General Crowdfunded Fleet Carriers

[Augusta]

Or squadron funded. Not sure if this had been suggested or discussed before.

I know there are mixed feelings and concerns about credit transfer = credit for $$$ currency services, whereas FD's intentions against it are very clear.

What if there was a system for players to "donate" various degree of credits directly to the FC's maintenance upkeep? The owner cannot withdraw from it or use it, and the donations become locked and closed when the week's upkeep quota has been met, until the next upkeep cycle.

Just a thought.

 

[Kastor]

Agreed. This would be a great idea, honestly I'm disappointed that there hasn't been an option for squadron owned carriers. Should be pretty easy to make it in such a way that's not exploitable.

(I have little hope though, FD seems quite convinced that that all meaningful player intereactions should involve lasers.)

 

[sinkarma]

you say that... but before I left my previous squadron (long story) we all agreed to mine our ships full then gathered together to feed all the mined recourses into one person's ship so they could buy a fleet carrier for the squadron. Yes it was tedious but we had worked together and in no time made the money to make it happen. A simpler system for us to have done it as a group would have been nice. in the end though I prefer the personally owned carriers now cause I can just share my carrier with me and my husband and not have to worry about pleasing a whole squadron of people

 

[SamSlade]

It's a bit silly that there's no way to create a 'free port' FC outside of the bubble with the option to buy a berth... that would be freaking awesome

 

[Agony_Aunt]

Have you tried selling JPGs to people in return for credits?

Seriously though, i suppose there could be a way with the current mechanics as long as there is a market nearby or people are willing to do a bit of mining.

What is needed is some goods and then for the owner to put up buy orders for a value well above markert value, so in that way the owner profits.

 

[Misty_Dark]

Or squadron funded. Not sure if this had been suggested or discussed before.

I know there are mixed feelings and concerns about credit transfer = credit for $$$ currency services, whereas FD's intentions against it are very clear.

What if there was a system for players to "donate" various degree of credits directly to the FC's maintenance upkeep? The owner cannot withdraw from it or use it, and the donations become locked and closed when the week's upkeep quota has been met, until the next upkeep cycle.

Just a thought.

That is the problem with squadron owned stuff etc, lets say I create a squadron I invite all my friends, and we decide to have a fleet carrier, now since I am lazy, I do not have much credits, but the other have plenty of credits to ship and we fund the carrier. Now I think it would be super to have my own carrier, so I kick everyone from the squadron and now I am only user of Carrier...

This is what would happen in various ways, players taking advantage of other players, and even if noone have broken any rules etc, this is would be very bad behaviour and Frontier could get lots of negative PR from players doing this.

So I think this is was one the bigger reasons to make fleet carriers player owned and also all the players who do not play in a groupp that wanted the option to have a fleet carrier.


Then the issue with upkeep etc, having players the possibility to donate or whatever you want to call it, is a just a bad solution to a bad game mechanic...Why even have upkeep to begin with? what is the purpose for the upkeep? everything else in the game do not have an upkeep as that makes sense, imagine if there was upkeep on your ship? and if you took a break and ran out of credits and then you log back after a break from the game and to discover that most/all your ships are gone? This is bad user experience.


If upkeep only costed credits when you played, then it would not punish you for not playing the game. It would still be bad, but not as bad as it is now... as you can now take a break without having to worry about your stuff is gone when you get back. So once again, what purpose does upkeep server?

I think Fleet Carrier should have been like our ships, buy one for like 2 billion credits, and then you upgrade stuff, faster FSD cool downs, longer FSD range, better fuel effiency, add facilities like cartographer, etc and to max out your fleet carrier with everything would set you back some 8 billion more credits. So a relatively small entry step, but to a bigger task to max it out. and there would be no need to max out everything.

 

[Augusta]

That is the problem with squadron owned stuff etc, lets say I create a squadron I invite all my friends, and we decide to have a fleet carrier, now since I am lazy, I do not have much credits, but the other have plenty of credits to ship and we fund the carrier. Now I think it would be super to have my own carrier, so I kick everyone from the squadron and now I am only user of Carrier...

