Please reconsider fleet carriers for solo players.
- Thread starter CMDR Karrde Sun
- Start date
- Status
I'm still fuzzy brained after a 'couldn't sleep' night, so forgive me if I've 'assumpted' wrong...
are you suggesting with the pay to win bit is about the guy who buys the same game more than once?
You'd think this community would know better than to base arguments on forensic analysis of Frontier's actual words. You're trying to extract subtle semantic meanings from a company whose advertising and official communications are so inconsistent that they've been known to literally switch definitions in the middle of the same paragraph.
Theorycrafting is cool, but trying to strengthen any of it using an argument based on the specific words used by FD is futile. Trust me, they do not pick their words with skill and dexterity in order to furnish you with clues as to their true intent. Some days I think they just reach into a drawer containing a set of darts and a thesaurus.
They're lovely people, but clear and non-contradictory communication isn't their strong suit. Remember, this is a company that tried to "clarify" their position on ganking and ended up endorsing a charity event that specifically involved blowing up new players.
Treat the words as general pointers, not the Gospel. Believe me, nothing that's been written so far will bind FD to what Fleet Carriers (or is it Squadron Fleet Carriers?) are or how they're implemented in the game. What you see will be what you get. Have fun with the guessing game, but don't fall into the trap of thinking you've cracked the code. There isn't a code to crack.
Theorycrafting is cool, but trying to strengthen any of it using an argument based on the specific words used by FD is futile. Trust me, they do not pick their words with skill and dexterity in order to furnish you with clues as to their true intent. Some days I think they just reach into a drawer containing a set of darts and a thesaurus.
They're lovely people, but clear and non-contradictory communication isn't their strong suit. Remember, this is a company that tried to "clarify" their position on ganking and ended up endorsing a charity event that specifically involved blowing up new players.
Treat the words as general pointers, not the Gospel. Believe me, nothing that's been written so far will bind FD to what Fleet Carriers (or is it Squadron Fleet Carriers?) are or how they're implemented in the game. What you see will be what you get. Have fun with the guessing game, but don't fall into the trap of thinking you've cracked the code. There isn't a code to crack.
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
One carries vessels capable of operation and survival in the same medium that supports it, the other does not.
Last edited:
Don't try to save that strawman of a bad comparison. He said an actual fleet carrier is not a fleet carrier.
Given the vitriol displayed towards Frontier with every multiplayer only feature you'd of thought they would of learned their lesson by now...
When you create barriers to entry you loose customers.
When you create barriers to entry you loose customers.
Goose4291
Banned
Except of course, it doesn't and no amount of forum e-warrior word play is going to change that.
The companies that run those types of ships make their money carrying stripped down empty shells from Hyundai Shipyards to be floated at Europoort where they're fitted and crewed up, collect and deliver hulks that can't make their own way to the graveyards in, for example Bangladesh, or so badly damaged they need to be transported to a specific shipyard to be repaired. In addition to this, they make a good few coin transporting oil rigs around.
In summation, to make it clear for your landsman like ears, a ship being moved by one of those behemoths is incapable of either operation or survival in the sea, which is why its secured in the welldeck of a Heavy-Lift ship.
I know you and Indigo don't like the idea of more multiplayer content in Elite, but nodding sagely and pretending a Fleet Carrier is going to be anything more than the tired sci-fi trope of 'carriers in space', when all we've seen in the past regarding this concept (the Gnosis) is doing nothing but setting yourself up for disappointment.
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
Not necessarily - it may simply be that the vessel being transported either lacks the motive power to make the journey itself or it makes financial sense to transport it rather than make the voyage itself (possibly under tow) - but is quite happy both operating and surviving in the environment for which it is designed, i.e. an FPSO.
Aircraft of the type transported by a floating runway, on the other hand, generally don't float...
Last edited:
Reminds me of "destroyers" - they were originally meant to destroy Torpedo boats. Then they hunted subs. Whatever it is they do now if they're not obsolete. I assume the job of carrier might shift too. Who knows: Maybe they could be drydocks in one setting?
