at least partly addressed.

Further more, you are seemingly ignoring my second point about the proposal's provisions for single players too.

The OP is clearly NOT proposing a situation that could constitute infinite ammo and despite your protestations to the contrary, without using some form of botting software (in contravention of the EULA/ToS) it would not be feasible to actually control more than one ship at a time in anything but the most trivial of cases. The impact of multi-crew and a single player with multiple accounts is a far greater concern since they get a free pip for each crew member (not sure exactly how it is balanced but my impression is that it effectively counts as about 15% extra PD availability per additional PC crew member).
 
Last edited:
I am going to just start picking at the Topic. First, I agree we don't need another Limpet controller so why ask to add another one?
Just like we have right now with synthesis right? Just with no Grind. You know I feel Mining the minerals levels playing field. It prevent players having unlimited ammo so they have to mine for more minerals.

Yes a a few I can see this exploited in Powerplay and I would assume in BG in a Wing. We will have ships that stay in a area indefinitely. A type 10 or Cutter that can Repair the Hull and Supply Ammo. Shoot they don't even have to be in the same wing to repair hulls. So I bet you would not need a wing to Supplying Ammo.

I could also see 1 player exploit running 2 computer So he has that extra ship in a combat zone or Res site doing nothing other than Repair and Rearmed. Bummer I don't have a few computers to exploit this or even Elite Dangerous on a PC :(. I am only an X box. I could also see more Open mode solo players moving to Solo only and PVE because Wing players have to much of advantage.


You know I think frontier trying to keep some thing limited for a reason.
On new limpet contollers - that's addressed near the very beginning. I don't want more limpet controllers, the proposal is merely described in existing gameplay terms. Like most sane folks, I want combined limpet controllers (or a programmable universal to just be done with it).

Synthesis has already been shown to be an unnecessary burden for the purposes of reloads in the field, and that its principle design is for ammunition damage boosting not reloading. Longterm reloading only became a viable solution with the introduction of materials storage expansion. That said, you're right - you can reload a fair number of times with synthesis if you put the time in to grind out materials.
  • Grinding out materials for the purposes of longevity in the field for reloading (not exploring or mining) defeats the purpose of the longevity. You traded down in time savings: it takes longer to grind those materials than fly to most restock stations.
  • Forcing mining gameplay (surface or space) onto combat pilots is out of line with 'choose your career' thinking. We're talking reloads, one of the most basic functions of combat, being relegated exclusively to docking or farming via another career path to be extended
On exploits - these are excellent points, make no mistake, but the same logic applies to SLFs in general: a second account need only launch an SLF with hired expert or higher NPC and set them to attack on sight. Multiply as suits you. Repair Limpets are also abusable via this method, which implies they need a nerf - or you're creating the presumption of a problem not yet documented. I'm not saying it can't happen - again, excellent point - but you presume it will happen at a rate significant enough to warrant developer intervention.

All of these points are focused exclusively on solo commanders and continue to ignore the benefits for wing gameplay. As for wings, yes, this feature along with the aforementioned features can all be used to radically improve the staying power of a wing. That's the point. There should be inherent advantages to teamwork that go beyond combined skillsets. Repair Limpets and Fuel Limpets are existing examples of this - literally, we're missing only one other ingredient: ammunition. After that, you're left with power-plant repair which I can't imagine will ever be a thing for obvious reasons.

I have to admit, I'm surprised at the arguments against the feature all focus on explaining synthesis as the reason for nixing implementation. Bringing up exploits is the first halfway thought-out excuse to not implement, although it ignores the already existing cases that can also be abused (yet I've not seen a single thread complain about them...)

Once Again: synthesis is not an excuse to nix implementation of this feature.
 
Synthesis has already been shown to be an unnecessary burden for the purposes of reloads in the field, and that its principle design is for ammunition damage boosting not reloading. Longterm reloading only became a viable solution with the introduction of materials storage expansion. That said, you're right - you can reload a fair number of times with synthesis if you put the time in to grind out materials.
Synthesis

Synthesis is a mechanism by which different Materials can be combined to quickly create ammunition or resource refills for various modules. Synthesis recipes can be accessed in the Inventory tab of the right HUD panel, or via the Modules tab by selecting a specific module. Most Synthesis recipes have three variants: Basic, Standard, and Premium. The Standard and Premium variants often feature beneficial bonus effects, but have greater Material requirements than the Basic recipe.
So I had to look it up. To see if you are right or wrong. Sorry It looks like you are wrong.
 
Last edited:
Synthesis has already been shown to be an unnecessary burden for the purposes of reloads in the field, and that its principle design is for ammunition damage boosting not reloading.
False - in the general sense, if the primary intent was damage boosting then we would have synthesis for energy weapons too. Damage/Efficiency boosting is a secondary effect.

