As long as you haven't destroyed your canopy the AFMU will happily repair it
The sad little "C" class module should be something special...
- Thread starter Chaparral
- Start date
As long as you haven't destroyed your canopy the AFMU will happily repair it
The C class is a good middle of the road module, in some sense it ought to be the go to module of a build - it does a good job but not great, it doesn't use too much power but isn't super efficient, similar with heat similar with weight and it doesn't cost too much.
Problem is that with credits relatively easy to come by it makes more sense to do some sort of min/maxing with your modules an A here for extra punch or if you are worried about heat a D here to reduce weight, B if you are taking knocks, E if you are low on power. In some sense we perhaps have it too easy such that C is a bit redundant these days. Back in the early days I remember being pretty chuffed at C rating a ship and could only look towards A rated modules with starry eyes - we are well beyond that now. Not to say things were better previously but we are certainly in a different place now and, as you say, perhaps C needs to be given a new purpose..
A long winded way of agreeing? I'm not sure I did before I started
Problem is that with credits relatively easy to come by it makes more sense to do some sort of min/maxing with your modules an A here for extra punch or if you are worried about heat a D here to reduce weight, B if you are taking knocks, E if you are low on power. In some sense we perhaps have it too easy such that C is a bit redundant these days. Back in the early days I remember being pretty chuffed at C rating a ship and could only look towards A rated modules with starry eyes - we are well beyond that now. Not to say things were better previously but we are certainly in a different place now and, as you say, perhaps C needs to be given a new purpose..
A long winded way of agreeing? I'm not sure I did before I started
C is Comberry
But what if C could be an more energy efficient variant, like draining less form the PD (for shields and such) and consuming less Power from the PP?
But what if C could be an more energy efficient variant, like draining less form the PD (for shields and such) and consuming less Power from the PP?
Can't nerf what doesn't exist. Almost any actual economy would be an improvement, in my view.
Then your CMDR has comparatively less to lose in an economic collapse.
Achilles7
Banned
:O...the AFMU has GPP, now?
NB: Don't worry, I generally aim for a 50/50 split on post comprehension...it separates the wheat from the heat-sink.
um.....GPP??
EDIT: well none of these make sense for it in context: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GPP
Last edited:
In game to make other modules seem more special, sure...
Another path to the goal that a lot of you are after, would be to not allow modules to be repaired to 100% of their former glory, at least, not if they're damaged beyond a certain threshold (maybe, the first 5% of damage is fully repairable, but after that, you can only repair some of it).
If you're a transport pilot or an explorer, this change wouldn't affect you. You take small amounts of damage, and you repair fully before a module drops below 5%.
But if you're a combat pilot and have a module completely destroyed, you wouldn't be able to fully repair it. You can still use it, but it wouldn't be at 100% so the next time you take damage, it'll be even easier to destroy it.
What this means is, combat pilots would need to occasionally throw away worn out modules. That alone is sufficient incentive to buy lower, B and C class modules where possible. Because now, they're consumable.
For the ships themselves, and their hull percentage, it should work in a similar fashion except, there should be a very expensive "overhaul" option available so that you don't have to throw away a ship.
If you're a transport pilot or an explorer, this change wouldn't affect you. You take small amounts of damage, and you repair fully before a module drops below 5%.
But if you're a combat pilot and have a module completely destroyed, you wouldn't be able to fully repair it. You can still use it, but it wouldn't be at 100% so the next time you take damage, it'll be even easier to destroy it.
What this means is, combat pilots would need to occasionally throw away worn out modules. That alone is sufficient incentive to buy lower, B and C class modules where possible. Because now, they're consumable.
For the ships themselves, and their hull percentage, it should work in a similar fashion except, there should be a very expensive "overhaul" option available so that you don't have to throw away a ship.
Not all C is biweave.
It is interesting that the economics discussion popped up. It is fair to say that there is a subtext about the cost of modules. Within the first hundred hours of play, credits are definitely a factor for "building" your ship. In the current state of the game, even without gold rushes, it is possible to grind up quite a few credits fairly quickly.
This means that within early game play, C modules are used as a stepping stone toward more expensive modules, but shortly thereafter C's are completely skipped.
Starting players will upgrade to D not because of their unique mass properties, it is simply "on the way" to better modules. Later on, players select "D" for their mass properties.
Giving "C" a special profile such as low heat profiles may open up new builds for smuggling, PVP, or as a means to ofset other hot modules. I'm not necessarily attached to being cool, some other property might make more sense.
This means that within early game play, C modules are used as a stepping stone toward more expensive modules, but shortly thereafter C's are completely skipped.
Starting players will upgrade to D not because of their unique mass properties, it is simply "on the way" to better modules. Later on, players select "D" for their mass properties.
Giving "C" a special profile such as low heat profiles may open up new builds for smuggling, PVP, or as a means to ofset other hot modules. I'm not necessarily attached to being cool, some other property might make more sense.