Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[JDCollie]

(Note that a synergy slot already loses some capability by no longer accepting down-sized weapons.)

That's more of an advantage than not, especially with Autofit.

I disagree. It loses a lot of flexibility for slight ease of use improvement for a quality of life feature.

[SCC]

I suspect Retry meant that enemy fleets are going to be less likely to have their weapons be undersized, preserving their level of challenge, instead of making them laughable.

[Alex]

Generally speaking, if autofit downsizes something, it's because it wasn't allowed to use any right-size weapons for the slot (or didn't have the OP), not because it decided to downsize something because it thought it was a good idea*.

(*There's the exception where something like one in four AI-fleet ships (configurable per-faction) ships have autofit randomize the loadout considerably more.)

For some encounters (e.g. the Red Planet) the ships have access to all available weapons, as opposed to trying to make the best of a subset; loadouts produced there would be more indicative of autofit without external restrictions.

[Retry]

(Note that a synergy slot already loses some capability by no longer accepting down-sized weapons.)

That's more of an advantage than not, especially with Autofit.

I disagree. It loses a lot of flexibility for slight ease of use improvement for a quality of life feature.

If you think trading the ability to downgrade a weapon slot's size for the ability to draw from two pools of weapons for a given size is a not only a net loss of flexibility, but a large net loss, then I have an arcology on Chicomoztoc to sell you.