Ships Module Priorities.

F*** me sidewise, this guy πŸ˜‚πŸ˜‚πŸ˜‚πŸ˜‚πŸ˜‚

When you land ON A PLANET.

Jesus dude just stop, learn, then stop min-maxing in EDSY, get out in the black and play the bloody game already 🀣
I know what you mean. Engine shutdown only works on the planet.
I can easily check it the next time I log in.

I will land on a planet, turn on the modules menu (key 4) and there the engine should be turned off.

This is good, I learned about another feature of the game, it is a pity that it is practically not applicable as it happens only when landing on a planet and in this mode except for turning on the AFMU nothing much can be done.
 

I painted the engine green for convenience. (to show that the green one is much thicker than the red one.) If the motor shuts down, there is enough power for ALL modules of group 4. I did that for clarity. In your case only 3 groups are enough, even the 4th one is unnecessary.

 
Last edited:
No, once more, you didn't, and that's why I usually refrain from answering you. You've made an arbitrary assumption and fail to see beyond it. Maybe someone else, kinder and with more patience will take the time to develop a more thorough explanation.

I have come to regret my kindness and patience. We live and learn. 🀣
 
I realize that EDSY is far from correct.
Here's an interesting article:
It doesn't change anything, but it makes an interesting point. According to the table in this article, the chaff and the criminal scanner (KWS) should turn off when the nests are removed.
I don't know if that's true or not, as it's not shown on the EDSY.
 
Last edited:
You continue to stubbornly insist on being hilariously wrong in the exact same way, you are literally incapable of communication I might as well be banging my head against a brick wall here πŸ˜‚
I thought I showed you everything.
Even if the engine turns off when landing on a planet, wouldn't there be enough power for the 3rd group with 3 groups ? Why would there be a fourth group, much less a fifth? I think you're just mistaken.
 
What exactly is your issue with the existance of five priority groups? You don't HAVE to use them (you don't even have to use them at all if you don' want to), but you can. It's called an "option". Your posts read like a crusade against something that is completely user preference. Only want to use two, three or four groups? Go ahead and do that. But don't tell those who like to make full use of all groups for whatever reason - be it neccessity, neatness, the urge to micromanage or the weather of the day - that we do it wrong.
 
I thought I showed you everything.
Even if the engine turns off when landing on a planet, wouldn't there be enough power for the 3rd group with 3 groups ? Why would there be a fourth group, much less a fifth? I think you're just mistaken.
Since I can end up with only stuff in the 5th group turning off, there's a need for 5 groups.
 
What exactly is your issue with the existance of five priority groups? You don't HAVE to use them (you don't even have to use them at all if you don' want to), but you can. It's called an "option". Your posts read like a crusade against something that is completely user preference. Only want to use two, three or four groups? Go ahead and do that. But don't tell those who like to make full use of all groups for whatever reason - be it neccessity, neatness, the urge to micromanage or the weather of the day - that we do it wrong.
I think I've written before, but I'll say it again.
I've never written that others don't use all 5. I just wanted to find out the minimum necessary set of priorities that should be used for proper play.

The 5 priorities are like paint on a ship, some people paint and some don't. It doesn't affect anything, just the person wants it.

There are people here who tried to prove to me that all 5 are actually involved in the game and there are situations when all 5 groups are really needed. Their attempts have completely failed.

Yes I wish I could fail their attempts and realize for myself that really all 5 affect the game, but alas.
 
I've got to say it, thanks for all the info in this thread, I can't believe just how much I did not know! Picked up some fantastic pointers here.
In fact, I created this thread to teach people how to prioritize properly. Since it seemed to me that a lot of people didn't know about it at all. And some did it without really understanding what exactly they will get, because they did not understand all the mechanics.
 
I had a vague idea, but new nothing of the power plant broken running values, this really does change the way that one applies the logic of the ordering.
I think also helps me to understand how it is that quite often NPC are able to still fight back after you have shot out their power plant, the mechanic makes more sense now.
 
I played around a bit and technically the perfect power priority setup (that NPC-s probably use) would be something like this:

You'd be able to keep at least two guns firing even when the power plant malfunctions and keep fighting with a 0% reactor integrity. Would I do this in real life? In a pre-arranged PvP fight, probably. During "organic" play broken power plant means high-tailing the hell outta here, so no need to keep the guns going at this point and I'd prioritize life support instead.
 
I played around a bit and technically the perfect power priority setup (that NPC-s probably use) would be something like this:

You'd be able to keep at least two guns firing even when the power plant malfunctions and keep fighting with a 0% reactor integrity. Would I do this in real life? In a pre-arranged PvP fight, probably. During "organic" play broken power plant means high-tailing the hell outta here, so no need to keep the guns going at this point and I'd prioritize life support instead.
Cool stuff, I have to say that I've noticed more NPC's highwaking it out of the fight too. Most of this was in combat zones.
 
I played around a bit and technically the perfect power priority setup (that NPC-s probably use) would be something like this:

You'd be able to keep at least two guns firing even when the power plant malfunctions and keep fighting with a 0% reactor integrity. Would I do this in real life? In a pre-arranged PvP fight, probably. During "organic" play broken power plant means high-tailing the hell outta here, so no need to keep the guns going at this point and I'd prioritize life support instead.
If YOU happen to be interested, here is the same 1 in 1 but only using 4 priorities.
 
Ah whew. Five groups, so when my Fuel Scoop goes off (since only an idiot overpowers their explorer ship to cover everything deployed, so you have some modules off most times), luckily nothing else does.

scoopoff.jpg


Three groups, as per the OP. Oh noes! Now when fuel scoop is deployed, other stuff goes off, including life support! Argh!

scoopoff3.jpg
 
Ah whew. Five groups, so when my Fuel Scoop goes off (since only an idiot overpowers their explorer ship to cover everything deployed, so you have some modules off most times), luckily nothing else does.

View attachment 399493

Three groups, as per the OP. Oh noes! Now when fuel scoop is deployed, other stuff goes off, including life support! Argh!

View attachment 399494
I'm not quite following you.
If you want to keep only 3 groups, then you transfer from 4 and 5 to group 3, and what was in group 3 to group 2.
 
I'm not quite following you.
If you want to keep only 3 groups, then you transfer from 4 and 5 to group 3, and what was in group 3 to group 2.
Doesn't work. I already transferred from 5 and 4 to 3 in the second pic, and putting more in 2 would just mean that when 2 goes down, I lose more than I need to, instead of just some of the modules (in former-named group 3) I'd lose all the 3 ones and the 2 ones as well.

You really don't get this, do you?
 
Back
Top Bottom