I don't see any excuse why we can't have this. I mean they come in all colors anyway. So why not mix and match them and give them the proper Phaser or Disruptor Color. They could actually make some coin on it. I would pay zen for that option because I love my being able to shoot the same color and still have some different set items...
C-Store Inc. is still looking for active members on the fed side. If you don't have a fleet feel free to contact me in game @stegi.
I'd like for the higher-mark Klingon weapons to be able to look like the default compression pistols you get in the beginning. The more advanced ones look stupid with all the blades and TRIBBLE added to them. Weapons in general need a passthrough on their textures and models.
Nothing breaks the tension better than a tankard of warnog - except maybe a good brawl...
That is completely false. Perhaps SOME players have that attitude but most don't. We are just writing what we would LIKE to see in the game or what would make the game more pleasurable to us and make us spend money on it.
Look at my post, where do you see any part of your statement?
Other posts? Can you find more than 4 or 5 posts that could be interpreted like that? Out of 35.
We are the costumers of this game and the devs are it's staff. There is nothing wrong with us suggesting changes we would like to see and devs liking something or not is completely unimportant, to them it's just about what would make the game more profitable and the cross between costs, returns and available time to do something.
I can and will, suggest additions and changes to the game I would like to see. I am aware that there is less than 1% chance any of the devs will ever see a word I write or do exactly what I would like to see.
That being said, civil argumented discussion about something is always a good thing and who knows, perhaps some does see an odd thread here or there, like whet they read and make some part of it happen down the line.
I would pay a good amount of Dil just to make all my [name energy type] weapons look like standard [same energy type].
this is actually not a bad idea. they could hook it into the re engineering system, and youd pay dil to basically re engineer the color of the item itself instead of having a vanity slot.
That is completely false. Perhaps SOME players have that attitude but most don't. We are just writing what we would LIKE to see in the game or what would make the game more pleasurable to us and make us spend money on it.
Look at my post, where do you see any part of your statement?
Other posts? Can you find more than 4 or 5 posts that could be interpreted like that? Out of 35.
We are the costumers of this game and the devs are it's staff. There is nothing wrong with us suggesting changes we would like to see and devs liking something or not is completely unimportant, to them it's just about what would make the game more profitable and the cross between costs, returns and available time to do something.
I can and will, suggest additions and changes to the game I would like to see. I am aware that there is less than 1% chance any of the devs will ever see a word I write or do exactly what I would like to see.
That being said, civil argumented discussion about something is always a good thing and who knows, perhaps some does see an odd thread here or there, like whet they read and make some part of it happen down the line.
My post was not meant directly as a reply to you, but generally to all the people who insisted on discussing this after it was mentioned that the devs have previously refused to do it (and given at least two specific reasons why) on the grounds that "those reasons aren't good enough".
Most people weren't pointing out that those reasons are 'not good enough'. I, for example, was pointing out that the reason given (CBS saying 'no') may not even be applicable anymore - and that even if it still is, it's being ignored as proved by many examples.
Others were, just as rightfully, pointing out that a 'no' from the past does not necessarily hold much value in the present or future.
So yeah, it's perfectly understandable that we're still discussing this.
My post was not meant directly as a reply to you, but generally to all the people who insisted on discussing this after it was mentioned that the devs have previously refused to do it (and given at least two specific reasons why) on the grounds that "those reasons aren't good enough".
A T6 Connie was once a hard "no" from CBS. How many different T6 Connie / Donnie / JJonnie variants do we have now?
Things change. A "no" from 2011 CBS does not mean they still care in 2022. A "no" for "because PVP reasons" makes no sense with almost no PVP occurring in the game.
We did not attack the devs, or CBS. We are saying that we still want this feature, and are willing to pay for it. That's all.
Comments
Look at my post, where do you see any part of your statement?
Other posts? Can you find more than 4 or 5 posts that could be interpreted like that? Out of 35.
We are the costumers of this game and the devs are it's staff. There is nothing wrong with us suggesting changes we would like to see and devs liking something or not is completely unimportant, to them it's just about what would make the game more profitable and the cross between costs, returns and available time to do something.
I can and will, suggest additions and changes to the game I would like to see. I am aware that there is less than 1% chance any of the devs will ever see a word I write or do exactly what I would like to see.
That being said, civil argumented discussion about something is always a good thing and who knows, perhaps some does see an odd thread here or there, like whet they read and make some part of it happen down the line.
this is actually not a bad idea. they could hook it into the re engineering system, and youd pay dil to basically re engineer the color of the item itself instead of having a vanity slot.
I meant they could sell vanity weapons with the visuals of the basic energy types for 300k(?) Dil each.
Most people weren't pointing out that those reasons are 'not good enough'. I, for example, was pointing out that the reason given (CBS saying 'no') may not even be applicable anymore - and that even if it still is, it's being ignored as proved by many examples.
Others were, just as rightfully, pointing out that a 'no' from the past does not necessarily hold much value in the present or future.
So yeah, it's perfectly understandable that we're still discussing this.
A T6 Connie was once a hard "no" from CBS. How many different T6 Connie / Donnie / JJonnie variants do we have now?
Things change. A "no" from 2011 CBS does not mean they still care in 2022. A "no" for "because PVP reasons" makes no sense with almost no PVP occurring in the game.
We did not attack the devs, or CBS. We are saying that we still want this feature, and are willing to pay for it. That's all.