Yes. Completely in the spirit of mischief:
Frontier the one time in the past when they talked about carriers directly implied there are technical issues relating to them, and if everyone just went and made one there could be trouble. For no other reasons provided other than this, they are going to set some minimum squadron size to get one. Given that enterprising players will just buy more accounts, this is where the standoff is.. frontier can set the number too high, and so many dad and kids squadrons (and mischievous solo players) are going to get turned away, frontier just went to an animal shelter, took 100 kittens and put them infront of a firing squad. If they set it too low, their servers crash day after the patch and they all apply for transfers to other projects at frontier.
Lets see who blinks first hey.
The only techincal issue I see is Frontier themselves. They have an engine that can display ship models and allow the player to sly them. Making any of those ships or stations, be a carrier is chump change. Where the issues arise are when they want to dock and launch, which is already overcome on small stations and ships like the gNosis.
Adding combat facilities to them might be a bit of work, but, could easily be overcome by saying 'no carrier' combat.
I mean if NMS can have carriers why can't Elite? I'm just not seeing the issue.
Goose4291
Banned
Personally I (and I think most folk) don't see them having combat capabilities, and being something akin to a mobile base which inhabits its own instance away from any possible combat (so, more akin to a modern day carrier standing off from danger than the sci-fi tropey Galactica/Imperial Star Destroyer charging in, guns blazing).
Because this is the frontier forums, inhabited by a strong '84 brigade, anti change rhetoric that has an undercurrent of not liking multiplayer mechanics getting any love, particularly if its combat orientated.
You just have to look at the odd argument that 'fleet carriers aren't fleet carriers' and inevitable strawmanning of the past two pages to see that.
We've been told that Carriers will be upgradable, so I'm assuming something pretty simple to start with. A mobile garage for a certain number of ships (hangars upgradable in number and size). We've been promised repair-refuel-rearm-respawn, but repair-rearm might be an upgrade. Some other services might involve building and then sacrificing hangars (turning them over to NPC's who then provide the service). Outfitting and Shipyard could be upgrades too (though I'd say Shipyard is more basic than Outfitting, the ability to load multiple ships is more fundamental to a Carrier than the ability to reconfigure ships with stored modules). Limiting ship transfers to within a system is sensible, and I wouldn't mind seeing that limitation extended to module transfer too, so no deliveries over interstellar distances to a moving Carrier: if you want to let people swap stuff around, park the Carrier for awhile in a system with a station that has outfitting/shipyard.
My own preference would be for a Carrier with at least one Large hangar (for the refuelling tanker), plus 1 or 2 other Large hangars, plus 3 or 4 Mediums and a similar number of Smalls. Many will be content with less, and I wouldn't mind starting with something smaller and building it up. If we don't get Large hangars, I'm hoping the Carrier will be small and mobile enough to scoop its own fuel. A price tag of a few billion, maybe starting with 1bn for a basic model with a few Small ships, going up to maybe 10bn for several ships of all sizes. Huge prices (100bn+) should be for Carriers used by big squadrons, with hundreds of hangars.
This all seems quite modest, and most of those hoping for single-player Carriers aren't asking for much. It's over on the "wishlist" thread that things seem to be getting a little out of hand...
My own preference would be for a Carrier with at least one Large hangar (for the refuelling tanker), plus 1 or 2 other Large hangars, plus 3 or 4 Mediums and a similar number of Smalls. Many will be content with less, and I wouldn't mind starting with something smaller and building it up. If we don't get Large hangars, I'm hoping the Carrier will be small and mobile enough to scoop its own fuel. A price tag of a few billion, maybe starting with 1bn for a basic model with a few Small ships, going up to maybe 10bn for several ships of all sizes. Huge prices (100bn+) should be for Carriers used by big squadrons, with hundreds of hangars.
This all seems quite modest, and most of those hoping for single-player Carriers aren't asking for much. It's over on the "wishlist" thread that things seem to be getting a little out of hand...
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
His quick thinking and cool head on that day saved the lives of his passengers, his crew and himself - for which he is justly to be praised.Sully might have something to say about that
The plane? Oh it floated - briefly - and will never fly again.
I think Hoopla and Old Duck are.
A fighter jet can easily operate and survive over the sea, the key thing is for how long...
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
How long indeed.
Goose4291
Banned
Comparing an FPSO to a ship is like comparing a static caravan to a car.
I suspect based on that poor example you've thrown out there to justify the weird argument that semi-subermsible lift ships are more like an example of a Fleet Carrier than actual Fleet Carriers, that I've done more seatime than you've done bath time popeye.
- Status