Fleet Carrier Fueling Broken

[kail]

I already thought that FDev had made a horrible mistake when I realised that it would many man days of effort to refuel an FC using mining. And that was before they made it worse. My only hope is that someone in FDev is either not paying attention or making these numbers up.. because the alternative is that they really expect us to do this and will not fix it. I insist FDev try this FC refueling themselves.. on stream. I need proof they understand the actual effort they're talking about here.

OK, I'll stop now.. sorry everybody.

 

[GroG79]

I already thought that FDev had made a horrible mistake when I realised that it would many man days of effort to refuel an FC using mining. And that was before they made it worse. My only hope is that someone in FDev is either not paying attention or making these numbers up.. because the alternative is that they really expect us to do this and will not fix it. I insist FDev try this FC refueling themselves.. on stream. I need proof they understand the actual effort they're talking about here.

OK, I'll stop now.. sorry everybody.

Are you naive? Offcourse they know.

 

[Kestrel71]

As of now, fleet carriers are essentially out of reach for anyone who doesn't have one, those who do are going to find it hard to maintain and operate them, no one dare go out of the bubble because you can't find fuel to get back, and the weekly upkeep costs are now completely non-viable.

Either this is a COLOSSAL F**K UP by both dev and QC (who completely failed to catch it in test) or this is intentional to kill off a TON of fleet carriers, in which case, congratulations FDEV you just killed the newest feature you introduced!

For now, I'll assume this is a massive screw up but if it turns out this is by design then I'm selling off everything and I'm done with this game - it's supposed to be fun not a hellish, mind-numbing grind. Definitely, the respawn bug needed to be fixed, but completely killing hotspots and nerf-hammering LTDs, tritium and even some forms of trading out of existence makes no sense. There's no way to make decent amounts of money. I'm not going back to the trade-runs paying a handful of credits that I used to run in the early days of the game.

Even if this is fixed, it's just one massive f**k up after another with this game lately and I think I've just had enough. It's definitely looking like No Man's Sky is my new go-to space sim until 2060 or so when Star Citizen releases.

 

[kail]

Are you naive? Offcourse they know.

If they've never done it, they do not know. Unless you're suggesting that someone at FDev a) worked something out in advance and b) tested it. I'm naive?

 

[Rudi Raumkraut]

I already thought that FDev had made a horrible mistake when I realised that it would many man days of effort to refuel an FC using mining. And that was before they made it worse. My only hope is that someone in FDev is either not paying attention or making these numbers up.. because the alternative is that they really expect us to do this and will not fix it. I insist FDev try this FC refueling themselves.. on stream. I need proof they understand the actual effort they're talking about here.

OK, I'll stop now.. sorry everybody.

Are you naive? Offcourse they know.

Are you naive? Of course they don't care.

 

[Havvk]

Mining

• An issue which allowed launching a fighter to restore sub-surface deposits on asteroids was fixed.
• A bug with material distribution in overlapping hotspots was fixed and hotspost themselves we rebalanced. Now, the effect that each hotspot has on the base rarity of a commodity has been doubled. To counter this, hotspots of the same type which overlap will be less effective. The aim of thsese changes is to reduce the massive impact of overlapping hotspots while still ensuring they provide a higher yield than non-overlapping hotspots.

 

[GroG79]

If they've never done it, they do not know. Unless you're suggesting that someone at FDev a) worked something out in advance and b) tested it. I'm naive?

The feedback that mining trit in the black is not viable was voiced since the first beta. 500 ton per hour is not enough.

 

[Sysmon]

Carriers were introduced to the live game like a broken bone that was never set right. And no matter what patching and tweaking is done, they will never function well without tremendous negative impact on the rest of the game. It unfortunately looks more and more like it is either fix the carrier or fix the game without them, but fixing both will be near impossible to pull off.

So I vote to take them out of the game again. It will be like having to rebreak and reset that broken limb, but it will be the brave and right thing for FD to do. Then rebalance them as they should have been during the beta, and then do another beta. For that beta, do it right and split testers up in teams charged with testing specific aspects and scenarios for the carriers. We know now how they are used, so test round that. Probably make the test a closed beta with invited testers.

It will be hard on large initiatives such as the deep space array, but they were built on assumption made even before the carrier specifics were known. Hitting a wall like this must have been a risk they were willing to take.

S

 

[MattG]

Great data and write-up Gnauty.
This has to be a mistake? It sounded like they just wanted to make single spots more viable? Hopefully they’ll fix this “fix” quickly...

