The game is in constant development, there's never been any hide from that, as a game slowly layering on a long term goal always will be. It's a newer model of gaming to get one's head around (or just not play).
As for the question, in world, I can see a reason for it. We're not being charged for ship storage on a station, stations might not want the insurance risk of high valuables being left on ships - you have to lug the small cases of materials around with you. Some will be tiny. But yes, I think now materials are more valuable and can be dropped, there does need to be a module storage next, from a sheer game mechanic front. In the meantime, its how the game is, and by the in-game logic I offer, just something you have to mediate.
Elite is meant to be a long term, real-life immersion. You aren't meant to be rushing collecting every material to go and do big game-stacks for powerful mods. You get a couple of materials requested from a blueprint, and go get an upgrade. If you're very lucky, they'll be a manic effect, but that's a rare. Maybe you'll go back when you chance more of the same materials, but if you live in a world where you can't store unique and untested goods you've picked up around the universe because stations don't want that stuff, you would have to micro-manage how much you want to keep in your escape pod
That is until they do the module upgrade.
well i suppose the ground crew do it for you, in the realistic world, thats how it should be. If you listen to some station announcements when you dock, you can hear "ground crew deployed".
But yes, storage is sorely needed even more now.
Last edited:
In real life, I go to a mechanic who I pay to put a new turbo in my car. I don't have to try 20 low and medium level gearboxes or drivetrains to gain access to the turbo I want, nor do I have to go and find/mine/salvage the casings, bearings, blowers etc to make it
The performance of said turbo will have a certain output range along with certain downsides like fuel consumption and maintenance costs - so I am quite happy with a bit of RNG in the finished product
Having the possibility to rent station storage would be great, but going all the way to say engineers are pointless without it while completely ignoring the fact that many, many players have been perfectly able to get the necessary stuff and upgrade their ships without having storage, seems like yet another hyperbole drama statement (there seem to be a lot of them the past few days).
No need to quit and lose the will to live just because you encounter some obstacle.
No need to quit and lose the will to live just because you encounter some obstacle.
Last edited:
Yes, as long as the ship you are transferring to has cargo space. If you forgot to put a rack on the ship you wanted to mod, you can't change ships until you get rid of your current cargo.
The OP is right, this is a poorly thought out. I can't see how this wasn't a serious oversight. We have to try bizarre workarounds for a number of issues that would not have been a problem if proper storage had been released with 2.1.
Last edited:
We need a way to store cargo and modules. I cant believe, still even now with engineers, people are defending the current poor design or missing mechanics. The solutions that people found to overcome this missing mechanics is not making things OK. Using spare ships to store modules??? Why? And what if a player cannot afford another ship to store things? The devs may need another year to implement those things ok, but why defending the current status? Because there is a workaround? We all need the 100% working solution, not a workaround.
There should be a way to purchase or rent storage space for cargo, modules and materials at stations.
I frankly don't understand how people can disagree.
I frankly don't understand how people can disagree.
I know, it is odd when people try to defend the indefensible. If we don't call things out nothing will change, and I don't think anyone wants ED to be an exasperating game filled with workarounds.
Last edited:
for a monthly fee? what did you drink this morning?
Not every player has a Clipper/Cutter/Corvette/Ananconda/Python. Some players don't even LIKE them. But by God, we're going to be forced to use them late-game whether we like it or not because they are the only ones capable of combat AND cargo storage. Bye-bye, for example, FdL and Vulture. You are now nearly impossible to own and upgrade to be used as the dedicated combat ships you are. Now ONLY multi-role ships are viable.
I have yet to see someone disagreeing that having station storage would be great.
Although I disagree that "engineers is worthless without storage". It would be better with storage no doubt, but is certainly not worthless without it.
You know what it reminds me of? A tech demo someone is trying to stick a game on to.......With the almost unimaginable scale of this Galaxy.......The galaxy itself was always going to the elephant in the thimble......Everything has to work around that...so we get "Instances" instead of unbroken linear travel and things like that........and lots of "Spread Sheet" type game play tweaks and Additions.......Powerplay, Engineerss....lots of text and hand-waveium.....but the galaxy practically never changes.....
.
As another example, though I am sure it can change with Dev input...is the number of stations......this game is set 1300 years in the future........there are some 15,000 spacestation/ouposts in the game?.......I don't know the lore but lets say we have been colonising space for 500 years......then we must be building them at a rate of 30 a year............do we see that natural evolution in the game? To me it feels like the game started and galaxy froze all at the same time........
Or Instead of this silly suggestion commander - that FD realizes its the 24th CEntury and Storage - a concept in vogue for thousands of years - be included the game?
Last edited: