I suspect a large proportion of current carrier owners would downsize... helping to rid system maps of the current carrier clutter -- or FDev could at least make carrier markers an expandable icon instead of dozens of the damned things.
Affordable Carriers For All - Hammerhead Class
- Thread starter shadragon
- Start date
What bugs me most is the "Market Compare" option is now, mostly useless. Odyssey hasn't helped either, with the dozens of surface settlements added, but 100 FCs == 100 options to fish through looking for the target station you want to sell at.
OT, I know, but... ergh.
Last edited:
To get many people to change all they would need to do was to reduce the amount of Tritium usage per jump so that a full mini-carrier had more range than the large ones. For me just getting rid of the marker with everything else the same would be a winner. Might need a redesigned concourse though but that depends on what services were available for players to use.
again... really easy to get just by trading
it's 200m to buy a clipper. thats 10 runs in a type 9 if not less. Just running standered cargo runs, no FOTM no broken mechanic that gets patched out. Just your standard trading.
With EDO you can do high intensity combat sites as soon as you get even grade 1 laser pistol and kin carbine. These will let you get a type 9 in about 7-9 sites depending on rng and how efficiently you are at getting the combat bonds.
This means you can go from a sidewinder to a type 9 skipping all the other ships in only a day. So yeah... ships are a bit too cheap if you consider them the game progression. I however would argue that unlocking ships is the early game, engineering is the mid game and late/end game is when the sandbox opens up and you start setting your own goals. Be it PvP, growing a faction, exploration or whatever.
and considering how Fdev designs things that would be the hardest part of this. It would need to function on a completely different system than the current FCs and would probably need to be built from scratch. Honestly don't think they would be worth the dev time.
That's true, I suspect what we have is all we will get for usable player large ships. (I mean as in capital class, not Panther Clipper, we will get that one day)
It could be easy really- if the mini carrier is just a wardrobe for some things (i.e. no market) it could be instance based and tied to the commander - sort of a halfway house between a ship and an FC. This way systems won't gunge up as thousands could overlap.
The other approach is more radical (and more fun). Since FCs are modular (as seen with the ship kits for them) why not go one step further and have a modular carrier where you can take away / add sections at will? You start with a drive section, one pad and a bridge and go from there. It would scratch base building itches too.
yeah, sounds easy, that doesn't make the implementation easy
It depends on what hooks need to be used- FCs have markets on them for example- for a small FC with none the data required to 'define' an FC would be much less.
The problem I see here is the permanent asset versus the instanced asset that only exists when we are logged on, which is what it would be tied to our CMDR account, which would mean it would be a player only asset, not friends sorry. I would be happy with that personally, but many other wouldn't.
Why is that? Because the players' ships behave the same way. An example of working in multicrew.
The most important thing is that it can be destroyed by other players.
Can be destroyed? I'm out.
Deleted member 182079
D
Pick one, because both can't be true.
What's wrong with that if you can attack and destroy that little aircraft carrier?Can be destroyed? I'm out.
It will eventually bring it into balance in the game.
Because instancing will never allow it to function sanely.
If its just a box for ships, and since FCs can't be destroyed (and this has no market) there is no point to keeping it persistent. If it can only store your own ships and its just tied to you, then instancing should be enough- after all its a personal carrier, and not something like an FC.
Nothing wrong with it, but it's not as good as the carrier I've already got, so I'll stick with that one.
In your scheme, what will happen if a mini carrier is attacked while its owner is away in a ship in another system? Does it have any defence at all?
In all logic, the actual Drake-Class Carrier is the middle sized carrier class, reason to call it Fleet Carrier and not Super Carrier or Escort Carrier, so if this idea would make a complement to the carrier classes, we would need Super Carriers as well.
You concept is of the Escort Carrier class.
Well, it's not.
Apparently FDev does not likes ship in ship setup.
So Carriers are stations. And they are persistent.
So having a small personal carrier does not fit the ship-in-ship setup while having a small normal carrier means the same impact for the infrastructure as a big carrier.
Well, if you cannot support it, then it only means that you dont need it
But a rather basic carrier upkeep is around 11 millions. You can easily make 3 times in a single hour while not not pursuing high credit gain activities.
Or you can do 1 hour at Robigo and get 90 millions and be set for 8 weeks.
1h gaming > 8 weeks of upkeep...