Remove the storage implant from the uplink #2253
Closed
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
i think storage is a very valid implant, only due to its cost. AT LEAST half of all of your TC is a big ask. |
|
i personally feel that if we can blacklist objective items and storage items from being in the implant, this is fine to keep with a significant reduction to its cost |
2 tasks
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
About the PR
This PR removes the storage implant from the uplink.
Why / Balance
It started as simply changes to make it unable to store high risk items, but then containers happend and my smooth brain couldn't figure that out.
Storage implant with high risk item = boring, no RP.
Technical details
YAML changes
Media
It gone.
Requirements
Breaking changes
None.
Changelog
🆑