There would need to be a couple of provisos. Firstly the FC would need full weapon coverage so you couldn't sit somewhere and damage it while the FC couldn't damage you. Then you'd need the attackers to be guaranteed to be facing multiple rebuys before they could damage it enough to move it. Thirdly I think it's fair enough if the FC is in an uninhabited system, so maybe you couldn't make them retreat from there (or it would just move between that system and one other uninhabited system, so making it retreat would just be a waste of time).
Death to all Fleet Carriers, what what
- Thread starter thelion
- Start date
![[PS4] Lorenzo Waringos](https://forums-cdn.zaonce.net/data/avatars/m/234/234580.jpg?1612617334){kind=avatar}
Yeah, ok, but the lack of crossover between platforms surely means this is all a non-starter.
Limit them to one per system body? They'd be less intrusive then.
o7
o7
I'm all for 'sploding the FC's, but I'd prefer it if it wasn't something that could be achieved solo. Not because I have an FC or care, but because it'd be nice to have more PvP Wing content.
It's never going to happen, so this is all hypothetical anyway. I'm just thinking of a way this might work without there being a way to repeatedly grief someone. None of this means I think it's technically possible.
That's one option, another would be to autojump them out of an inhabited system after a certain time, maybe to a random uninhabited system.
Would be fairer then drive some off, and would open slots for latecomers.
I pondered this, but you;d then have people using it to move normally, and what fuel does it use (i.e. does it come from the silo, or is it extra?). You'd also need a way to know where you are retreating to as well- which in itself is a problem (see the first point).
Personally I think that FCs should have been simple shoe boxes that existed in your instance (or wings instances) only- in short they all occupy the same space but in overlapping parallel instances. That way you could have a few visible carriers rather than fifty of them, and your client would not have to deal with all that.
They don't really take up space when you are in system, they are here and there but the system maps look absolutely crap with all the goop drops hanging off planets or stations, I like the idea of shooing them out the system, but how would we keep them out?
Personally I would just like the ability the filter them out as I only need to see them when.. I need to see them.
I had to check I couldn't
Pug
Fully concur. On has got to pondering (it happens when the whiskey runs freely), when the oblate will something something froth of the galactic dream, obviously referring to a french jazz genius and hidden champion of pulp novels.
Why is this not implemented now, FDEV?
please moderate.
fleet carriers should be attackable by npcs as a sort of CZ bgs state if they find themselves in systems where such cz's are breaking out and/or the ships landing on the station are wanted/hostile to the controlling faction of the system the carrier is in.
This would be sort of like a un-interruptable state for as long as the cz is going on, making landing difficult (since it's in the middle of a cz) and impossible to jump the carrier out during.
The cost to the owner to repair would depend on if the npcs not hostile to the carrier win or not. Wtih the carrier automatically being sided on the appropriate faction and the owner having to side with the same as the carrier automatically.
It would never be destroyable if it loses, but the carrier could incur a penalty upkeep cost the following week with reduced functionality until the tick or until it can be in a system with a carrier facility for immediate repairs. If it wins, the next due upkeep cost would be covered by the faction that lost against it. No reduced functionality would be incurred.
Such carriers would only be susceptible to 1 such event per week.
This would be sort of like a un-interruptable state for as long as the cz is going on, making landing difficult (since it's in the middle of a cz) and impossible to jump the carrier out during.
The cost to the owner to repair would depend on if the npcs not hostile to the carrier win or not. Wtih the carrier automatically being sided on the appropriate faction and the owner having to side with the same as the carrier automatically.
It would never be destroyable if it loses, but the carrier could incur a penalty upkeep cost the following week with reduced functionality until the tick or until it can be in a system with a carrier facility for immediate repairs. If it wins, the next due upkeep cost would be covered by the faction that lost against it. No reduced functionality would be incurred.
Such carriers would only be susceptible to 1 such event per week.
I've only ever been to 3 of them, and they all smelt of cheese.
And not the good type of cheese....
And not the good type of cheese....
No, leave FC's alone. They've been in the game too long to make a change like that at this point.
However DO release another ship class: Battle Carriers. Think smaller versions of FC's that can carry a limited number of ships/fighters for combat. But without the stupid Tritium fuel sink, upkeep, etc etc.
However DO release another ship class: Battle Carriers. Think smaller versions of FC's that can carry a limited number of ships/fighters for combat. But without the stupid Tritium fuel sink, upkeep, etc etc.
I still want to loot FC's somehow... Looting should make the FC owners want to move their carriers somewhere else away from NPC and us human pirates. Like a uninhabited system or outside the bubble would most likely be safe at that point. And I agree on no destroying a FC, since it is cross platform. But looting, oh yeah baby
Yep hacking and looting would be awesome
I think the original Dev expectation was that they wouldn't be sustainable, who do they listen to?
They surely underestimated peoples ability to adapt to their expectation.
Or.. is this how it was intended to be played out as it causes contention which , well, sells.
They are here, they look ugly in maps, can I filter them out please. I did save up for one but I have not purchased yet.
They seem to be losing the gaming aspect and are focused on the sales/time-spent aspect it's sad really for such an immense game.
If they gave us everything we all wanted, would we be happy/sated or would we, Just, Want, More?
Pug
They surely underestimated peoples ability to adapt to their expectation.
Or.. is this how it was intended to be played out as it causes contention which , well, sells.
They are here, they look ugly in maps, can I filter them out please. I did save up for one but I have not purchased yet.
They seem to be losing the gaming aspect and are focused on the sales/time-spent aspect it's sad really for such an immense game.
If they gave us everything we all wanted, would we be happy/sated or would we, Just, Want, More?
Pug
What about baby carriers old chap? How doth one feel towards them?
Flyable?
Pug
Fleet carriers are an abomination and make community goals tedious as there are x hundred FCs camping in the nearby system stripping them of resources so the normal casual player cannot participate
