I am once again asking FDev to address the horrendous fleet carrier jump request situation.

[Neestar]

Because Fleet carriers are already vastly OP.

Respectfully @Ozric , i must disagree ^. ( FDev clearly disagrees too btw ) Particularly with your hyperbolic choice-of-word "vastly" .
i've only been playing this amazing & majestic game for a little over a year , but already one thing is very clear to me: 500 LYs is NOTHNG. Drop in the infinite space bucket.

Personally, now with new Colonisation mandate combined with the fact that Anaconda & Mandalay ( and Cobra mk5 ) can almost reach 100 LY by themselves ( not to even mention neutron-star boosting ) , makes me think FCs should have an engineering option ( materials requirement unlock or ARX upgrade or whatever gatekeeping needed ) to expand up to 1000 LY range.

After all, it's been over 10 years since this game began and pilots have barely even explored a mere what 2% of entire known explorable universe?!?!! 2% !
i realize it's a space simulator ( the best one, imo ) but jeez c'mon 2% ?! So what, another 10 years, if the game lasts, to reach maybe 5%? 7% maybe?!

Consequently, i hardly think a 1000 LY range option for some FCs, combined with current & typical server-load time-gating to the extreme, would "ruin" the game.
Therefore, sorry but 500 LY range for FCs certainly isn't "OP" , much less "vastly" .

Being able to jump vast distances negates what is a core part of the game imo.

Again, with respect, i believe you're speaking quite hyperbolicly with statements like that ^ , because of your specific word choice "negates" . To negate means "to cancel out" . Are you really saying with a straight forum-face that you believe FCs "cancel out" ALL exploration?!?!
Instead, the reality is FCs only serve to enhance the core part ( exploration ) of EliteDangerous, by providing an optional avenue of FURTHER exploration possibilities.

And this new Colonisation update proves just as much, since it's very evident how FDev is encouraging MORE exploration potentials with every new 'FSO' type ship and every recent update. Are they not?

Lastly, it's important to always remember: Most players are casuals who never even engineer their own ships, much less purchase a FC.

 

[alexzk]

After all, it's been over 10 years since this game began and pilots have barely even explored a mere what 2% of entire known explorable universe?!?!! 2% !

Did I miss something ? I was 0.05% or 0.07% and I prepared celebration drinks to open at 0.1% hit

 

[Neestar]

Did I miss something ? I was 0.05% or 0.07% and I prepared celebration drinks to open at 0.1% hit

well, i might've bumped that number up ( presumptively ) because of calculating efforts like these--> https://forums.frontier.co.uk/threa...can-every-system-within-200-ly-of-sol.531480/ ...which is nearing it's completion soon.
Either way, if i over-estimated, it only further reinforces my above point.

 

[Ozric]

Respectfully @Ozric , i must disagree ^. ( FDev clearly disagrees too btw ) Particularly with your hyperbolic choice-of-word "vastly" .
i've only been playing this amazing & majestic game for a little over a year , but already one thing is very clear to me: 500 LYs is NOTHNG. Drop in the infinite space bucket.

Personally, now with new Colonisation mandate combined with the fact that Anaconda & Mandalay ( and Cobra mk5 ) can almost reach 100 LY by themselves ( not to even mention neutron-star boosting ) , makes me think FCs should have an engineering option ( materials requirement unlock or ARX upgrade or whatever gatekeeping needed ) to expand up to 1000 LY range.

After all, it's been over 10 years since this game began and pilots have barely even explored a mere what 2% of entire known explorable universe?!?!! 2% !
i realize it's a space simulator ( the best one, imo ) but jeez c'mon 2% ?! So what, another 10 years, if the game lasts, to reach maybe 5%? 7% maybe?!

Consequently, i hardly think a 1000 LY range option for some FCs, combined with current & typical server-load time-gating to the extreme, would "ruin" the game.
Therefore, sorry but 500 LY range for FCs certainly isn't "OP" , much less "vastly" .

Again, with respect, i believe you're speaking quite hyperbolicly with statements like that ^ , because of your specific word choice "negates" . To negate means "to cancel out" . Are you really saying with a straight forum-face that you believe FCs "cancel out" ALL exploration?!?!
Instead, the reality is FCs only serve to enhance the core part ( exploration ) of EliteDangerous, by providing an optional avenue of FURTHER exploration possibilities.

And this new Colonisation update proves just as much, since it's very evident how FDev is encouraging MORE exploration potentials with every new 'FSO' type ship and every recent update. Are they not?

Alexzk is right the last we heard in early 2024 it was 0.06% discovered.

I'm not exaggerating my point of view at all. In fact I'm being quite restrained, but that's only because I've gone over my dislike of Fleet Carriers many times before. I never once mentioned Exploration though, so I'm not sure why you decided that was my issue with it.

