That would be a shame IMO. I can see there being a lot of fun gameplay around groups "hiding" their fleet carrier, and other groups tracking it down and causing damage. Would tie in nicely to the planned exploration enhancements.
But yes, open to griefers. This is why we cannot have nice things.![]()
Not on console it isn'tYup, but no need to give people easy access to such stuff if its not desirable. And besides, for FD, its easy money![]()
I cant even find 3 other cmdrs to forma wing...
I cant even find 3 other cmdrs to forma wing...
I think there could be a sweet spot in gameplay around carrier losses.
Instead of fully destructible carriers, they could have heat relays like superpower cap ships do, so rivals can take them out in order to force the carrier to retreat back to the owning player groups home system. Additionally, carriers could have destructible modules that could be destroyed that incur a replacement cost on the owners. So not as onerous as losing the entire hull, but enough to represent a meaningful set back.
I wish they could limit that to a FIGHTER carrier.
ie - we can have a carrier that can launch multiple wings of small fighters we can fly as assisting crew on that carrier.
The carrier can then use synthesis to produce new fighters with mats and commodities.
Easiest way is to drag some RL mates into the game.
NO IT IS NOT. I Don't have any... Who still play video games... That's why I thought I get Elite Dangeorus a MULTUPLAYER game to find like minded cmdrs who which to team up . Parts of the issue is time zones and the heavily fragmented nature where I in open play. Many in solo or private groups.
Alsoi There really should be wing missions.
I did have a wing once were the 1 cmd was in Alaska othe in Denmark me London other in OLdam. Wild.
I think there could be a sweet spot in gameplay around carrier losses.
Instead of fully destructible carriers, they could have heat relays like superpower cap ships do, so rivals can take them out in order to force the carrier to retreat back to the owning player groups home system. Additionally, carriers could have destructible modules that could be destroyed that incur a replacement cost on the owners. So not as onerous as losing the entire hull, but enough to represent a meaningful set back.
Fleet carriers available.. only 100 billion price tag! Maybe.
The devil will be in the detail on this.
That would be a shame IMO. I can see there being a lot of fun gameplay around groups "hiding" their fleet carrier, and other groups tracking it down and causing damage. Would tie in nicely to the planned exploration enhancements.
But yes, open to griefers. This is why we cannot have nice things.![]()
Easiest way is to drag some RL mates into the game.
Yep, that was what I was getting at. Complete destruction would probably be bad, but it would still be good to add an element of danger into owning a fleet carrier. Make it something to protect.
I wish they could limit that to a FIGHTER carrier.
ie - we can have a carrier that can launch multiple wings of small fighters we can fly as assisting crew on that carrier.
The carrier can then use synthesis to produce new fighters with mats and commodities.
NO IT IS NOT. I Don't have any... Who still play video games... That's why I thought I get Elite Dangeorus a MULTUPLAYER game to find like minded cmdrs who which to team up . Parts of the issue is time zones and the heavily fragmented nature where I in open play. Many in solo or private groups.
Alsoi There really should be wing missions.
I did have a wing once were the 1 cmd was in Alaska othe in Denmark me London other in OLdam. Wild.
Really..? "Squadrons" of one player and a personal private fleet carrier?lol, that would be just so ridiculously uber.
Carriers should represent a huge resource sink that should absolutely require collaboration and pooling of resources between players to acquire, not a frivolous perk that any casual player can just dip into on a whim.
I think FD have got it 100% right by suggesting this is going to be content for groups only [up]