Make the new "free" slots "NON-MILITARY" only to help prevent yet more power creep/tanking.

Was there any reason why FDev didn't just fit the ADC and SCA to the Sidey and not make them available on larger ships?
Since they are intended to be an aid for new players to help them overcome the learning curve there's no need for them on anything other than the Sidewinder. Once you buy a new ship, the training wheels come off. That would have avoided all the fuss about free slots and balancing and whatever else we're moaning about.
The whole thing is silly IMO. While I'm actually an advocate for Supercruise assist (DC can be retconned for all I care), it makes no sense that cheap, tiny ships come with advanced autopilots and the large ships do not, as this is a bit backwards. An old Cessna may come with a basic autopilot, but nothing like what comes installed in an Airbus. I never went for my pilot's license, but I'm pretty sure you learn how to fly before you learn how to use the AP.

What Frontier should have done is have you fly with a partner in an Adder to begin with (their Adder, not yours), who basically teaches you how to fly and helps you run your first missions. Once you rank up, then they gift you with your own Sidewinder, and then you're on your own. This would be similar to the Escape from Coldharbour in ESO. This could have also replaced the out-of-game training simulations with an in-game "I'm actually playing and earning credits while learning" tutorial. You know, like almost every other game written...
 
Was there any reason why FDev didn't just fit the ADC and SCA to the Sidey and not make them available on larger ships?
Since they are intended to be an aid for new players to help them overcome the learning curve there's no need for them on anything other than the Sidewinder. Once you buy a new ship, the training wheels come off. That would have avoided all the fuss about free slots and balancing and whatever else we're moaning about.
I don't know what they're doing when this seems so easily "done in a number of ways better" IMHO...

IMHO they've just gone down the design/development route of least resistance even it's a bit messy and ultimately a bit counter productive.

ps: Combining the ADC and SCA into single module would also have meant less of this needless "slot creep" issue too.
 
Last edited:
I suppose this shouldn't come as any kind of a surprise though, in a game where a 1A Collector Controller weighs 2t and a 7A Collector Controller (which, at worst, is presumably 4 x 1A Collectors welded together) weighs 128t. 🤷‍♂️

1A controller weighs 2^1 tonnes, a 7A weighs 2^7 tonnes, powers of 2 is how developers think - 3A is 2^3t and 5A is 2^5t as well.

The number of controllable limpets is only increased by a factor of 4 but the range is also nearly doubled so it's not just 4 1As stuck together.
 
Well, a couple of hours till the new tanking slots go live... :)

I wonder who used to work at Frontier as regards managing ED balancing? :)
 
Ummm, nobody?

Ever. ;)
I'll swear at one point, before Engineers just gave up with any real attempt to balance the game, there was someone sitting there carefully weighing up weapons, hull and shield strength?

Maybe they left when SCBs were introduced?

I give up... The tidy solution is within easy grasp as to how to offer the DC, ADC and SCA... But nope... Throw out free slots in some odd non-productive attempt to offset their needless slot cost, with seemingly little/no care/understanding for the counter productive outcome(s)...

Given how needlessly half-baked the mining revamp release was, this is just more of the same really I guess...

/rant
 
Well the new slots are here, so perhaps, just perhaps one of two things exist, either frontier see no issue with the 'powercreep' potential or perhaps, just perhaps, they actually know what they are doing :D

I wonder what was needlessly half baked about the mining revamp, so far i'm enjoying mining...
 
Well, a couple of hours till the new tanking slots go live... :)

I wonder who used to work at Frontier as regards managing ED balancing? :)
TBH you should probably ask who there even plays the game the way advanced users (aka. those who engage in powerplay, PvP combat, BGS etc.) do. They very, very rarely consider their updates from that perspective. I can't remember who it was, but that person said that most, if not all, of FDev's streams are them doing low-level mission stuff in low-level ships. I am in a state of mind where I believe that completely without verifying it. No one who has stepped foot in High CZ, PvP or even traded in Open would have though more HRPs or MRPs or instakill tools would in any way enhance the game.

If I could make a single change in E:D design I would force some of the devs to sit down, pick a ship, get themselves enough money and credits to unlock a Corvette with prismatics, engineer it fully, participate in CG in open, and finally engineer a fully modified late game FdL or Chief. Then take that out for a spin and engage in combat in both CZs and PvP. Without cheating in any materials or ranks to themselves. Refer ANY gameplay changes to these guys and watch their PTSD kick in.
 
