Add warning to carrier escape pod regarding cargo loss

[FarstriderScout]

Title says it all, but as an explanation:

I tried out the escape pod on the carrier and noted that it gave a warning that you would:
Be transported to your last known safe location.
Your ship would be left behind.
Any organic data on your person would be destroyed.

Of note, I had been flying my Type 9, and had some cargo aboard. I didn't really think at the time about potential cargo loss.

I was promptly teleported to LHS 3447, which was definitely not the last place I had visited - I'd just been on Worlidge Hub prior to jumping to my carrier. Upon taking several shuttles to the same system as my carrier, I retrieved my Mamba via the station's shipyard, but discovered that it would not bring it into the hangar. I am assuming that this is due to how cargo is so intrinsically tied to your person and not so much to the ship you're flying - under normal circumstances, you can't switch to a ship that doesn't have enough cargo space to fit whatever you have stored on your current ship. So, after retrieving the Type-9, I was able to get it into the hangar and board it, only to find that the cargo hold was empty

While I can totally accept that this is intended behavior, as stated by Support, "Transferring a ship while it has cargo in it from one station to another causes the cargo to be lost. This is intended behavior, as transport missions could be completed fairly easily with the use of Apex taxis in this way!", so it's entirely my fault, I also feel like a warning needs to be added to the escape pod warning players of such.

Alternatively, let us switch to ships that don't have cargo on board, and tie cargo to the ship and not the player.

 

[varonica]

Title says it all, but as an explanation:

I tried out the escape pod on the carrier and noted that it gave a warning that you would:
Be transported to your last known safe location.
Your ship would be left behind.
Any organic data on your person would be destroyed.

Of note, I had been flying my Type 9, and had some cargo aboard. I didn't really think at the time about potential cargo loss.

I was promptly teleported to LHS 3447, which was definitely not the last place I had visited -

Last known safe location, not the last place you were, that's not the same thing, unfortunately we don't know how they define "safe." If you have fines at the last location maybe that's not considered safe, but I would certainly like to know the logic behind LHS 3447 since that's one of the original starter locations before the federation district was put in game.

 

[CardioTherapy]

Title says it all, but as an explanation:

I tried out the escape pod on the carrier and noted that it gave a warning that you would:
Be transported to your last known safe location.
Your ship would be left behind.
Any organic data on your person would be destroyed.

Of note, I had been flying my Type 9, and had some cargo aboard. I didn't really think at the time about potential cargo loss.

I was promptly teleported to LHS 3447, which was definitely not the last place I had visited - I'd just been on Worlidge Hub prior to jumping to my carrier. Upon taking several shuttles to the same system as my carrier, I retrieved my Mamba via the station's shipyard, but discovered that it would not bring it into the hangar. I am assuming that this is due to how cargo is so intrinsically tied to your person and not so much to the ship you're flying - under normal circumstances, you can't switch to a ship that doesn't have enough cargo space to fit whatever you have stored on your current ship. So, after retrieving the Type-9, I was able to get it into the hangar and board it, only to find that the cargo hold was empty

While I can totally accept that this is intended behavior, as stated by Support, "Transferring a ship while it has cargo in it from one station to another causes the cargo to be lost. This is intended behavior, as transport missions could be completed fairly easily with the use of Apex taxis in this way!", so it's entirely my fault, I also feel like a warning needs to be added to the escape pod warning players of such.

Alternatively, let us switch to ships that don't have cargo on board, and tie cargo to the ship and not the player.

Instead of warning about cargo loss I would prefer to see cargo bound to the ship and stays on the ship even if I change ships. That will solve also a lot of problems with limpets.

 

[Ski'Thor]

Instead of warning about cargo loss I would prefer to see cargo bound to the ship and stays on the ship even if I change ships. That will solve also a lot of problems with limpets.

Yea, and I'm sure someone will put 20 Cutter full of tritium onto the carrier to avoid the limited storage

 

[varonica]

Instead of warning about cargo loss I would prefer to see cargo bound to the ship and stays on the ship even if I change ships. That will solve also a lot of problems with limpets.

Then you would be unable to retrieve your ship via Inter Astra. The entire idea is to stop players filling up dozens of Type 9's with cargo for a CG, basically empty hulls with no shield and etc, then using Apex or a hardened combat ship to travel to the CG destination then just calling your fully loaded cargo ship, swapping to it and completing the CG delivery.

So if you have one ship, with a single ton of say biowaste on it, you couldn't summon it to your destination even though you have no other ship and maybe can't afford to buy another ship to travel to that destination, which may be out of reach of Apex.

