The title of the thread does not fully encapsulate the truth of the problem.
Perhaps OP should determine their position in that, because that is what OP seems to be saying.
The title of the thread does not fully encapsulate the truth of the problem.
Sorry, I had beans for dinner. I'll light a match.A shame the toxicity levels here...
really? I just had the misfortune to read the whole thread because of your post... and i would say there is 1 post i would consider rude, the rest are a mixture of agreeing / disagreeing or offering partial solutionsA shame the toxicity levels here...
There were 2 and they were acknowledged by the poster. What might you offer the convo without having read it in the first place, other than shade?really? I just had the misfortune to read the whole thread because of your post... and i would say there is 1 post i would consider rude, the rest are a mixture of agreeing / disagreeing or offering partial solutions
which is par for the course for a discussion forum imo.
I'm at roughly 40 engineered ships and 90 modules in storage.
My take nowadays is I build a ship until I like it and then build the next.
I'm not switching many modules any more.
Workaround, sure, but for me it works.
More important then a storage increase (which I wouldn't reject by the way) would be
a better storage UI with filters for me...
I have a list that I prepared on a thing called paper with a pencil for my 8 Vultures, four Cutters and 6 Pythons.It's not specifically about the length of time played, but more-so about the play style of wanting to try different aspects of the game. I can attest to this as I'm one of these players. I red-lined my module storage about a year ago and have since resorted to buying ships to store additional modules on.
So in this case, you need to remember which particular ships you stored which particular modules on (with engineering/experimental combinations). This means you need some external method of tracking which modules are on what ships.
Does this method technically allow you to store higher numbers of modules? Yes it does.
Is this method frustrating and time-consuming? Yes it absolutely is.
I think additional space, and some better UI elements allowing more intuitive module management (maybe even some sort of loadout save/load system) would go a long way.
I have a list that I prepared on a thing called paper with a pencil for my 8 Vultures, four Cutters and 6 Pythons.
![]()
Cleaning clutter takes time, and this is video game, that is supposed to be played for fun, not for mundane maintance.Dear OP, I've been playing this game for over 2.5 years and have never come close to using my allotted module storage, so speak for yourself. If you need over 120 modules sitting around doing nothing, then you're doing it wrong or you are a hoarder. Get help if you need to:
Clutterers Anonymous℠ - 12-Step Program for Help with Clutter
Clutterers attend our 12-Step recovery meetings for support and help getting rid of clutter.clutterersanonymous.org
I would absolutely love that, and I'd be a lot more ruthless with my current modules in storage. But then people would have less reason to grind mats and the 'gameplay' that entails, so...It would be nice if 'Remove Modifications returned 50% of the mats used..
It does take a while to 'let it go' when it comes to stored modules and is a tough decision to make![]()
Your statement is self-defeating, since just managing hundreds of modules is "mundane maintenance". Heck, the Outfitting Screen is "mundane maintenance" except for the building of new ships. The answer is so simple that it should be a no-brainer - build a fleet of ships each with their own purpose. On my old account, I have one Type-7 specifically outfitted for rescue missions, another Type-7 specifically outfitted and engineered for exploration, etc. Swapping modules back and forth is the epitome of "mundane maintenance".Cleaning clutter takes time, and this is video game, that is supposed to be played for fun, not for mundane maintance.
As mundane maintance i meant swaping modules from storage ship to one i want to use, watching same animation of weapon installing 8 times is not fun and time consuming. If you don't have base in Shinrarta, becouse for example you are engaged in power play and really need control system of your power for base, it's not difficult to reach 120 modules limit, if we count fuel scoops, guardian modules, human tech weapons, it's not only about engineered stuff. Btw, how many possible weapons combiantios with effect and mods is possible? I have no idea but i m sure 120 is tiny % of this number.Your statement is self-defeating, since just managing hundreds of modules is "mundane maintenance". Heck, the Outfitting Screen is "mundane maintenance" except for the building of new ships. The answer is so simple that it should be a no-brainer - build a fleet of ships each with their own purpose. On my old account, I have one Type-7 specifically outfitted for rescue missions, another Type-7 specifically outfitted and engineered for exploration, etc. Swapping modules back and forth is the epitome of "mundane maintenance".
Or you can just quit the game in a huff.![]()