Again, as I have already said more than once, I am fine with the change. I am not ok with only finding out at the time of announcement when the design decision was taken months prior. For those of us in large player groups who longed for Squadrons and were massively let down by its lacklustre content and buggy nature (I still can't accept new member applications 9 times out of 10), Fleet Carriers was the last hope of further Squadrons development. As I have already said, my disappointed is not that FCs are available to all but that it means there is now nothing in the pipeline for Squadrons.
[Video] Open letter from community to Elite Dangerous
- Thread starter Yamiks
- Start date
Hey, just a heads up that there were no actual death threats on Reddit. It was a preemptive warning and no one has been banned. One of the Reddit mods just told me this.
So would you say,even though you personally have lost out,that FD did the honorable thing for the betterment of the game and the community as a whole?
Are you gatekeeping now ?.
Lol
Good!
It's not that I personally lose out, more like player groups potentially do. I would not say yes or no to that as it's too early to call. I think more people will initially be happy with the decision but in terms of long-term gameplay options afforded by Squadron guild-like tools and features I think the original plan would be better. Hopefully they do flesh out Squadrons with other features but I won't hold my breath.
I don't think that word means what you think it means
Certainly nothing in the pipeline, regarding FC's, for Squadrons without the imagination to leverage maximum useage out of a given resource, particulalry if said squadrons are large enough to require more than 16 pads.
The change to personal I regard as positive as it will enable sharing one's FC with squadron / friends without the asset being tied to our particular squadron.
Making a FC a sole asset, but being able to share access, makes perfect sense if one considers that a squadron may dissolve or eject members - if a player had spent considerable effort in supporting a squadron that fails it may not be viewed in the best possible vein by said player...
I wonder too...
Seems to be a bit weird to write...
"I can't believe I have to even say this, but sending frontier employees personal attacks and death threats is super uncool and will get you an immediate ban from this community. Make your criticism as pointed and as loud as you want, but attack the problems you have, not the people."
....if nothing happened in the first place.... right? I mean.... it is quite common sense to NOT do such things in the first place...
So much for you claiming it was all false promises by the evil FDEV people then. It actually turns out we both think its a work in progress and too early to tell.
You shouldn't be so quick to accuse the devs of things like that. Its dirty pool.
I don't know man.. a mod told me this so I passed it on so we're all on the same page. I'm not trying to make it a 'gotcha' hence the friendly "hey, just a heads up"
Nothing I have said contradicts that this was promised as, and now no longer is, a Squadrons-specific feature. And I don't think Frontieris evil. I love Frontier and all the team butI can still make criticisms. This isn't black and white; us vs them.
Wrong.
I do agree here... it was announced as a Squadron feature... I'll give you that... promised.... not sure about that?
...but... if it works the way FD have made most activities in this game work, so far... as in...
Grouping up = benificial
Solo = lots more work...
IF... IF, what I write here is true... what is your take on it then?
They just changed fleet carriers because they listened and yet it seems to upset people. This is a perfect illustration of what's wrong with the petition.
It looks like everyone would be in agreement but the actual truth is that nobody can agree with anything. And people wonder why FDEV 'can never get it right'.
No - this is what you don't get - they don't want fdev to listen to others they want fdev to listen to them.
Allowing solo players access doesnt degrade it as a squadron feature. The only thing that's lost is exclusivity to squadrons, which given we can set up one player squadrons for ourselves was never a real issue anyway.
They just recognised that plus player base desire to access game content and widened the scope to fit.
Nothings lost, other people gained something.
Be happy for them.
If you're referring to me and the FC issue that I raised as an example of poor communication, you've misunderstood. As I've said more than once, personal fleet carriers are more popular than Squadron ones and I wouldn't want them to do what I want over what most people want. I raised that issue in response to Stigbob asking for examples of broken promises. It is also an example of poor communication.
The situation is that Dev announces feature aimed at specific part of the playerbase (X)
X wait a year for the feature to be told it's delayed until next year
Next year rolls around and the feature is announce but now it's aimed at everyone (Y)
Y are very happy about this. X are bewildered at waiting 2 years for a feature aimed at then that no longer is
Y tells X to get over it.
That's how I see it. It's not really about features it's about comms.
Prove it!
Shall we call this a Pyrrhic win for pedantic determination?