trust me man, I know about the manufacturing traffic. It is pretty barren at the moment compared to what it could be.

This change wouldn't spark some revolutionary change, but it is a step in the right direction in my opinion.

You are called Darth Stupid for a reason, ever tried being on our side? No? Fuck off then.

- a lot

Can we get a number crunch of what this would mean in terms of reduced trips to complete a trident, assuming everyone moved two per trip rather than one (because nobody's going to pass that up)? I'm curious just how much it would reduce what is really the biggest generator of Grey traffic involved in a dent build: having to shuttle manufactured items around.

+1

I'm generally in favor of further reductions to the Type-M grind. I get PTS thinking about it.

If FCP and FFSA are to be the basic skin & bones building blocks of all future large-scale manufacturing, then yes by all means make them fit into existing cargo ships better. It is completely reasonable to load up 2x FCP per XC. It makes nice symmetry with the 50cu FFSA. The process will still be an arduous grind.

What I want to ask about is: how can a tiny observer bot drop a 150cu optics core? Never made any sense: an XC should be able to swallow up 5 or 10 of those bots...

@Lecter: more FCP per load means pylons and engines and hangar bays can get built faster, so those would be getting hauled more frequently.

Being built faster will drop their value, so I suppose I'm indifferent to more cheaper/fewer costlier.

As for the observers, well...

As CD said, this won't effect how long the process that much. It more of a change to make it seem like you're doing more. Don't get me wrong, it does make the process easier, but not that much easier.

CD obviously the optics core is under incredible pressure inside the observer. It simply expands when dropped and cannot be recompressed without destroying it, hence the large size.

Kinda like the Coneheads movie birth moment.

Much of the space in an optics crate is occupied by packing peanuts, essential for preserving the glassamer lattices which have been made especially fragile after suffering the explosion of the observer.

Here is where I stand, before we talk about reducing the workload of building a trident, we need more manufacturing in general that...

1) is not trident specific or related
2) is not tied to the conquerable stations (I still think this should include FCP and FFSA)
3) produces commercial widgets that players can make which produce a profit substantially above the effort & risk involved.
4) produces ships and ship addons that are slightly better than what is available for purchase for player use and player to player trade. The effort here should be higher, but not prohibitively so. Actually, I would make certain existing items manufacturable (Guass 3, N3, AAP, UCPC) though I expect there will be a lot of push back for that.

These should be things that newer players can produce and use with the ships that are available at lower levels, like an atlas or centaur.

Well, buddy, we have many of things already. Don't get me wrong, we could use some more addons and shit to build, but there are quite a few addons that are currently available to be built. Most of these items aren't built at conq stations.

My point to everything you said is, we have that. Not a bunch of it, but it's there. I agree we could also be expanding the low level manufacturing game, but that can be done in parallel.

There's no reason to not make trident building easier because of the lack of other shit to build though. If anything, the fact that there's nothing else as cool to build should make us want to make the coolest thing to build a little easier. And when I say a little easier, I mean only a little. Building a trident would still be the biggest grind in the game.

I think many of you are forgetting that this is a video game and not a space sim. It is meant to be fun. I get that it is fun for some of you to hate on any new changes and then whine about how the game is so stagnate, but I personally find that re-fucking-tarded. Any change that would promote more game-play, funner game-play, and a more satisfied player will always be good for a game.

Actually, unless GS has added some new manufacturing missions that I am unaware of, we don't have anything that meets my criteria. Not the superlight or widowmaker, nor the assorted missions that pretend to make water or somesuch. The furies are reasonable and pretty cool, but that's it.

I am not outright against the OP, which I originally took to be a spoof on some silly post by Dr Lecter wanting to increase the size, but maybe I didn't catch the time stamps and this one came first.

I think moving FFSA and FCP outside the conq stations would result in more activity.

Still, I'll stay with my +1 I put at the beginning because this benefits me when I do start playing again, and you are correct that the RBA stage sucks monkey balls marinated in feces.

maybe I didn't catch the time stamps and this one came first

Ding ding ding.

Yea, we have a few power cells that can be built. The furies were just brought back. While not all that impressive, there are turrets that are worth building. And not to mention the TU mines. Oh. Concussion rails, too. HAHA!

I completely agree that we need more manufacturable items, but that is an unrelated (not completely) problem. I've been working on a suggestion for that, and I think it is something that everyone will love (it has been suggested before I'm sure).

But I think Lecter has gone from -1 to a dodgy 0....amiright?

Any other opinions?

+1

Not as drastic and dramatic as some may think.

I posted a similarly motivated post not long ago. I came to the conclusion that somebody's idea of a dent-lite would help, altho they were suggesting that the ship be a mini dent, i thought much better would be a manufacturable super XC, a trade ship of increased size. This would add a new ship in the middle. If its capacity were to be around 350-400 cu, and it took maybe 1/3 the resources to build and the dent manufacturing tayed untouched, then its addition to the manufacturing process would mean that the time from starting the trade ship to completing the dent would be the same. The road would be no shorter, but there would be a motivating milestone in the form of a new ship in the middle. This introduction of a bigger unarmed trade ship would change the dynamics in some ways as well, as the value of a bigger load will be a bigger temptation to pirates, and may even be enough to encourage more usage of player escorts when trading. Using that big ol' xc is one thing, but losing your manufactured trade ship? Also, i think it should be manufactured each time, maybe a simpler tree for once its been done the first time.

Thats a good idea to solve the issue of the replacement dent for 500k sounding ridiculous... If they were to offer a different manufacturing tree for your dent after it has been destroyed, but much much shorter, then it would feel a little more sensible at least.

Just blowing off steam hehe...

Or maybe they could introduce some kind of 'repaying a favour' mission, you go help someone with a story type mission, and in return they replace your dent.

Start a different thread for that.

This one is about changing the FCP size to 100cu.

You got any thoughts on that?

Savet...this thread is getting bored

Can you help spruce it up a bit?