Apart from their location FCs are persistent objects from the moment you commission one until it decommissions, they are present in all play modes for all gaming platforms. Engineer bases are persistent as well and only those invited are allowed to dock at them.
Base Building?
- Thread starter Omenophis
- Start date
I personally couldn't see any "compelling gameplay" reasons for FCs, yet they are in the game and the same people who say we don't need bases seem to be saying that their FCs are more than enough.
Yeah I know I could jump 500ly, great now about all those systems I missed out exploring. Yes I could use the FC as a base and explore the surrounding systems but I can do that in an explorer without the upkeep costs.
Not having a go at anybody, just pointing out that 1 cmdrs idea of compelling can be different to anothers. I would find a base (that I build not just purchase with credits) far more compelling than spending credits on a FC.
Edit: fixed it to make more sense (maybe)
Yeah I know I could jump 500ly, great now about all those systems I missed out exploring. Yes I could use the FC as a base and explore the surrounding systems but I can do that in an explorer without the upkeep costs.
Not having a go at anybody, just pointing out that 1 cmdrs idea of compelling can be different to anothers. I would find a base (that I build not just purchase with credits) far more compelling than spending credits on a FC.
Edit: fixed it to make more sense (maybe)
Last edited:
As I have pointed out in past threads where this has been suggested (and is an oft-requested feature):
Base building is unlikely to be implemented before we gett he ability to walk on all planet types, including Earth-likes. Why would I want to build a base on a barren airless rock (or mostly-airless, in the case of Odyssey planets) when I could build a base on an Earth-like instead? Assuming we only ever get permission to own one base, and you can never move it... if it were implemented now (or during early Odyssey), all the early partakers would be salty that the latecomers would get to build a base on an Earth-like while they're stuck on their barren rocks.
Base building is unlikely to be implemented before we gett he ability to walk on all planet types, including Earth-likes. Why would I want to build a base on a barren airless rock (or mostly-airless, in the case of Odyssey planets) when I could build a base on an Earth-like instead? Assuming we only ever get permission to own one base, and you can never move it... if it were implemented now (or during early Odyssey), all the early partakers would be salty that the latecomers would get to build a base on an Earth-like while they're stuck on their barren rocks.
In the end it isn't on offer (in any form) so really its just a pipe dream anyway
How about, it costs less to construct, is cheaper to maintain, is intended to be stationary, etc.
Yes, an FC can be moved into a location (hat tip to DSSA), but, if you KNOW that you're just leaving a facilty (I prefer orbital as opposed to ground) in a specific location, similar to the deep space asteroid bases, why pay for an FC when you could more cheaply create a permanent facility?
Legs was a future feature included in the launch blurb for future release, of course we were always going to walk on planets, and that there would be some shooting involved was all part of the expectation, not sure what your point is!
There are lots of things in this game (and others) that I don't like and don't do, however I would never suggest any of them be removed. FC's for instance were not something I wanted, but I know others did/do. Base building is something I would like (others may not), however, if it is never to be, I won't lose too much sleep over it and I certainly would never quit for something so trival.
Some of the things I don't like and don't may turn into, at some point, things that I like and do do. I may one day end up with a FC, but at the moment, its not for me.
It would also depend, for me, on how base building would be implimented and how it can be used, who knows, the actual implimenation might turn me off. But for now it is pie in the sky stuff anyway.
I have been serious for several threads now, can I go back to being my annoying and (attempted) witty self
Edit: wish I would proof read stuff before hitting post. Yeah, Nah that would ruin the fun.
Some of the things I don't like and don't may turn into, at some point, things that I like and do do. I may one day end up with a FC, but at the moment, its not for me.
It would also depend, for me, on how base building would be implimented and how it can be used, who knows, the actual implimenation might turn me off. But for now it is pie in the sky stuff anyway.
I have been serious for several threads now, can I go back to being my annoying and (attempted) witty self
Edit: wish I would proof read stuff before hitting post. Yeah, Nah that would ruin the fun.
Last edited:
Well, a few things off the top of my head but they would have to introduce a player version of it. A) planetary mining and refining of your minable your collect into intermediate materials. B) Legit crafting system, the ability to create ships, modules, weapons etc and sell them in your outfitters and shipyards. C) Ability to host an engineer that you can "train" with various disciplines. D) A BGS like mission board, and faction system where you can build up your faction control in the system, left to your own devices long enough and you should be able to claim the system, build outposts, stations, have system authority vessels. (course that's long term endgame type gameplay.) E. Carrier administration and construction offices. F) an expansion of the Player Minor Faction system to give the owning player a bit more control like set the kind of government and disposition the faction will have to visiting players.
Even if you were to limit it to one system per player or squadron, so individual squadrons cannot build entire constellations of allied systems, I'm sure you would still encourage alliances between several players/player groups by them cooperating and colonizing areas together.
I've been playing since the start.
I would estimate (based on no knowledge at all) that the cost of installing a single large sized landing pad with underground repair garage on an unoccupied planet would be perhaps 1 Billion credits. The landing pads are a pretty impressive piece of machinery. Perhaps an additional 5% premium for every 5K Ly outside the bubble, cause it will cost more. I think that sounds reasonable. (this might be waaay overpriced when considering how cheep a FC is).
