Back to the drawing board, FD

[Sysmon]

This thread is an enjoyable read, where a commander takes an FC boldly where none have gone before: CMDR Nutter far above us all. No bad feelings against dear Nutter, that thread is a great read of fun times had.

But really?? We can take our Carriers to hitherto unreachable places, then get to keep the exploration data by simply selling it at the onboard UC, decommissioning with hardly a penalty and then suicide home? And how are the ships transferred back? How is the carrier getting back without fuel?

Talk about shoddy, poorly thought through and badly implemented mechanics. Take those carriers back out of the game and get them worked up to into something useful, please.

S

 

[shreddog]

How is the carrier getting back without fuel?

It won't. It will stay in the system as a derelict. Its very existence a reminder of the past.
And if someone someday manage to find it, and access the internal flight log archives, they will hear the final ramblings of a madman

 

[rhiz]

This thread is an enjoyable read, where a commander takes an FC boldly where none have gone before: CMDR Nutter far above us all. No bad feelings against dear Nutter, that thread is a great read if fun times had.

But reall?y? We can take our Carriers to hitherto unreachable places, then get to keep the exploration data by simply selling it at the onboard UC, decommissioning with hardly a penalty and then suicide home? And how are the ships transferred back? How is the carrier getting back without fuel?

Talk about shoddy, poorly thought through and badly implemented mechanics. Take those carriers back out of the game and get them worked up to into something useful, please.

S

To be fair, onboard UC was a late addition in response to player outcry - it was never strictly intended as part of the core design as far as I know. Were the original decommissioning costs higher? They spent ages thinking through the system and people didn't like it so I'd give them a break on this one. Personally, I'd rather have UC on board than sweat about outlier cases like this.

 

[THECATISDEAD]

Are you for real

 

[Factabulous]

It wasn't planned to be like that, but CMDRs like Nutter ranted and raved until it was changed - pester power

 

[CMDR Tony]

Talk about shoddy, poorly thought through and badly implemented mechanics. Take those carriers back out of the game and get them worked up to into something useful, please.

Here here! But par for the course for FDev.

 

[Bionic Bytes]

None of the game design choices are going to please everyone. In the end it’s a compromise.

 

[Sysmon]

To be fair, onboard UC was a late addition in response to player outcry - it was never strictly intended as part of the core design as far as I know. Were the original decommissioning costs higher? They spent ages thinking through the system and people didn't like it so I'd give them a break on this one. Personally, I'd rather have UC on board than sweat about outlier cases like this.

Outlier cases to whom? This makes "end game" exploration everything FD told us they wanted exploration not to be.

S

 

[Sysmon]

None of the game design choices are going to please everyone. In the end it’s a compromise.

Except when it turns out not to be a compromise, but rather something that could be game breaking. In this case, the trip was done for fun. But this means you can organise an expedition and everybody just suicides back while the carrier decommissions largely without cost. Similar mechanics any other place would be called exploits.

S

 

[rhiz]

Outlier cases to whom? This makes "end game" exploration everything FD told us they wanted exploration not to be.

S

I see your point, but can you offer any solutions that don't roll back to a more restrictive and harshly punitive design?

 

[Sysmon]

I see your point, but can you offer any solutions that don't roll back to a more restrictive and harshly punitive design?

I posted all sorts of solutions in the past during the FC betas. The issue is always that oversimplified mechanics are either too harsh or too easy when implemented in an otherwise complex setting (as the ED universe after all is).

Anything punitive will have to be met with something to ease the punishment. In the case of UC, that is the first of anything we have gotten that will give us payout from our own assets, and an indestructible one with consequence-free decommission. For everything else we get vouchers (CODEX) or data that does not persist through death. Taking UC away from Carriers mean that expeditions would have to be planned, as there is no other way of topping up the bank in the black. To ease the pain, UCs on carriers could hand out UC vouchers that can be cashed in by the data owner when at a real station, basically a exploration "save point", but the data should perish with the carrier, so if the carrier is decommissioned in the black, the owner would have to return to a station the hard way to get the payout.