True having Fleet Carriers you can sell Exploration Data and repair on takes away from the risks of deep space exploration, but as Exploration data is the only data you can lose on death now... and it has an element of RP that colonisation is building on, it's my least concern. My issue is far more with being able to move vast fleet of fully engineered ships at the drop of a hat, being able to stockpile hard to obtain goods, corrosive items, plot goods etc. (which has now gotten worse as this patch seems to have enabled the storing of Rare Goods), and the major unbalancing they have caused to CGs.

But I digress.

Lastly, it's important to always remember: Most players are casuals who never even engineer their own ships, much less purchase a FC.

If that were the case then we wouldn't be in this situation

 

[Aexrael]

Lastly, it's important to always remember: Most players are casuals who never even engineer their own ships, much less purchase a FC.

For someone complaining about hyperbole, this is a nonsense comment. Just open your system view and jump through 15-20 systems in the bubble. There are thousand upon thousand of players with FCarriers. The get rich schemes over the last 5 years have vastly accelerated credit gains, and FCs aren't out of anyones reach furrther compounding the issue.

 

[Neestar]

Alexzk is right the last we heard in early 2024 it was 0.06% discovered.

Again, this only serves to reinforce my point. Are we to expect to "wait" another 10+ YEARS before another "0.06%" is disovered?! Sorry but that seems illogical in a video game. ( space sim or not )

I'm not exaggerating my point of view at all. In fact I'm being quite restrained, but that's only because I've gone over my dislike of Fleet Carriers many times before.

Right, hence your obvious bias.
Again, FDev disagrees with your opinion CMDR , since they implemented FCs and have no indication of "nerfing" them. Ever.

I never once mentioned Exploration though, so I'm not sure why you decided that was my issue with it.

Well, when you said "core spirit" of the game or however you phrased it , i presumed you meant Exploration itself, no? If that was an improper presumption, then i apologize.

having Fleet Carriers you can sell Exploration Data and repair on takes away from the risks of deep space exploration,

Again, i disagree and i believe you are vastly ( your word ) overstating things here. Players can still very easily die/destroyed within range of their own FC , from planet temps or interidctions or hyperdictions or Thargoids or caustics or mismanagement or going AFK or heck any number of things.

My issue is far more with being able to move vast fleet of fully engineered ships at the drop of a hat, being able to stockpile hard to obtain goods, corrosive items, plot goods etc. (which has now gotten worse as this patch seems to have enabled the storing of Rare Goods), and the major unbalancing they have caused to CGs.

That ^ is a totally separate issue from FC range ( aka the topic of this thread ) .

If that were the case then we wouldn't be in this situation

Sorry but what "situation" exactly? And i ask that without sarcasm. ( i really want to understand what you mean and how it relates to my point about FC ranges + Exploration )

 

[Neestar]

For someone complaining about hyperbole, this is a nonsense comment.

First off, i wasn't "complaining" . So you can stop with that type of typical internet lame flame attempt.
In over 1 year of being here, i've never quoted/commented on ANY of @Ozric 's post . Until today. So yeah, nice try but i'm hardly "complaining" lol smh

Just open your system view and jump through 15-20 systems in the bubble. There are thousand upon thousand of players with FCarriers. The get rich schemes over the last 5 years have vastly accelerated credit gains, and FCs aren't out of anyones reach furrther compounding the issue.

Again, that has absolutely nothing to do with my post & point , nor the topic of this thread. ( re: FC jump times , jump ranges, etc. )
Secondly, most of those supposed "thousand upon thousand" of players are ALT accounts and/or parked idle.
But of course only FDev coders know the exactly quantifying data.

 

[Ian Doncaster]

For someone complaining about hyperbole, this is a nonsense comment. Just open your system view and jump through 15-20 systems in the bubble. There are thousand upon thousand of players with FCarriers. The get rich schemes over the last 5 years have vastly accelerated credit gains, and FCs aren't out of anyones reach furrther compounding the issue.

The two aren't incompatible statements.

There have been over 13 million accounts created, according to Frontier's official numbers.
If just 1% of those accounts own a FC, then there are 130,000 Fleet Carriers (or four for every inhabited system, plus a bunch spare for deep space)
But still 99% of accounts don't have a FC.

(The "average" player probably never gets out of the Sidewinder, and probably doesn't play enough total hours to afford a FC even with 100M+/hour earning rates, which they don't ever reach because they're in a Sidewinder)

 

[alexzk]

Again, this only serves to reinforce my point. Are we to expect to "wait" another 10+ YEARS before another "0.06%" is disovered?! Sorry but that seems illogical in a video game. ( space sim or not )

Sorry, cannot agree with that. Too fast = bad. I dislike possibilities SCO gives, point is space must be huge.
This game is about immersion. In fact, I would eat some another message like "huge witch-space fluctuations" instead "no time slot"

 

[Neestar]

Too fast = bad.

