Idea for de-cluttering systems with fleet carriers

Obviously when fleet carriers were introduced, FDevs intended the upkeep cost to ensure that inactive players would run out of money and their fleet carriers would become decomissioned. What's happened since then is players are now able to make insane amounts of money very fast and cover literally years of operating expenses for their fleet carriers in a matter of days. The result? A lot of fleet carriers. A looooot of fleet carriers.

I think it's fair to say that a lot of people who purchase fleet carriers simply want the convenience of being able to move all of their ships together, and have access to all the services of the fleet carrier. There are certainly players who have little or no desire for their fleet carrier to show up publicly in whatever system they are in. So my suggestion is to have it so that instead of every fleet carrier automatically be set up to be publicly on display wherever it is parked, to have an optional module that you can install on the fleet carrier that then makes it on display to the public. Some people rely on this public information to know if someone is using a fleet carrier to mess with the BGS in their area, so admittedly, my idea does step on some peoples toes, but please bear with me. If the service module has an upkeep cost that comes in the form of some sort of resource aside from credits, like tritium or whatever currency you can think of, then it can be installed with a limit on how many months the fleet carrier can be left AFK. Currently there is no limit to how many credits you can store up (AFAIK) and so you can grind out years worth of operating expenses in a matter of days, or maybe weeks, then drop the game, never play again, and now you've left this giant peice of space junk that sits in space for years, if not for the rest of Elite Dangerou's lifetime.

If the resource needed to operate the module that puts your fleet carrier up on public display were something like tritium or similar, then there can be set a limit to how long you can go AFK before your fleet carrier is taken off public display, but you can continue to have the fleet carrier remain operational for literally years (beyond it being yanked off public display) for when you log back in after taking a long break. My idea is to just have the module that puts your carrier up on display go inactive after a hard ceiling of time that you've spent AFK from ED

What do you guys think? I'm just trying to come up with a solution to all the fleet carriers that are all over the place. Admittedly, even I was AFK from ED for 2 or 3 years and I know that my FC was just sitting there occupying space while not being of value to anybody while I was gone from the game. If I had a module installed that would set my carrier to become publicly available.... I would seriously not even use it. I don't care if other people can dock in my fleet carrier. I (and I'm sure other players) want to just have the convenience of moving all my ships together at once with the FC.

It should be obvious that my idea is also intended to free up parking spaces, so this would involve changing the code so that parking spaces are only occupied when a fleet carrier is parked there AND it also has this module installed. So what would happen if someone tried to turn the module on, when parked in a place where there is no more room for another "publicly displayed" FC? Simple. Have a message pop up to inform the player that they need to relocate the FC before they can online the module and make the FC publicly available.
There's a good chance that there are other issues that would come up from an idea like this. But I think it's a problem that should be solved. There's seriously a lot of fleet carriers in space, and I'm sure many of them have a story like my own: player grinded credits, bought a fleet carrier, had a little fun, then left the game and it sat there for literally years for no good reason. It's a problem worth solving.
 
Last edited:
How about if the carrier disappears from the game if the account owner doesn't log in to the game for one year. Next time they log in it gets instantiated into the game again, if impossible to put it back in the same spot, then nearby.

This shouldn't inconvenience anyone in an excessive manner?
 
How about if the carrier disappears from the game if the account owner doesn't log in to the game for one year. Next time they log in it gets instantiated into the game again, if impossible to put it back in the same spot, then nearby.

This shouldn't inconvenience anyone in an excessive manner?
I think this is also a good idea. It's simple, except for that it would require the FC to be teleported to the nearest available parking space in some circumstances. Also a year is kind of a long time but that's debatable.
 
Just have the FCs jump automatically to adjacent unoccupied systems if cmdr hasn't logged in for 2-3 weeks. Make those jumps not require any tritium, to prevent cmdrs leaving their depots empty to avoid it.
 
How about if the carrier disappears from the game if the account owner doesn't log in to the game for one year. Next time they log in it gets instantiated into the game again, if impossible to put it back in the same spot, then nearby.

This shouldn't inconvenience anyone in an excessive manner?
There's a couple of carriers I know of whose owners have passed away. They're kept well funded (via selling carto data and redemptions) as virtual memorials. Those cmdrs will never log in again but it would be disappointing if their carriers disappeared.
 
I think we've been through all this before, every single possibility that could be taken to somehow reduce clutter, and yet here we are again. Personally the stacking of multiple carriers in one icon is all I need, my carrier always appears as a separate object for me so I don't have to search through dozens to find it, I'm happy.
 
ban them all, has it's just lazy cmdr's who don't want to jump from system to system in his ship's. :)

better suggestion i would think is make the carrier's disable it postion on the system database .until the cmdr comes back then turn off the carrier sytem in database .that way no one knows it there and will free up spaces. especially since most carriers cmdrs are 100 billion in cr's
 
Last edited:
I'd certainly be in favour of a mechanism that simply removes Carriers from the game if the player hasn't logged-in for awhile. People with Carriers out in the black that they want to keep (e.g. DSSA Carriers) just have to log in, they don't have to go to them, or do anything else. And they'd be quietly reintroduced (somewhere in the general vicinity) if the player ever comes back.

As for other people with ships parked on the Carriers: that shoud be solvable with the current instancing system. If you log-in on a removed Carrier, you're on a Carrier in your instance that others can't see or interact with. This "ghost Carrier" disappears (for you) when you leave the instance.