Or the UC could draw from the carriers bank (but that would be a harsh cash drain really fast).

S

 

[[Diplomacy] Carnegie]

Dying in the black was the only thing left in ED that had any significant consequences - no surprise that FDev have made it easier.

Edit:
DSSA - the Deep Space Suicidewinder Array.

 

[CMDR Jayce MacLeod]

People cried and the tears flowed like a river because of harsh decomissioning from beta 1, now people are crying because of the ridiculous "no consequence" system of Decommissioning of beta 2/live.... which one is it lol?

Personally, I don't think you should be able to just buy a carrier, use it for like 2 days, sell it and get like 99% of your money back.

You should lose 50%. End of story.

 

[Sysmon]

People cried and the tears flowed like a river because of harsh decomissioning from beta 1, now people are crying because of the ridiculous "no consequence" system of Decommissioning of beta 2/live.... which one is it lol?

Personally, I don't think you should be able to just buy a carrier, use it for like 2 days, sell it and get like 99% of your money back.

You should lose 50%. End of story.

That's the thing, isn't it? What about all the solutions in-between those extremes?

S

 

[Riverside]

ADS doesn't seem so god like now, eh?

 

[ErichZann]

People cried and the tears flowed like a river because of harsh decomissioning from beta 1, now people are crying because of the ridiculous "no consequence" system of Decommissioning of beta 2/live.... which one is it lol?

Personally, I don't think you should be able to just buy a carrier, use it for like 2 days, sell it and get like 99% of your money back.

You should lose 50%. End of story.

sure that is fine if it didn't have running costs (upkeep). that would make decommissioning not a problem since your carrier will not bankrupt you, and you couldn't use exploits like these.

simple, without upkeep people wouldn't have such a problem with high decommissioning costs, and you would still need to make sure to get your carrier home.

 

[Kamiyoda]

People cried and the tears flowed like a river because of harsh decomissioning from beta 1, now people are crying because of the ridiculous "no consequence" system of Decommissioning of beta 2/live.... which one is it lol?

This just in, a large group of people have differing opinions about the a subject.

After our break we will introduce you to a device that can cook 2 pieces of bread at the same time. Will it break the bake meta? Stay tuned to find out.

 

[[PS4] Lorenzo Waringos]

Going to write an open letter about this. I want something’s colour changed too.

 

[CMDR Jayce MacLeod]

This just in, a large group of people have differing opinions about the a subject.

After our break we will introduce you to a device that can cook 2 pieces of bread at the same time. Will it break the bake meta? Stay tuned to find out.

Lol Exactly

 

[Nutter]

This thread is an enjoyable read, where a commander takes an FC boldly where none have gone before: CMDR Nutter far above us all. No bad feelings against dear Nutter, that thread is a great read if fun times had.

But reall?y? We can take our Carriers to hitherto unreachable places, then get to keep the exploration data by simply selling it at the onboard UC, decommissioning with hardly a penalty and then suicide home? And how are the ships transferred back? How is the carrier getting back without fuel?

Talk about shoddy, poorly thought through and badly implemented mechanics. Take those carriers back out of the game and get them worked up to into something useful, please.

S

Thank you for the mention....

It's like this.. I spent a very long time, probably longer than you spent mining LTD's dreaming of reaching for the stars and finding awesome places....

Then carriers came, my chance to extend on my extreme exploration, my reward? Stunning never seen before views of our galaxy.....

That said, carriers are a explorer curse, you think I decommissioned for a quick win? No No No... I'm truly gutted that I cannot enjoy my carrier. No other playstyle Forces you to mine fuel..... NONE!

Explorers are the only players that should be waving banners..... I've been here far to long to hear the same old poppycock.

Some people get exploration........ and some never will

o7