Why lift the restriction on passenger ships?
- Thread starter Oss133
- Start date
Would you like to buy a car, and told you can only use the front seats, however if you are carrying sacks of rice, you may use the rear seats, but only if there is an R in the month, and if it is a Full moon in Borneo!
recap in ED terms, I buy an Orca ship, i want to put what i want in it, and that goes for all restricted slots in ships
The restricted use slots, while good intentioned, have turned out to be a disaster as far as many CMDRS are concerned, with many players asking for them to be opened up for more modules, it's been an almost continuous request since they were introduced. I doubt we will every get any more on any ships and this is just a step to correcting what turned out to be a good but deeply unpopular idea.
That's my thoughts anyway.
That's my thoughts anyway.
The restricted passenger cabin slots made the already very useless ships even more useless. Other ships are better at passenger transport (expect luxury missions, but that's an other topic) making the dedicated passenger ships a complete joke.
Now they can, at least, be used for something else since they still are bad at their dedicated role.
Isn't that like.. a pickup truck?
In theory yes, but in the Elite Dangerous universe a Ferrari would be much better at transporting rice than a pickup truck.
The only restricted slots I think need to stay are the ones for combat ships. They were added to make them as good as or better at combat then multirole ships. If you opened them up, then they would end up being better multirole ships then the multirole ships.
As to the orca, beluga and Dolphin, what they should have had is luxury cabins built in instead of optional compartments.
Then you could do the same for cargo vessels, have a certain amount of cargo space bulit in depending on size of the ship and so on. Combat ships get their combat slots.
Exploration ships could have the DSS and a fuel scoop built in. Make the dedicated ships unique to the multirole ships.
But seriously now, I have nothing against them making the ships more useful, but at the same time I'm a bit concerned, because this smells like choosing the easier way to balance ships.
Wouldn't it have been more beneficial for these ships to go completely in the opposite direction: i.e. to give them smaller restricted compartments in addition to what they had until now? Or any other compartments they seemed to need for that matter?
I think in the end again it boils down to defensive modules or utilities like the new boosters, and how these should be worked into slots of their respective mandatory modules instead of having them use internal space and make a nightmare out of balancing.1
1 For more information see the work of Frenotx, cca Arpil 2018
Wouldn't it have been more beneficial for these ships to go completely in the opposite direction: i.e. to give them smaller restricted compartments in addition to what they had until now? Or any other compartments they seemed to need for that matter?
I think in the end again it boils down to defensive modules or utilities like the new boosters, and how these should be worked into slots of their respective mandatory modules instead of having them use internal space and make a nightmare out of balancing.1
1 For more information see the work of Frenotx, cca Arpil 2018
Restricted slots exist to give ships purpose. That would be like complaining Mechwarrior 4 added weapon hardpoints to the otherwise overly lenient outfitting system of Battletech which previously allowed you to mount your mech's weapons in the legs.
I am also confused by the pax ships change.
No, only the Passenger ships
I was a bit surprised myself, but those restrictions were difficult to justify. Unlike the military slots, these are big boxy spaces that can take passenger cabins and cargo racks (and HRp/MRP etc): a bit difficult to explain why they couldn't take other stuff.
Effectively FDev have given us four new exploration ships in the "exploration" update, which is nice of them: Krait Phantom, Dolphin, Orca, Beluga. It also makes my Beluga slightly better for passengers, because I can use the previously-restricted size 5 slots for other stuff and free up size 6 slots for big passenger cabins.
Effectively FDev have given us four new exploration ships in the "exploration" update, which is nice of them: Krait Phantom, Dolphin, Orca, Beluga. It also makes my Beluga slightly better for passengers, because I can use the previously-restricted size 5 slots for other stuff and free up size 6 slots for big passenger cabins.
I am happy. My Beluga makes a lot more sense with 4 size 6 luxury cabins and size 5 shield and fighter bay.
The idea behind restricted slots was that by doing so it would prevent the passenger liners from becoming 'multi-role' behemoths, and give them an edge in their specialty. However, as luxury cabins are of almost zero value they simply didn't have this edge, and multi-role ships like the conda could easily match the Beluga, and the Asp X would easily beat the Dolphin. That is of course silly. Instead of 'fixing' their advantage, they opened the liners up to more diverse roles. Incidentally, the Saud Kruger ships are all very interesting exploration ships with their restrictions removed, so together with the Phantom explorers now have four new very capable exploration ships, from small to huge.
![[VR] Deggial](https://forums-cdn.zaonce.net/data/avatars/m/47/47252.jpg?1553527110){kind=avatar}
I agree with all observations.
Unfortunately, beside the fact that ED all of a sudden gained three new exploration ships, it also lost its dedicated passenger ships. Or actually ... it never really had those.
So, as nice as the change is, it doesn't solve the "identitiy issue" of the product line.
In my opinion, FDev should change two things:
1. Make those luxury missions really worthwhile. Maybe add even more (well payed) "wrinkles" (= overly demanding passengers) to them as well.
2. Limit 1st class cabins to the dedicated passenger ships as well. Business- and economy class cabins are fine for the more "mundane" combat- and multi-role ships.
![[VR] Mad Mike](https://forums-cdn.zaonce.net/data/avatars/m/27/27910.jpg?1553527108){kind=avatar}
i always looked at it another way.... modular stuff is great but generally is less efficient than fixed..... for example if a cargohold is modular it has to have a lot of extra fluff - fixings and what not - to allow it to be removed and replaced with,...... what ever
where as fixed, if the designer knew it was going to be cargo and nothing else then it could fill every nuck and cranny with cargo space.
I like the idea of fixed slots, however as a compromise i would say in the case of passenger..... a class 6 bay could be a class 6 bay (modular) for these ships but if using as passenger act as a 6.5.
i would then give the 3 Lakon Type trade ships (keelback and T10 up for discussion) fix their largest bays too but let them be a "+0.5 class" if using for cargo
same with exploration / scout class ships for say fuel scoop
classic mulitroles such as the cobra/anaconda/python/krait mk II dont get this..
that way the fixed slots is actually a bonus and not a restriction.
probably lore, if you look at the models, those ships have pretty much some very exclusive passanger suited decks you can visually see. Them now being suddenly cargo makes not much sense from a lore pioint of view. But it doesn't really hurt ship balance so its not that bad. Illogical, but not bad.