0.07% in 10+ years = "too fast" ?!?!?!
wow , ok then.

 

[Neilski]

I actually came to the forum tonight to see if there was a work around for the no time slots available situation.

Did you succeed at all in the end? Am noticing that your post was at 02:30 UTC :-O

True having Fleet Carriers you can sell Exploration Data and repair on takes away from the risks of deep space exploration, but as Exploration data is the only data you can lose on death now... and it has an element of RP that colonisation is building on, it's my least concern. My issue is far more with being able to move vast fleet of fully engineered ships at the drop of a hat, being able to stockpile hard to obtain goods, corrosive items, plot goods etc. (which has now gotten worse as this patch seems to have enabled the storing of Rare Goods), and the major unbalancing they have caused to CGs.

I'd agree on pretty much all of those points you list as issues with FCs. Their actual jump range on the other hand feels much more restrained - it's only as far as my Exploraconda can jump in 5 minutes (without neutron boosts), so I don't see it as too big especially given that the best-case scenario is 3 jumps per hour. (I've complained elsewhere about FC refuelling issues so I won't mention them again here.)
I have yet to explore all the way to Sag A* or beyond, so I'll never get to try it in a world where there is no DSSA, which I'm sure hugely changes the whole experience of "the black".

(The "average" player probably never gets out of the Sidewinder, and probably doesn't play enough total hours to afford a FC even with 100M+/hour earning rates, which they don't ever reach because they're in a Sidewinder)

Yes, I think the presumption (or certainly mine) is that the learning curve for ED turns off most of the people who buy it - a far higher fraction than for other games, I suspect. FD will no doubt know the numbers for say ED vs Planet Coaster, but they may not wish to share them

 

[Greasetrap42]

After all, it's been over 10 years since this game began and pilots have barely even explored a mere what 2% of entire known explorable universe?!?!! 2% !
i realize it's a space simulator ( the best one, imo ) but jeez c'mon 2% ?! So what, another 10 years, if the game lasts, to reach maybe 5%? 7% maybe?!

I see this argument occasionally and I very much dislike it.

It is like saying only 2% of the trees in a forest have been closely looked at. Or people have only looked at and appreciated 2% of the rocks at a beach.

The ED galaxy has 400 billion star systems. Certainly only a very small portion of these systems and their planets have been scrutinized by players. But sure enough if you go to any interesting galactic location you will find 99% system visitation by cmdrs. And the cool planets will have been scanned. And if was visited since Odessey first foot falls.

Cmdrs learned a long time ago where to look for the cool stuff. Certainly might still be the new cool discovery, but at this point nothing much 'new' is going to be discovered in deep space. A cmdr can search hundreds of systems searching for a planet with dinosaurs or whatever... but there is an extremely small chance they will find it. Because we know this is a video game and it doesn't appear Frontier planted super rare items like dinosaurs.

 

[alexzk]

0.07% in 10+ years = "too fast" ?!?!?!
wow , ok then.

Adding +500ly jump will not change that number . 90% of the star's population is brown dwarfs all sort. People just filter them out. Also in 500 ly around bubble there are plenty never visited places.

 

[Ian Doncaster]

Yes, I think the presumption (or certainly mine) is that the learning curve for ED turns off most of the people who buy it - a far higher fraction than for other games, I suspect. FD will no doubt know the numbers for say ED vs Planet Coaster, but they may not wish to share them

It's all a matter of definitions.

Someone who buys ED, plays it for 50-100 hours, enjoys it, then moves onto something else (like a normal person playing a normal game, in other words) ... has probably got more hours of fun out of it than out of their average game purchase, but by forum poster standards would be so far below the floor for "occasional casual player" that they may as well not exist.

 

[Neestar]

The ED galaxy has 400 billion star systems.
but at this point nothing much 'new' is going to be discovered in deep space. -- Because we know this is a video game and it doesn't appear Frontier planted super rare items like dinosaurs.

How do you "know" if only "0.07%" ( or whatever ) has been discovered in 10+ years?
Ever heard of 'RAXXLA' ? Or 'The Dark Wheel' ?
My point is, again, adding 500 LY range to FCs ( much less the current 500 limit ) certainly wouldn't be "vastly OP" nor would it "ruin the game" nor would it automatically mean all of a sudden 99% of remaining 400 billion systems would be "taken" or discovered in a week. Surely there must be some logical balance between having to wait another 10+ years for another measily "0.07%" , no?

And FDev agrees, otherwise why so much focus on further jump ranges and SCOs and Colonisation? Don't you think coders want their code to be played?

