I didn't mind it thanks to Spansh, but getting the Tritium beforehand...
fleet carrier jumps
- Thread starter bertiy
- Start date
It is possible to steal tritium, up to 6k for a single wing delivery mission for minimal cost and reputation loss. Just need to pick it up and ferry it to your carrier.
Top tip! Thanks. I never thought of that. Very cunning.
Just keep in mind that they have to be wing delivery missions. You need to pick it all up and sell into secure storage on your carrier before you fail the mission. You can buy it back from secure storage to fuel your own carrier with, but IIRC any other commander buying it will have it flagged as stolen. FWIW, you can also find missions to steal gold, etc. Once you fail them there is a small fine and a small rep loss. Very often you can get bribe missions to just buy back the reputation. For those stuck out in Colonia, CB-56 Colonia Bridge in Eol Prou GE-A c1-291 does often give out these kind of missions.
Colonia is exactly where I am (usually). Thanks again!
Sorry for reposting myself, but the idea is following - to allow setting a route using star systems which were visited by the commander/FC owner themselves OR buy exploration data for systems which were visited and reported by other commanders (and for that add ability to see/filter such systems on the map).What sort of chaos? Saving up to 15 waypoints (what is roughly max number of jumps on full tritium depot) on the server and update a record once a 20 minutes? Even if it would be 20k of carriers (peak number of players) it could be run on Raspberry PI I guess
Anyone wishing to travel far (while being offline) now just need to go to Discord and find a FC owner to join the trip. Not everywhere, but most active destinations like Colonia, SagA etc. No one complaining about that.
And if someone would deside to travel through the systems not visited earlier it could be a set of random events on route which would interrupt the process. Something based on the skill of NPC crew (another feature to add). So it would be less predictable in comparison with "manual" variant, but still good way to avoid the need to get back into the game to schedule next jump every half an hour. And this could provide a "content" for FC owner to make the travel more entertaining. Or alternatively one could see and buy exploration data (via GalMap, almost existing function) and construct more predictable route (with less chance of random events) through the systems visited by other commanders earlier.
Would it still be considered as auto-playing if it will be used for scenarios like the following?
- getting back to the inhabited/core systems the same way you jumped from there
- getting to the places visited by others at least once
Try it & see!
When travelling I always try to get as close to 500ly as I can because of the 20 min turnaround between jumps is the more important factor for me. Not really seeing the connection between the thread topic & your idle query though.
Dude, they were never intended to be "personal". They were designed for squadrons, and it shows. Why they were released for individual ownership is most likely because Fdev couldn't figure out how a squadron would control them; which is fair, because that would have gone terribly.
It took me all of 90 sec to come up with a better personal fleet carrier than the one we have in the game.
As the tritium consumed depends on the cargo (including the tritium) held on the carrier, it seems likely that make many smaller jump will increase the tritium use..
1. Examples for carrier weighing 25k tonnes in total:
- 492.95 Ly jump requires 128 tonnes of tritium, which translates into 3.85 Ly/tonne of tritium
- 283.66 Ly jump requires 76 tonnes of tritium, which translates into 3.73 Ly/tonne of tritium
- 487.92 Ly jump requires 118 tonnes of tritium, which translates into 4.13 Ly/tonne of tritium
- 23.76 Ly jump requires 11 tonnes of tritium, which translates into 2.16 Ly/tonne of tritium
- 493.87 Ly jump requires 87 tonnes of tritium, which translates into 5.68 Ly/tonne of tritium
- 294.59 Ly jump requires 54 tonnes of tritium, which translates into 5.45 Ly/tonne of tritium
Big jumps use less tritium than same distance with small jumps.
But individual small jumps don't cost much om tritium. So the occasional repositioning the carrier to a better planet in the system, or a better nearby system costs very little.
But individual small jumps don't cost much om tritium. So the occasional repositioning the carrier to a better planet in the system, or a better nearby system costs very little.
They were made personal assets due to the demands of players, it had nothing to do with the difficulty of making them squad assets, and it would have made no difference, all you would have seen would have been a proliferation of single player squads, plenty of them around already but that's what people would have done. The problem with any other sort of personal fleet carrier is persistence, a personal fleet carrier, done in any other way, wouldn't have been persistent and would vanish when the player left the game, now that's not an issue for me, but would have caused problems for players who wanted to use the fleet carriers as a market place.
The most unnerving thing when doing long distance carrier travels is the time factor, 15 mins (or more) cooldown plus another 5 for preparations for each jump. In the best of cases, you can do around 3 jumps per hour. And you cannot set the next waypoint while the thing is cooling down, so it's a more or less idle wait. That's not so much a problem when hopping around inside the bubble, but on long journeys, to Colonia or Beagle or such, it really gets tedious. IMHO fuel efficiency only gets important when refueling is a problem and you're close to the limit, like going to Salome's Reach and back.
O7,
O7,
Carrier jump efficiency for a fully loaded carrier (total mass 26k tonnes).
Fdev wary of any automatic devices, so don't expect it to happen any time soon.
FCs were a huge game-changer for exploration, they added a lot, but sometimes I miss the old exploration, before the FC and even before the FSS. Yes it was tedious, yes it was often even boring, but man how it gave you a feeling of being out there in the Black, alone, with the whole civilisation way behind you, no easy way back, and a permanent feeling of being at risk. FCs completely changed that. There was also a bigger feeling of discovery prior to the FSS. Those who never had to do a 45min "faith supercruise run" to a distant planet hoping to get an Earth-like terraformable world only to realize it was actually a worthless rock can't understand the feeling.
So yes, explo today as an activity is objectively far superior to what it was, but it also reduced the "true" exploration feeling. Can't have everything. Any addition that simplifies or automates processes would only accelerate that trend. I don't think it would be a good thing.
Last edited:
I'd love it if my FC could travel thousands of light-years on one tonne of Tritium.
The inclusion of three trailing digits makes the y-axis figures look weird to English-speakers, this is one problem when certain countries use a comma as a decimal separator compared to others that use a period (full-stop) separator.
Now to me that has yet to become an issue out in the black as I can’t resist at least scanning an unknown system, but I can see how it would be annoying in heavily explored areas and if one actually wanted to rush.The most unnerving thing when doing long distance carrier travels is the time factor, 15 mins (or more) cooldown plus another 5 for preparations for each jump. In the best of cases, you can do around 3 jumps per hour. And you cannot set the next waypoint while the thing is cooling down, so it's a more or less idle wait. That's not so much a problem when hopping around inside the bubble, but on long journeys, to Colonia or Beagle or such, it really gets tedious. IMHO fuel efficiency only gets important when refueling is a problem and you're close to the limit, like going to Salome's Reach and back.
O7,
This wasn’t as much of a problem when people wrote things as the decimal separator was a dot placed at the halfway height of the numbers. Actually I have a vague memory that good mechanical typewriters either had a key for that or a trick to move the paper to achieve the same thing.I'd love it if my FC could travel thousands of light-years on one tonne of Tritium.
The inclusion of three trailing digits makes the y-axis figures look weird to English-speakers, this is one problem when certain countries use a comma as a decimal separator compared to others that use a period (full-stop) separator.