Well the new slots are here, so perhaps, just perhaps one of two things exist, either frontier see no issue with the 'powercreep' potential or perhaps, just perhaps, they actually know what they are doing :D
3) Or FD have never really taken note of the requests/suggestions from posters that these modules should not use regular slots?
4) Or FD don't understand/agree yet more slots = more tanking in combat builds etc?
5) Or FD simply went ahead with the simplest implementation of the mechanics, with the least resistance, not (overly) concerned with the/any negative outcomes.

Personally, I think (5)...

I wonder what was needlessly half baked about the mining revamp, so far i'm enjoying mining...
sigh

Try going out for income orientated mining and not playing the motherlode-->motherlode-->motherlode game? Try going out using the subsurface missiles to make a worthwhile difference to mining? Try going out using the PWA to find stuff to mine, other than motherlodes? Try seeing if the Hotspot depletion is a meaningful well designed "thing"? etc?

No one is saying new mining does not have its fun elements, or doesn't offer improvements. But personally I would say, because of numerous issues (which I cannot fathom how they made it through design meetings and internal testing), it is needlessly half-baked in areas, as if basically just not fully thought through. A bit like throwing out free slots just to offset the needless cost of the DC/ADC/SCA, never mind the seemingly slicker/better alternative solutions.
 
TBH you should probably ask who there even plays the game the way advanced users (aka. those who engage in powerplay, PvP combat, BGS etc.) do. They very, very rarely consider their updates from that perspective. I can't remember who it was, but that person said that most, if not all, of FDev's streams are them doing low-level mission stuff in low-level ships. I am in a state of mind where I believe that completely without verifying it. No one who has stepped foot in High CZ, PvP or even traded in Open would have though more HRPs or MRPs or instakill tools would in any way enhance the game.

If I could make a single change in E:D design I would force some of the devs to sit down, pick a ship, get themselves enough money and credits to unlock a Corvette with prismatics, engineer it fully, participate in CG in open, and finally engineer a fully modified late game FdL or Chief. Then take that out for a spin and engage in combat in both CZs and PvP. Without cheating in any materials or ranks to themselves. Refer ANY gameplay changes to these guys and watch their PTSD kick in.
Yeh, I really just do not think FD realise that:-
1) These new modules will not be used by many CMDRs (simply wishing to use them for fun and QoL) because they use up slots perminantly. It's been the issue with the DC for years, so why would that view change?
2) The slots they're handing out will simply risk being used to yet further tank up ships. But let's be honest, seemingly keeping ships balanced and sensible seems to have long since stopped being a concern. Engineering was the beginning of the end of that IMHO...
 
As if a single class 1 internal adds up a thousand hull points if fitted with an HRP...
Same for small ships, 2 more HRP or 1 HRP and 1 MRP in size 1 is not adding a huge amount of hull...
 
3) Or FD have never really taken note of the requests/suggestions from posters that these modules should not use regular slots?
4) Or FD don't understand/agree yet more slots = more tanking in combat builds etc?
5) Or FD simply went ahead with the simplest implementation of the mechanics, with the least resistance, not (overly) concerned with the/any negative outcomes.

Personally, I think (5)...
Honestly I think a lot of these "hey let's add a cool new thing" features are taken from the point of view of how cool it'd be to use in solo/private, or in open with friends in a quiet backwater - just like healbeams, they're really fun for co-op gameplay against swarms of NPCs to have your healer zipping around and patching up the big aggressive corvette that's pulling the entire CZ's aggro and so on, but the point where they become a problem is when they're used against another player. Fun to use, not so fun to have them used against you.
In PvE encounters it can be handled by limiting the number of healers that spawn (and this is something that comes up in AX CZs - kill the regenerator scouts first!) but there's nothing stopping a wing of players from making everyone a healer.
That, and there's little consideration given to the knockon effect these little QoL things have on other items/effects. Drag slowing you down and disabling boost is powerful in its own right, but when you combine it with reverb torpedoes that you can no longer outrun due to the drag, that simple effect becomes a gateway to an absolutely devastating 1-2 punch. Extra size-1 slots so you don't have to sacrifice anything for the new modules? Unintended side-effect that people can now move their existing size 1 modules that are currently sitting in oversized slots, freeing up the larger slots in the process. My cutter, for instance, effectively gained a size 3 slot back when the need for an ADS was removed.

The latter is something I've seen happen a lot when I've been following the development of various Space Station 13 codebases - someone will code a cool new thing and add it to the game, and very shortly the players will find some other use for it (or combo with another item/ability) that utterly breaks things because nobody in development thought "wait, what effect will this weapon have if you combo it with this?"