 

[Robert Maynard]

Further reminder to participants: Please discuss the topic. Other participants are not the topic. Failure to comply will result in advisories, warnings, reply bans, and / or thread closure. Thanks.

 

[Aexrael]

First off, i wasn't "complaining" . So you can stop with that type of typical internet lame flame attempt.
In over 1 year of being here, i've never quoted/commented on ANY of @Ozric 's post . Until today. So yeah, nice try but i'm hardly "complaining" lol smh

Again, that has absolutely nothing to do with my post & point , nor the topic of this thread. ( re: FC jump times , jump ranges, etc. )
Secondly, most of those supposed "thousand upon thousand" of players are ALT accounts and/or parked idle.
But of course only FDev coders know the exactly quantifying data.

Literally the first line of your sentence was bemoaning Ozric for hyperbole, if you need a reminder check what you wrote.

Secondly if you cannot see the correlation between the relative ease of acquiring FCs, the current substantial amount of FCs and the very topic of the thread, then you're being intentionally obtuse. It is precisely on topic in fact. Your thinly veiled attempt at dismissing the point by throwing accusations of flaming are also incredibly transparent in that regard.

 

[Greasetrap42]

My point is, again, adding 500 LY range to FCs ( much less the current 500 limit ) certainly wouldn't be "vastly OP" nor would it "ruin the game" nor would it automatically mean all of a sudden 99% of remaining 400 billion systems would be "taken" or discovered in a week. Surely there must be some logical balance between having to wait another 10+ years for another measily "0.07%" , no?

Okay, I'll bite. If the discussion is surrounding the % of the ED galaxy that has been scrutinized, and trying to significantly increase this (why?) and possibly finding a planet with dinosaurs (or whatever) I don't see how increasing Fleet Carrier jump range factors in. A Fleet Carrier gets you somewhere quick, but you can't use it to scan a larger % of systems per day.

And yes, I am one of these explorers that has spent giant time in deep space scanning many thousands of systems. And yes when carriers were introduced I used it extensively for exploration. But it does NOT increase my searches per day.

 

[Neestar]

Literally the first line of your sentence was bemoaning Ozric for hyperbole, if you need a reminder check what you wrote.

Actually it was my 2nd sentence--> https://forums.frontier.co.uk/threa...r-jump-request-situation.634300/post-10561085 .
My reply to @Ozric was extremely respectful in tone AND i was also mostly just asking them QUESTIONS. Then you swooped in, in typical forum opportunist-mode, and started flame posting with standard internet trigger word "complaining". Now you say "bemoaning" , eh? Ok fine, but umm "bemoaning" isn't "complaining" , and you know it.
Not like it matters anyway, since you're just strawman'ing here completely ignoring the crux of my point. Maybe get off this flame train?

Secondly if you cannot see the correlation between the relative ease of acquiring FCs, the current substantial amount of FCs and the very topic of the thread, then you're being intentionally obtuse. It is precisely on topic in fact. Your thinly veiled attempt at dismissing the point by throwing accusations of flaming are also incredibly transparent in that regard.

i call it like i see it. Regardless, the great @Ian Doncaster already replied to you---> https://forums.frontier.co.uk/threa...r-jump-request-situation.634300/post-10561254 in a far more articulate way than i ever could. He validated my supposed as you put it "nonsense". And you ignored his reply too , in favor of trying to come at me again lol go figure.

Okay, I'll bite. If the discussion is surrounding the % of the ED galaxy that has been scrutinized, and trying to significantly increase this (why?) and possibly finding a planet with dinosaurs (or whatever) I don't see how increasing Fleet Carrier jump range factors in.

Because it just makes it slightly easier, more convenient, more worthwhile (considering server-load time-slots) , seemingly more attainable, etc. That's all.

i just personally don't find it fun to imagine having to wait (actively) another...let's see my Math here... 0.07% , let's round up to 0.10% in past 10 years. Okay so that means, maybe if players continue to play the game, maybe by the year 2035 with continued Colonisation & whatever, maybe we'll have roughly discovered.... 0.9%? Maybe even 1%? Maybe 2% ?
That sure does seem like a waste of coded SPACE, no? Plus i mean, is the game gonna last until 2035 ? Surely there's gonna be an 'Elite Dangerous 2' ( or whatever sequel number ) before then, no?

A Fleet Carrier gets you somewhere quick, but you can't use it to scan a larger % of systems per day.

Exactly. Hence why, again, FCs certainly aren't "vastly OP" when it comes to Exploration. ( *i also don't believe they are "vastly OP" in any other sense either tbqh )
FCs are just another tool to utilize. Or not.

 

[galahad2069]

Is this very informative error message somehow related to the 'no time slot' carrier situation?
Because apparently the servers are simply too weak for the job.

(this is actually how this error message looks like in the lower right corner of the screen)