Living spaces would be much cheeper, considering you could conceivably buy a T9 for 76M and park it like a mobil home. Strip out the racking system for living space. Okay you don't want to live in a T9? The point is, for less than 1Billion credits you should be able to have a reasonable habitat.
Reasonable estimate for a basic 1-pad base with living habitate: 2 Billion.
(not to be compared to the large engineering bases we visit, which are much larger)
But others fly those same ships and actively use them.
So, my point being, if the only use case for planetary bases is sitting in them, and that is all anyone can do with them, then i don't see why FD would spend time implementing them.
So none of those are compelling but you still play the game? Err..... ok.
I see compelling gameplay with FCs. Mobile bases for your ships, a home away from home. They have a use.
I don't know, maybe people are taking the word compelling different to how i mean it. Let's simply say useful feature then instead.
FCs have a use. Multiple uses.
I'm not seeing much in the way of uses for the bases as proposed so far, just people thinking it would be cool. Useless, but cool.
There we go, that's what i was thinking about. Things that bases could actually be used for.
Some of the things cross into areas i don't think FD would want to go, but some ideas there.
I'm fairly sure if FD were to do planetary bases the most likely thing would be something to do would be resource gathering. What you'd do with those resources then thought....
I own multiple houses in ESO and they have very little use at all (except for the extra storage slots), everything else I can access elsewhere.
Base building would very much depend on what is implimented and how. For example if they were a credit purchase like FCs I would give them a big miss probably regardless, even if the proved to be the best thing since sliced bread, I would prefer a way to "build" them myself.
The reasons I haven't made any suggestion about what I would like them to do and be used for, is 1. its pie in the sky stuff, 2. (and more important) you and I know forum suggestions are nothing more than black hole fodder, disappearing never to be seen or heard from again.
Why must it keep running while you're away? It's a static base, not a place for trade and such.
You could have somewhere for other players to refuel, repair and rearm if you wish, but that's about it. Even they could be freebies with an automated system that doesn't need filling up since the base wouldn't make you money, it's just a place to store your stuff and maybe have a storage facility with a refinery for your mining purposes, but you and some drones operate all that. The 4 modules are simply a way to make it more difficult to complete rather than for it to be functional as a base with staff. Drones don't need wages.
The very occasional player that chances across it can get what they need gratis and be on their way. Having a trading hub in it would be meaningless since, it's so far off the grid that nobody is going to travel that far just for trade.
Quite honestly, if they make them require upkeep like the FC, it would be a complete disaster.
They will either have to be close enough to the bubble to make it viable to keep hopping back and forth to earn the upkeep, which makes it quite pointless since you already have stations and FC's to do that all over the place in the bubble.
The other alternative is to give it a way to earn money for itself. That won't work unless it's also close enough to the bubble for other players to visit it with trade.
In effect, you would kill it completely since some players would probably want to go completely off the grid, halfway across the galaxy. If it always required you to be close to the bubble, there's no point in doing it at all, the number of players would never spread out far enough to make it worthwhile. The whole idea of having a base for yourself would mean that explorers could be halfway across the galaxy and chance across a players base, a slim chance maybe, but it's still a chance. If they are marked on the galactic map if they have facilities for repair, explorers could get repairs done for the odd mishap that always happens at some point.
Why do people live miles away from anywhere and have their nearest neighbours 100 miles away or more? Why don't they all live in big towns?
The answer is: Some people like a bit of peace and quiet where they can relax and enjoy themselves. Call them eccentric or unsociable or whatever you like, it's just human nature.
I hate visitors... especially uninvited visitors
Visitor are never guests, they are only ever pests Unless you have one of my grandkids in your back pocket, stay away. Grandkids are always welcome, their parents, not so much
I bought a spaceship game. Remember? Elite, Elite: Frontier, Elite: First Encounter... I don't remember those having legs on planets because we were pilots, not grunts.
If they must have us walking all over a planet, they could have at least allowed us to wander around stations and our ships FIRST and seamlessly get out of our ship to walk across the landing pad. Seamless in appearance since the instance would load when we activated the airlock.
We already hae the SRV to move around the planet quickly, why on earth would we want to walk?
My only worry is that Odyssey will become a prerequisite for the next update, so even if you don't want to walk on the planets, you'll still have to buy it because it contains content that's vital to the next update. I want the DLC's to be standalone so I can give Odyssey a miss because I'm not interested in being a grunt that runs around with a big gun in his hands, but still buy and use the next DLC. Unless Odyssey allows walking in stations and ships and seamlessly getting off the ship and walking across the landing pad, I am just not interested.
People are wondering what gameplay bases would add, it wouldn't need to add any. We have fleet carriers despite them essentially just adding cargo storage. Every other function of the carrier is replicable somewhere else. So all bases need to add to get us interested is proper module storage.
This ^^
Its the same in most games too. Owning a 'home' doesn't really offer much in practical terms, other than a place for players to hoard their stuff. But on a deeper level, they offer players a sense of ownership. We sort of have that with ships already, but building and owning a base on a world will appeal to lot of players as its tapping into that sense of ownership.
Home owning in games has always been popular, and has often been a feature game devs have used to retain its playerbase i.e. some games require players to log in and refresh their home/base every now and then, otherwise it'll degrade and eventually be wiped.
I can see frontier implementing exactly that kind of thing too, some day. And of course, adding base building to elite opens the door to another endless stream of cosmetics to buy for them with RL money.
Its coming to Elite, sooner or later.