With parked modules (for those with modules but not ships on the Carrier), that's easy. The module is in a specific system. You can't find the Carrier in that system anymore, but you can still book a module-transfer to another system.
 
Having Carriers unlisted from general view won't make them disappear from the system and the issue of instancing them in and out with a periodical log in check would cause issues when there are limited spots available in a system, or even if the particular spot the carrier was parked isn't available any more, which is probably not going to be an uncommon occurrence overall.

I like the idea of being able to switch from unlisted/listed from everywhere but the FSS, and even having a toggle switch in the FSS screen to filter them out so they can be set to be discoverable only by those looking for them.

Though the above raises the problem of the carrier limit per system when all the carriers in a system are present but unlisted, it might be confusing/frustrating to not be able to jump into what looks like a carrier free system, which also goes to highlight the arbitrary limit in the first place, which is understandable from a technical standpoint but not from the standpoint of how many carriers the volume of any given system could host, which would be in the millions.
 
it's a matter of player's attitude and respect to other players. When I see system with full parking slots, but one - I take it, finish my jobs there ASAP and jump somewhere to clear slot. So it's mostly up to us to prevent excess loitering important systems with half-dead poor little Carryas. Not their fault that their owners are, let's say, not the best representatives of hooomanz race :D
 
Having Carriers unlisted from general view won't make them disappear from the system and the issue of instancing them in and out with a periodical log in check would cause issues when there are limited spots available in a system, or even if the particular spot the carrier was parked isn't available any more, which is probably not going to be an uncommon occurrence overall.
Yeah this could be solvable with my original idea of having a module installed that you turn on, and should the spot you're parked at be at maximum capacity, you get a message saying to relocate your carrier before you can turn on the module and make the carrier publicly displayed again.
 
Yeah this could be solvable with my original idea of having a module installed that you turn on, and should the spot you're parked at be at maximum capacity, you get a message saying to relocate your carrier before you can turn on the module and make the carrier publicly displayed again.
So how do you deal with visiting your carrier without the module? Wouldn't it have to still be in the system for you and others you invite to visit, albeit not visible to everyone else? Or is the solution for that what you mean by recoding the way fleet carriers are in the game?
 
So how do you deal with visiting your carrier without the module? Wouldn't it have to still be in the system for you and others you invite to visit, albeit not visible to everyone else? Or is the solution for that what you mean by recoding the way fleet carriers are in the game?
Oh my idea was that only you would be able to go to the fleet carrier if you didn't have the module installed.
 
Which is the problem now that we are trying to solve here?

Are you annoyed by the number of carriers? Or just when they are in your way?

Geez! Have some respect for Fleet carriers.. Used or unused....
 
When one sells exploration data or sets foot on a planet if that player is the first to do so they get a permanent tag showing their name for the rest of the games life under the current rules. There are alot of those still around from Cmdrs that haven't been active in years. I don't have a problem with this, very few others do (I'm sure there are some but it's not a commonly raised issue), it's first past the post rules.

Something similar happens with carrier parking spots. If a system has all it's carrier parking spots filled already those same first past the post rules dictate that they can remain there as long as they like, forever or at least for as long as the Carrier has sufficient funds to pay the weekly upkeep & there are plenty of carriers with years or even decades worth of funds, they played the game, got into that parking spot early or got lucky, they are entitled to remain however inconvenient that may be to other Cmdrs. First past the post.

However unlike discovery tags a carrier can be moved if the Cmdr owner decides to, or if they run out of funds. I don't think there is any justification for one part of the game to no longer apply that first past the post (or first come first served etc) rule, they got there before you, they have that spot & you missed out, tough.

Visually the issue of multiple carriers cluttering up the system map has already been addressed in Live (they all still show up in Legacy if anyone wants to see what it used to look like).

So IMO no change required, if someone wants to get into a full system they need to accept they missed out or try to persuade some Carrier owner to give up their slot voluntarily. It is not for other players to decide, it would be unreasonable for anyone to expect the rules to be changed any more than it would be for discovery tags to eventually time out and somehow need to be maintained or renewed if that was not what the rules were when they got that tag expecting it to be there forever & any prestige or advantage for having their name on some popular tourist destination or whatever.

More parking slots could be added to certain systems with special rules like time limits, in the case of Rackams Peak an alternate route could be somehow created (eg make carriers able to jump further or add jump points existing carriers can use).
 
Last edited:
The issue isn't the consistency of carriers in all instances. It's the relative signal on your HUD and your Nav panel that clogs up the scenery. I'd like to see the large circle indicator go away with something more quaint in its place, and to have no signal on your HUD for things you haven't selected. That way I don't see all the HUD noise of carrier signals. It's distracting an unattractive to have so many indicators overlaying other things. I believe there's ways to shut it down, but I think that throws the baby out with the bathwater.

In the Nav panel, you should be able to filter out all carriers except the one you want to see. If that one is yours then that would be it. The highlighting is fine but scrolling through so many of them really creates an undesirable aspect to navigation. The fact you cannot is a problem. Not to mention the stupid names that somehow get through the filters.

Carriers are extremely miniscule compared to the planets they orbit and the system they reside in, but they punch above their weight with disproportional representation in both the Navigation panel and on the HUD.

Systems that are full already are fine, 1st come 1st serve.

I like carriers, it's why I still play, but they need some love (especially their galaxy mapping for jumps, ugh).
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom