Storage is not needed or wanted. Try a different tack.
I know it's been asked for before but please..........some form of storage!
- Thread starter LOSBOT
- Start date
Lestat
Banned
Well Frontier did not add Cargo storage for this reason. So they must think it an exploit. Try again.
So you are talking about third party websites to justify your views. Nice try. We can look at any game and view exploits. I could get my Forging skill up on Skyrim on any Third-party website, so your point is?
Common sense gameplay is what needed not a short cut.
Storage is not needed or wanted by you. There are clearly people here who at least want it.
Nobody needs EDDB or EDSC or the FSS.
Nobody needs beer or even Elite Dangerous.
Why is it an exploit? How does it affect the game? I've seen no arguments here that show any unwanted effects.
So you play the game without any third-party websites do you? The API was created by Frontier for the express purpose of making them possible. They are a supported feature of the game.
Who needs a third-party website to grind Skyrim forging? Just make jewelry.
If it's 900 tons then it's a wing mission, in a wing mission you can just buy 100 tons at a time from the store, saving the steps of buying 900 tons, putting it in storage, swapping to another ship, taking 100 tons out of storage, delivering it, coming back to get another 100 tons out of storage, rinse and repeat. I would suggest that's almost a nonsensical way to do it when you can just buy 100 tons at a time to deliver.
As I said, bad planning.
But this is Elite
angerous not ELite:"Lets do everything the player base wants rgardless of what effect it will have."What you want is immaterial, waht the devs want is what counts. Now you are free to make suggestions, but endless demanding over and over again of a feature that is obviously not desired or wanted by the devs isn't going to make any difference, it isn't happening at the moment and it may not ever happen.
Of course it's bad planning. I never suggested otherwise. Storage is a simple way to get out of an illogical hole in ED's structure.
I see no mention of the devs in the original comment:
Nobody here is demanding. There are no toys being thrown out of prams. If you are going to bat for the devs then use their arguments. If you don't know their arguments then why muddy the waters with irrelevant supposition? Why not instead give pointers to where the devs denied previous requests? Putting up illogical straw-men just extends the thread unnecessarily.
I agree that storing ships with cargo onboard is a game-breaking exploit. If that is what the devs denied then they had good reason but that is not what we are asking for here. There's an aphorism in the Open Source movement that says "with enough eyballs, all bugs are shallow." Devs are not omniscient gods; they are people like you and me. Hundreds of people together can solve bugs much more easily than a small dev team. It is not only possible but highly likely that we could invent a solution here that the devs did not think of. There may be very good reasons that this suggestion would be unworkable in practice. It might have repercussions that we have not considered, it may require too many changes to the codebase to be practical. But I haven't seen any reasoned arguments here that it would break the game. If it's too hard to implement, then only the devs know that and I haven't seen anyone argue that or point to the devs saying it.
Last edited:
What 'cargo' would people want to store.
Are people flying around with 100's of tonnes of cargo and not wanting to sell it?
As others have said if the problem is to do with missions then check the mission board and ensure you have the correct tool (ship) to do them job.
Not that I am against cargo storage just cannot see what the real benefit is of having loads of stuffz in storage rather than just selling it?
Are people flying around with 100's of tonnes of cargo and not wanting to sell it?
As others have said if the problem is to do with missions then check the mission board and ensure you have the correct tool (ship) to do them job.
Not that I am against cargo storage just cannot see what the real benefit is of having loads of stuffz in storage rather than just selling it?
“For insurance reasons, you can only store one ship at a time containing non-limpet cargo”
This would allow you to:
- Temporarily switch to a ship with no cargo racks in order to reconfigure and then transfer the cargo: eg. for when some scary dudes come after you during a mission and you decide you need a bigger ship for more protection
- Semi-permanently switch from a mining or cargo ship to a dedicated combat ship in order to take a lucrative mission, wing up with friends or even just scout ahead to see how dangerous a particular destination is before taking your other ship there
- Store a ship containing cargo in order to do something else: eg. bored of mining and seen a high-paying passenger mission
- Store as many ships as you like with limpets to stop the ridiculous “limpet dance” currently required.
At the same time you could not then fill another ship with cargo and store that - thus preventing “stockpiling” of any more than one “ships worth” of cargo.
There's been a few persuasive use-cases mentioned.
- You're half-way through a cargo grind and you fancy taking a break to shoot some pirates.
- You've got a hold full of VO and your friend asks you for help.
- You've got mission rewards and limpets taking up hold-space wherever you go even on ships without limpet controllers.
- You decide to take part in a community goal and take a freighter full of expensive cargo only to find the destination is too hot. You manage to high-wake out. You can do the job in a smaller combat-ready ship but it won't hold all the cargo that you've already bought.