Example: there was an item added called the Rapid Part Exchange Device that would allow you to swap out components in the various station's machines in order to perform upgrades faster and without dismantling them.
Later, someone added the "Bluespace RPED" which used teleporter technology to allow you to swap parts out on any machine you could see. A really nice QoL upgrade for people upgrading the station without waiting for people to open doors they didn't have access to, right?

Except SS13 is also a game about traitors and sabotage, and one of the things you can do is rig a power cell to explode when it's used.
Then someone discovered that the line-of-sight check allowed you to use the BRPED through security cameras.
Suddenly this nice little convenient upgrading tool allowed you to assassinate people from anywhere without warning by rigging a power cell, finding them on a camera, waiting for them to walk past any active machine that had power cells as a component, and clicking the button to blow a hole in the station. Emergent gameplay at its finest.
 
As if a single class 1 internal adds up a thousand hull points if fitted with an HRP...
Same for small ships, 2 more HRP or 1 HRP and 1 MRP in size 1 is not adding a huge amount of hull...
Except it is.

2x C1 HRPs for a ViperIV add a total of 220 hitpoints. Engineered, they give a total of 400 HP. That's about 3100hp for a Viper IV, up from 2700 they have now. That's a 15 % increase in raw HP. When you add in resistance buffs, you are now looking at about 3100HP with rounded resistances that are significantly (like 25%) higher than before.

How about a medium ship? FAS can now use a C1 ther res instead of C2. If I have a full hulltank FAS with 2D MRP, reactives (nonmodded) and a 2D thermal resist HRP, I get a total of 4300 integrity. Swapping that 2D thermal resist to HD gives me 200 hp more, and I can still round up my resistances with the class 1. I could also downgrade my FSD or MRP.

Sure I mean if you look at just slots it does not look like much, but it's a significant defence buff for small and medium ships once you factor in resistances and what you can downgrade.
 

The Replicated Man

T
A slimmed down even easier to implement version of my other request - https://forums.frontier.co.uk/threa...ist-please-dont-make-these-cost-slots.508347/

Make the new slots being handed out "NON-MILITARY SLOTS" so only non-military related modules can be fitted in them. This will prevent these new slots from simply being used to tank up combat ships even more.

ps1: I'd suggest a very limited list of only non-military modules would be permitted in them. eg: (A)DC | SCA | Cargo | Passenger Cabins | Refinery | Fuel Tank

ps2: Paige suggested I posted the suggestion, so here it is!

ps3: Why isn't there one combined module "Flight Assistant" which is the ADC and SCA in one?
No thanks. I like the ability to put what I want in the slots. This man does not speak for me.
 
A slimmed down even easier to implement version of my other request - https://forums.frontier.co.uk/threa...ist-please-dont-make-these-cost-slots.508347/

Make the new slots being handed out "NON-MILITARY SLOTS" so only non-military related modules can be fitted in them. This will prevent these new slots from simply being used to tank up combat ships even more.

ps1: I'd suggest a very limited list of only non-military modules would be permitted in them. eg: (A)DC | SCA | Cargo | Passenger Cabins | Refinery | Fuel Tank

ps2: Paige suggested I posted the suggestion, so here it is!

ps3: Why isn't there one combined module "Flight Assistant" which is the ADC and SCA in one?

Or just role back this change, get rid of the extra slots and give everyone the flight assistance features for free without modules - we have the panel to control them now..

People can then use them as they see fit... You'll generally be more efficient and effective without them, that's the incentive to turn them off.. Don't make it more module wrangling.
 
1 x size 1 hull replacement package may give you just under 200 hull points and in theory 15% resistance. but applying to a ship wont give you 15% in most cases. e.g. I fitted one last night 34.3 before... attached a size 1 now its 39.5%.

there are diminishing returns which mean you don't get the full 15%, the higher you resistance the worse the return is...

I think people should be able to use the slots for what ever they like, a size 1 wont make that much difference.
plus small ships having 2 gives the little ships more protection against the larger heavy hitters
 
Both. And Having more armor sure helps on small ships.
We're different.

I find the CZs a complete slog. I can rack about 400-500k in a high CZ with kinetic build FGS before literally having to rearm or synth ammo. This is about 1/3rd of what used to be before the engineer buffs were applied to CZ ships.

The hulls are buffed, DPS is not. We're seeing +2000% (literal) increase in hard defences vs. about 100% increase in DPS. This increases even more with more unrestricted C1 modules.
 
Top Bottom