 

[Gnauty]

I actually feel like Tritium mining and fuel requirements for FCs were pretty well balanced. Fueling a FC should not be easy. I was pretty comfortable with it taking a small, motivated group of miners in a Tri3 a few days to pull-off the task. Hopefully this was an unintended consequence which FDev will fix in the next patch.

 

[Bravo17]

Looking at the patch notes and the reported results in game its fairly obvious that the two do not match up, so I suspect (hope?) that someone messed up a number entry somewhere and it will get sorted out.

 

[Maolagin]

Looking at the patch notes and the reported results in game its fairly obvious that the two do not match up, so I suspect (hope?) that someone messed up a number entry somewhere and it will get sorted out.

I'm not convinced that we actually know that yet.

It seems clear from the patch notes that triple overlap sites are meant to be heavily nerfed, and they clearly are. But I think we need more research before we can really make broader claims. For instance, nerfing overlaps but buffing single hotspots suggests that the hotspot falloff effect is stronger now. How much stronger? We won't know until folks have systematically tested mining at different distances from the center. They claim that overlaps will still yield some benefit. Combined with falloff, does that mean it's best to mine where one hotspot overlaps the center of another?

Now it might very well be that mining yields are unreasonably low now. But let's give it more than a single day for the systematic miners to evaluate things, before we fire up the full doom-and-gloom act.

 

[Gnauty]

The numbers are already in and consistent. They won't improve with time.

 

[cmdr-Sweney]

Reverse this patch please!! DO not MAKE Double/triple hot-spots irrelevant please do not do that! Patch the LTD spawn rate and keep everything else as was.

 

[Mr T]

As of now, fleet carriers are essentially out of reach for anyone who doesn't have one, those who do are going to find it hard to maintain and operate them, no one dare go out of the bubble because you can't find fuel to get back, and the weekly upkeep costs are now completely non-viable.

Either this is a COLOSSAL F**K UP by both dev and QC (who completely failed to catch it in test) or this is intentional to kill off a TON of fleet carriers, in which case, congratulations FDEV you just killed the newest feature you introduced!

I'm wondering now perhaps if this was all done on purpose so they can reduce the number of FCs? FDev have said they wanted Fleet Carriers to be exclusive when they introduced them, excusing the $5b price tag. They may also be figuring it will also help them fix the "orange sidewinder" issues people are having with too many FCs in the one location.

 

[OldManKnott]

So mining is broken. OK fix it without preventing people in deep space from refuelling.
So FC's are broken, (too many in one place). Then stop more than 5 in a system at one time.

This is what happens when you let developers make decisions.

 

[Kestrel71]

I'm wondering now perhaps if this was all done on purpose so they can reduce the number of FCs? FDev have said they wanted Fleet Carriers to be exclusive when they introduced them, excusing the $5b price tag. They may also be figuring it will also help them fix the "orange sidewinder" issues people are having with too many FCs in the one location.

I strongly suspect this may be the case, too. Systems near popular mining sites and high-cost selling systems (and neighbouring systems) were just filled to the gills with FCs - dozens and dozens and dozens everywhere you looked. I heard that over 10,000 fleet carriers were bought, which seems like it was waaaaaay more than FDev expected.

 

[FutronBob]

I strongly suspect this may be the case, too. Systems near popular mining sites and high-cost selling systems (and neighbouring systems) were just filled to the gills with FCs - dozens and dozens and dozens everywhere you looked. I heard that over 10,000 fleet carriers were bought, which seems like it was waaaaaay more than FDev expected.

According to inara, there’s currently well over 12,000 fleet carriers. While that may seem like a lot, compared to the number of base-game copies sold (3.5 million), that’s about one FC for every 300 players, or 1/3rd of a percent of the game’s total playerbase.

That’s far less than the top 1% of all liners out there.

 

[Ephraim Stone]

Did anyone add to the bug tracker yet?

 

[Cometborne]

Based on the nerfed numbers, it would take us a month or more to mine enough Tritium to fuel a single carrier out it the black. Even this is optimistic, since the 3-4 day mining ops we have done tend to be very intensive periods of activity. I just don't see how that could be sustainable over a period of time measured in weeks or months.

Random shower thought while still low on coffee: Yesterday evening, there were a lot of comments from players in the LTD hotspots that every other rock either contained Tritium or had Tritium deposits. Got any LTD2/LTD3 nearby to test mining for Tritium there?