- You come back to the bubble in a large freighter with a hold full of void opals and then transfer them to a smaller ship to take them to a good market.
- You store valuable commodities until the market price is high enough.
I can't help but laugh at some of the arguments being described as "exploits" when they seem like common sense conveniences that we have in the real world and in pretty much any virtual one. Yeah, I might want to store my VO in the station but I don't need to wait until the market changes, to earn 1.6B each. There's always stations buying them at that price, so I just fly my VO to that location. It's not an exploit, it's basic supply and demand.
Regardless, I've seen some valid arguments, which have been EASILY addressed (such as not being able to transfer a ship with cargo IN IT). Other than that, most of the arguments are simply "Nobody needs it" which is obviously just your opinion, because apparently many do want that feature, so instead of making absurd claims, tell us your VALID concerns so they can be addressed (which they have been).
The same way you can choose to fly whatever ship you want, if you don't want storage, then YOU can simply choose to NOT store something.
Regardless, I've seen some valid arguments, which have been EASILY addressed (such as not being able to transfer a ship with cargo IN IT). Other than that, most of the arguments are simply "Nobody needs it" which is obviously just your opinion, because apparently many do want that feature, so instead of making absurd claims, tell us your VALID concerns so they can be addressed (which they have been).
The same way you can choose to fly whatever ship you want, if you don't want storage, then YOU can simply choose to NOT store something.
Yeah, I might want to store my VO in the station but I don't need to wait until the market changes, to earn 1.6B each. There's always stations buying them at that price, so I just fly my VO to that location. It's not an exploit, it's basic supply and demand. But I might not want to fly repeatedly to a station with a smaller ship, so I want to dump them in the station and when I have my 900 units, then I'll fly them to the station that's paying 1.6B
Also, there are times when I need to stop mining. If I go back to mining with minerals in my ship, I'm guaranteed to be harassed. I'd like to have the option of dumping it at the station then go back with nothing but limpets in my ship's hold. I successfully mined those. Why should I be forced to keep carrying them around, waiting to be killed? That's like walking through a bad neighborhood, waving a huge stack of cash around. That's why we have banks. Your job is to get it to the bank for safe keeping.
Lame arguments from the anti-storage group.
Feel free to not use it then if we get it. To each his own.
Ok well
1) Half way through a cargo grind - well sell what you have in your hold and change ships - you can then change back n pick up the rest of the cargo.
2) Well you will need to find somewhere to sell them before you can go help your friend.
3) Well surely again sell the mission rewards - as for limpets kind of a fair point I guess - although how many limpets do you want and how much does it cost to re-stock
4) So you need to find a system which you can sell the surplus cargo and then move to your smaller ship
5) There is supposed to be some danger in flying around with loads of stuff - you need to make a beeline for the nearest market you want to sell the VO's at and hope you do not get pirated.
6) How high is high enough? You could end up with hundred's of thousands of tons of stuff just sitting in warehouses and you will never bother to get round to selling it.
I guess you are supposed to be trading stuff not running a warehouse.
Untlimately if they did have storage then it would cost you and then generally half of the things you say would just not end up profitable - e.g. yeah you could store your mission rewards - but you may as well just sell em cos they just cost you money sat in storage.
I think I just realized why they didn't include storage (and by extension, player made bases).
It would require server storage that they don't have.
Space stations are not persistent. If you leave the instance, go somewhere else and come back all the commodities are reset to their default value (unless someone else is in the instance holding it).
The only ways to do player storage are either a) on the player's PC (HUGE security risk, given that there ARE people who will hack the files to give themselves an advantage) or b) server side storage, which could be quite extensive given players tendency to hoard everything under the sun.
Thus, it's a cost issue. Are you willing to pay real money for this feature, because it will cost FDev money, on an ongoing basis, to implement it securely.
It would require server storage that they don't have.
Space stations are not persistent. If you leave the instance, go somewhere else and come back all the commodities are reset to their default value (unless someone else is in the instance holding it).
The only ways to do player storage are either a) on the player's PC (HUGE security risk, given that there ARE people who will hack the files to give themselves an advantage) or b) server side storage, which could be quite extensive given players tendency to hoard everything under the sun.
Thus, it's a cost issue. Are you willing to pay real money for this feature, because it will cost FDev money, on an ongoing basis, to implement it securely.
How does NMS do it.
No idea what features are or are not in NMS, never played it.
Well it is not a persistent online universe in the way ED is - so most of that stuff is stored locally on the machine I would guess..???
Yeah this will be true - you will just end up with 'millions' of tons of commodities in storage - and flooding those onto the market could result in all sorts of crazy things going on with prices.
Are you sure about that? I believe that bases can be persistant. Honestly I dont think they will take up that much space server wise. It will just be a list of numbers (co-ordinates, layout etc) and the rest will be stored on your computer.
Nope!