Once Again: synthesis is not an excuse to nix implementation of this feature.
Agreed - your proposal would be roughly equivalent to the basic level of ammo synthesis and depending on implementation may be not as effective due to proposed damage reduction factors under at least some circumstances.
 
In RPGs there is the "holy trinity" of tank, dps, and healer.

There are variations, but the healer usually has buff functions as well. In Elite, with heal beams, repair limpets, refuel limpets and corrosion fixer limpets, we do have the healer role, but it lacks stunlock removal, and other condition clears (snare, cripple, armor hardness debuff, shield debuff, etc. clears) .

Actual game designers layout how to create these roles, and work deeply to balance buffs, debuffs and condition clearance skills/gear. When these mechanics are balanced, success and failure usually comes down to player skill and synergistic cooperation.

Some games have hybrid build mechanics that allow pve players to be somewhat self reliant and manage in mild pvp settings.

The designers in this game have an extremely limited understanding of how to build balanced pvp mechanics, and have largely ignored decades of past work on this. The current state of pvp IMO in ED is an unbalanced mess, being extremely heavy on the snare,cripple, debuff and fairly weak on condition clearance skills and gear. This leads to alpha strike heavy builds.

While adding an ammo supply boat to the game seems like a nice idea, these kinds of individual buffs can add to the imbalance. Game combat needs to be deeply theory crafted before implementation. I hope ED 2.0 takes a deep dive into balanced combat mechanics.
 
In general, ED is not a PvP focused game thus while PvP is a consideration it will (or should) always take second place to the broader and arguably more important PvE objectives.

The vast majority of PvP games have PvE focused environments completely segregated - FD did not choose that route though they did add a PvP arena to support properly balanced PvP.

In the precise context of this discussion/proposal though, it is unlikely to have that big an effect given we already have Synthesis. If done as a base game feature, it may actually help to redress a current imbalance (at least in part) between horizon and non-horizon owners.
 
In general, ED is not a PvP focused game thus while PvP is a consideration it will (or should) always take second place to the broader and arguably more important PvE objectives.

The vast majority of PvP games have PvE focused environments completely segregated - FD did not choose that route though they did add a PvP arena to support properly balanced PvP.

In the precise context of this discussion/proposal though, it is unlikely to have that big an effect given we already have Synthesis. If done as a base game feature, it may actually help to redress a current imbalance (at least in part) between horizon and non-horizon owners.
Even within the context of PVE - dungeons, raids, questing, and sandbox play, the trinity is a thing. Boss mechanics are often designed to confound the synergy or segregate part members. I do support your point about non-horizons players. Horizons is effectively pay to win given the shared game space. My personal preference would be to see support ships have a big role in any future game iteration. The only potential issues with rearm vs. synthesis might be with hi cost rearm weaps like shock cannons hybrid AX or torps. I could see wings of pvp pilots carrying rearm slots to support each other - but who knows, the meta evolves after a change in the mechanics.
 
Even within the context of PVE - dungeons, raids, questing, and sandbox play, the trinity is a thing.
Not exactly relevant to ED - it is first and foremost a solo PvE game with multiplayer an optional component in essence also it is not technically an RPG either.

[OT]The fundamental issue in play is there is a cancerous tendency in MMOs in general to push specific metas as being the only way to play a given game. Such metas typically revolve around the "unholy" trinity that you keep referring to, and often proponents of the metas are offensive and segregational against anyone who does not buy into their favourite meta(s). It happens time and time again across pretty much all MMOs almost without exception - unfortunately ED is not one of those exceptions.[/OT]

As for Horizon being pay to win, I disagree - there are some trolls that build exploit builds that are on the most part undefeatable by anything BUT ultimately, except in such extreme cases even with engineering and synthesis a win is anything but a guarantee.

The concept in this proposal is less about metas as I see it, and more about adding a (circumstantially useful) feature that would have applicability to both the single player and multiplayer case. The prospect of being able to carry additional spare ammo for your preferred weapon(s) is tempting but would need to be balanced carefully.

Personally, I do not see myself making use of it often in my builds (I rarely use synthesis either) because it would take second fiddle to other existing options that I am already forced to compromise on in my builds. I can potentially see wanting to add a missile reload cache to some of my builds, but that is about it. The idea in general should perhaps not be limited to weapons - heat sinks and chaffs (and perhaps to a lesser extent AFMUs) could also benefit from the general mechanic - albeit perhaps in a more limited way.
 
Different Navigational systems.
And have a fabricating system, with AFMS ammo system.
Impacts quantity and quality and module-mass.
 
Top Bottom