This is what would happen in various ways, players taking advantage of other players, and even if noone have broken any rules etc, this is would be very bad behaviour and Frontier could get lots of negative PR from players doing this.

So I think this is was one the bigger reasons to make fleet carriers player owned and also all the players who do not play in a groupp that wanted the option to have a fleet carrier.


Then the issue with upkeep etc, having players the possibility to donate or whatever you want to call it, is a just a bad solution to a bad game mechanic...Why even have upkeep to begin with? what is the purpose for the upkeep? everything else in the game do not have an upkeep as that makes sense, imagine if there was upkeep on your ship? and if you took a break and ran out of credits and then you log back after a break from the game and to discover that most/all your ships are gone? This is bad user experience.


If upkeep only costed credits when you played, then it would not punish you for not playing the game. It would still be bad, but not as bad as it is now... as you can now take a break without having to worry about your stuff is gone when you get back. So once again, what purpose does upkeep server?

I think Fleet Carrier should have been like our ships, buy one for like 2 billion credits, and then you upgrade stuff, faster FSD cool downs, longer FSD range, better fuel effiency, add facilities like cartographer, etc and to max out your fleet carrier with everything would set you back some 8 billion more credits. So a relatively small entry step, but to a bigger task to max it out. and there would be no need to max out everything.

I think you misunderstood my post. I didn't write that the fleet carrier be owned by any squadron entity, but enabling donations can bring co-op among squadron and non-squadron members. The FC will still be yours or whoever bought it. Only a single person should be able to buy a FC and own it. Donations are only for the upkeep, not for buying the carrier.

Only suggested it because I don't think they'll ever change their minds about the upkeep.

 

[Sylow]

That is the problem with squadron owned stuff etc, lets say I create a squadron I invite all my friends, and we decide to have a fleet carrier, now since I am lazy, I do not have much credits, but the other have plenty of credits to ship and we fund the carrier. Now I think it would be super to have my own carrier, so I kick everyone from the squadron and now I am only user of Carrier...

Of course, once there's player to player interaction, something bad can be done. But it's not the only way people do things. Just some room for thought:

• In STO members of a fleet can invest insane ammounts of stuff, from fleet marks and credits, over provisions and duty officers to dillitium. And of course, the leader of the fleet could then, when everything is leveled, kick out all members and have the fleet all for himself. But this usually doesn't happen. Why?
• In ESO members of my guild over the run of two years have donated writs, writ voucers, gold, materials and whatever else necessary to equip our guild hall with all crafting stations and services, along with nicely decorating it, etc. Our guild leader could now kick us all and have it all for himself. He does not. Why?

Similar examples can probably be brought from many other games. And the answer to the why on the points i posted should also answer on why we could have had properly operating squadron based carriers. Unless our community really is as bad and rotten as our reputations says it is. Then indeed what you describe would inevitably happen and FD was wise not to go this route.

 

[Ethaidan]

Or squadron funded. Not sure if this had been suggested or discussed before.

I know there are mixed feelings and concerns about credit transfer = credit for $$$ currency services, whereas FD's intentions against it are very clear.

What if there was a system for players to "donate" various degree of credits directly to the FC's maintenance upkeep? The owner cannot withdraw from it or use it, and the donations become locked and closed when the week's upkeep quota has been met, until the next upkeep cycle.

Just a thought.

There are already simple work arounds for squadrons/friends supporting an FC. Sure, workarounds are sooo hard and teduous, but....

An explorer can support a FC by simply selling data.
A miner can support an FC by simply selling LTDs (at FC owner set prices waaaaaay below market value)
Anyone can support an FC by simply buying a designated market item (FC owner sets buy price waaaaaay higher than their purchase price)
Etc.

 

[Augusta]

There are already simple work arounds for squadrons/friends supporting an FC. Sure, workarounds are sooo hard and teduous, but....

An explorer can support a FC by simply selling data.
A miner can support an FC by simply selling LTDs (at FC owner set prices waaaaaay below market value)
Anyone can support an FC by simply buying a designated market item (FC owner sets buy price waaaaaay higher than their purchase price)
Etc.

I see. I guess that's one way to keep active.