Print

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

[Xik]

Beta 7.2

(Note: Exact integrity values arbitrary but correct relative to each other for the purpose of explaining behavior)

Scenario:
Equipped:
Medium Storage - Integrity 10
Large Storage - Integrity 20

Inventory:
Full (No free slots)

On ground:
Large Storage - Integrity 30

Current behavior:
Auto equipping Large Storage from ground results in Large Storage swapping out the currently equipped Large Storage since one on the ground is higher integrity.
Old Large Storage is now on ground. Auto equip that one and it replaces the Medium Storage.

What I would expect:
Large storage on ground to replace the Medium Storage since it is both a stronger variant and higher integrity.

Notes
I'm not sure if this is actually a bug, it's possible it's intended behavior. It seems like the priority of "replacing the same module with lower integrity" is higher then "replace a weaker variant". I feel like it would be of more value to make replacing weaker variants a higher priority for the auto-equip.

You might then ask "what about when the stronger variant actually has lower integrity", then I guess the decision is not as clear cut. For instance, a full integrity medium storage might be of more value compared to say a 1 integrity Large Storage. In that case I think it would be fair to not auto-equip/swap. But in the currently reported instance the module on the ground was a higher integrity then both.

This isn't unique to Storage, it's just the most recent example I noticed the behavior on.

[Kyzrati]

Hi Xik! Yeah this is intended behavior. Overall the automatic swapping tries to operate on as absolutely few rules as possible, and consistently apply those rules to everything, so there will be a minority of situations where it won't do exactly what you might want. With too many rules it'd become hard to predict though, hence the current setup. The short list of rules and their priority are listed in the manual.

It generally errs on the side of the absolutely safe option, or does nothing at all if it's ambiguous.

[Xik]

Ah yeah, no problem. Thanks for replying so fast!

[Kyzrati]

Thanks for stopping by! Always good to have players interested enough to provide input