Military Slots - Open Them Up For Anything, but...

[CMDR Cosmic Spacehead]

make them -1 class smaller for non military modules.
So a C5 Military slot would be a C4 standard.

Also, allow shield generators to go them. (Full size)



Yay? Or nay?

It'd allow "military" ships to be used for other tasks, but less efficiently. Which means if your favourite ship happens to be a military one, you can still use it for other things.

 

[Robert Maynard]

It'd reorder the current list of "all-rounder" ships, give those ships with two or more military slots quite a boost - and give the Anaconda another general purpose slot.

 

[bicarbon8]

I'd certainly support allowing Shields in Military slots... makes no sense why they aren't already allowed in there

 

[Auronio]

Nay

 

[Misty_Dark]

why should shields go in military slots? what would the use for this be?

I do not see any military use case for that, but I can see why traders/explorers would like to use military slots for their shields, as that would give them another internal slots to use. Which defeats the core reason why they created these as military slots in the first place. As in most cases, these military slots are one class smaller than the biggest available slot. Vulture is one exception to this. I have not checked all ships.


The locked slots in Passengers ships was a big mistake, if you ask me, and that got fixed. Military slots is another can of worms, as predicted, people have requested exploration specific slots or mining specific slots. No matter how to view this, going down this rabbit hole is going to bad, so I think adding military slots was a big mistake to begin with and this is the aftermath of that, people see unused slots and wants to be able to use these, thinking that is a waste of space that could be utilized...

 

[Bortas]

so I think adding military slots was a big mistake to begin with

Personally I think it was a great idea, as it definetely made some extremely underused ships more suitable for their intended role, especially the Federal Trio, and also allowed to add other combat focussed ships like the Alliance Trio without making them multi-purpose ships.

Sure, some players, especially those not around at the time the military slots were introduced tend to request them to be unlocked... but I don't think it's a problem for FDev to simply ignore said requests.

 

[Fake Newts]

If anything the game needs more restrictions on modularity, and more type-specific slots to stop everything becoming a homogenous minmaxed lump, with a few ships and best-in-class modules dominating in all areas.

Military slots are one of the best additions they've made to outfitting since launch, and having more restricted slots for other functions and utilities would be even better. Ironically elite's wide open approach to modularity doesn't actually promote interesting choices most of the time, rather a binary choice between optimal or convenient which makes the gulf between minmaxed ships and casual ships unworkable for 'emergent' play.

Imho

 

[Lestat]

Oh boy, another let put another module in Military slot tread. Last time it was Fuel scoop.

People start using common sense instead of asking to add something that does not belong in a set slot.

 

[Azmuth Divarchchron]

Nay

 

[VR CMDR Novindus]

Shield generators make perfect sense in a "military" compartment. We can already slot Shield Cell Banks and Guardian Shield Reinforcement packages in military compartments, so the shields themselves would naturally belong.
I think though that the reasoning behind these slots is actually "reinforcement", as the only available modules are hull and shield reinforcements, with shield cell banks being counted as reinforcements.
If that is the case, then I vote either call them "reinforcement compartments", or else keep it under the general title of "military" and allow us to put shield generators there.

I like the idea of using military compartments at reduced size for non-military modules, but I wouldn't know if that would exceed the advantages Frontier factored in for those ships, to the point of overbalance.
On that note, I'd really like to know what sort of system (if any) they use to determine how many modules of what size are allowed for each ship, and if they use a points system to balance things out.
For example, each ship might have 100 points. Any positive aspect would reduce the points, and any negative aspect would put points back, and they can play around with options until they hit zero.
If that resembles how they configure ships, then I don't know if this idea would bring the balance into the negative.

 

[varonica]

Shield generators make perfect sense in a "military" compartment. We can already slot Shield Cell Banks and Guardian Shield Reinforcement packages in military compartments, so the shields themselves would naturally belong.

Shields are a general use item though, both civilian and military use them, if there was s specific military shield generator, say a heavily armoured one not available by engineering and that didn't fit in a regular slot I might go for it but that would still bring up the problem of opening up an extra general use slot and making the military ship more competitive with civilian counterparts for civilian tasks. Whatever way you color it, using military slots for more stuff just doesn't work because the military slots were added at a later date to a ship that was already complete. If you free the military slot up for more general use then you would need to add an extra slot to every ship to get back to the original balancing of ship classes, and that really seems pretty pointless when doing nothing achieves the exact same result.

 

[StiTch]

Starting my own petition off the back of this: Pls let us fit weapons on utility slots.

Everyone sign plox

 

[VR CMDR Novindus]

Shields are a general use item though, both civilian and military use them, if there was s specific military shield generator, say a heavily armoured one not available by engineering and that didn't fit in a regular slot I might go for it but that would still bring up the problem of opening up an extra general use slot and making the military ship more competitive with civilian counterparts for civilian tasks. Whatever way you color it, using military slots for more stuff just doesn't work because the military slots were added at a later date to a ship that was already complete. If you free the military slot up for more general use then you would need to add an extra slot to every ship to get back to the original balancing of ship classes, and that really seems pretty pointless when doing nothing achieves the exact same result.

But then, all modules can be used, whether by civilian or military, so calling it a "military" compartment can lead to interpretations whereby anything that would benefit the defensive or offensive capabilities of a ship can be classed as military, and thereby be justified in applying to that slot. For avoiding that sort of confusion, I suggest we just think of it as the "reinforcement" compartment.

Otherwise, I also have concerns about how balance would be affected, but without precise details of Frontier's ship design rules, there's no knowing if and by how much things get thrown off.

 

[CMDR Hagglebeard]

Nay

 

[Captain Thea Kreutzer]

I think all the ships should be open for everything. They already removed the requirements for passenger liners why keep military slots?

 

[Captain Willard]

NAY

 

[trollson]

Scrub specialist slots.

Modify the secondary attributes of modules based on the type of hull.

So weapons are a bit cooler and/or draw a bit less power in military hulls.

Passengers stay happier longer in purposeful liner hulls.

Transport ships are a bit better balanced with various cargo loads.

...and so on.

Not proposing changing the headline attributes - a cargo module can't suddenly hold more or less than its spec. But there are plenty of secondary attributes which affect the vessel.

 

[Misty_Dark]

Scrub specialist slots.

Modify the secondary attributes of modules based on the type of hull.

So weapons are a bit cooler and/or draw a bit less power in military hulls.

Passengers stay happier longer in purposeful liner hulls.

Transport ships are a bit better balanced with various cargo loads.

...and so on.

Not proposing changing the headline attributes - a cargo module can't suddenly hold more or less than its spec. But there are plenty of secondary attributes which affect the vessel.

this is along the lines of what I have suggested before. You add another nice spin to this.

 

[CMDR Cosmic Spacehead]

Starting my own petition off the back of this: Pls let us fit weapons on utility slots.

Everyone sign plox

Yes!

I want an internal mine launcher.

 

[bicarbon8]

Scrub specialist slots.

Modify the secondary attributes of modules based on the type of hull.

So weapons are a bit cooler and/or draw a bit less power in military hulls.

Passengers stay happier longer in purposeful liner hulls.

Transport ships are a bit better balanced with various cargo loads.

...and so on.

Not proposing changing the headline attributes - a cargo module can't suddenly hold more or less than its spec. But there are plenty of secondary attributes which affect the vessel.

so much potential with this. Want a challenge; take passengers on tourism trips in your Type-7 and try to keep them happy