 

[Aerendyl]

Then you would be unable to retrieve your ship via Inter Astra. The entire idea is to stop players filling up dozens of Type 9's with cargo for a CG, basically empty hulls with no shield and etc, then using Apex or a hardened combat ship to travel to the CG destination then just calling your fully loaded cargo ship, swapping to it and completing the CG delivery.

So if you have one ship, with a single ton of say biowaste on it, you couldn't summon it to your destination even though you have no other ship and maybe can't afford to buy another ship to travel to that destination, which may be out of reach of Apex.

I've never done a CG - why would this be a problem?

How about when someone summons their ship with a hold full of cargo, add the value of that cargo to the cost of summoning the ship?

OR if that doesn't solve the problem, add a confirmation: "your ship holds cargo with a value greater than 100 000 CR. If you summon it, that cargo will be sold at local rates before the ship leaves".

It's annoying to have to sell off all my limpets every time I switch to my combat ship and then buy them all up again when I switch back.

 

[varonica]

I've never done a CG - why would this be a problem?

Oh lol, I purchase 40 T9's and fill them with cargo, take apex to cg station, transfer all T9's to station, take part in CG, get top place in CG, job done with only 1 trip between stations!

 

[CardioTherapy]

Then you would be unable to retrieve your ship via Inter Astra. The entire idea is to stop players filling up dozens of Type 9's with cargo for a CG, basically empty hulls with no shield and etc, then using Apex or a hardened combat ship to travel to the CG destination then just calling your fully loaded cargo ship, swapping to it and completing the CG delivery.

So if you have one ship, with a single ton of say biowaste on it, you couldn't summon it to your destination even though you have no other ship and maybe can't afford to buy another ship to travel to that destination, which may be out of reach of Apex.

That is no true. It is very well solved in Star citizen You can store your ship full of cargo but if you retrieve it from another station it arrives empty. Then you loose the cargo.

 

[Northpin]

I find the behavior as expected within the logic employed regarding cargo onboard ships.

However, an extra notice regarding the fact that any cargo will get lost seems pretty normal.

 

[Guyperson]

So, after retrieving the Type-9, I was able to get it into the hangar and board it, only to find that the cargo hold was empty

Technically the act of recalling your assigned ship through Inter Astra is what deleted all cargo on it, rather than the escape pod. But since you can't get back to your carrier on your own without doing so the distinction is largely academic. It's a design oversight for an edge case, which is unfortunately common.

AFAIK the only way to save your cargo would have been to hitch a ride back to your carrier in physical multicrew.

 

[varonica]

That is no true. It is very well solved in Star citizen You can store your ship full of cargo but if you retrieve it from another station it arrives empty. Then you loose the cargo.

Which is exactly what happened here, so what's the problem? The OP wants to keep the cargo on the ship when transferring, which is not the same as Star Citizen! I don't see any application of this statement that's applicable to the OP's post. He stored a ship full of cargo, when he retrieved it he lost all his cargo, so in fact this currently works exactly the same as SC.

 

[CardioTherapy]

Which is exactly what happened here, so what's the problem? The OP wants to keep the cargo on the ship when transferring, which is not the same as Star Citizen! I don't see any application of this statement that's applicable to the OP's post. He stored a ship full of cargo, when he retrieved it he lost all his cargo, so in fact this currently works exactly the same as SC.

That’s the opposite. I will explain it more in-depth:

You leave a full ship in a station or carrier. you grab another ship while keeping the cargo on the first ship. So, no transfer of cargo to the new ship if you don’t want. When you change to the first ship you still have its cargo in it. However, if you want to recall a ship with cargo then you lose your cargo. If you recall another ship or board another ship you don’t loose the cargo on the first ship. It is simple as that.

 

[Guyperson]

Which is exactly what happened here, so what's the problem? The OP wants to keep the cargo on the ship when transferring, which is not the same as Star Citizen! I don't see any application of this statement that's applicable to the OP's post. He stored a ship full of cargo, when he retrieved it he lost all his cargo, so in fact this currently works exactly the same as SC.

There's a slight difference there. Had things worked like they do in Star Citizen, the OP would have been able to just board and fly their Mamba back to their carrier without destroying the cargo on their Type-9. Since SC tracks ship cargo independently and has no concept of a "currently assigned" ship.

 

[Northpin]

As i said, they could add a warning related to the lost cargo, but CMDRs should also understand that the Escape pod feature was implemented to be the on-foot equivalent of suiciding in space (with some added caveats of course)

IF you get stranded in space, you can always suicide.
But if you get stranded on-foot on a Megaship or a Carrier (with no ship at your disposal) there is no way to suicide, so they introduced the Escape Pod.