It would be good to expand the load of the fleet carrier since it continues with the same capacity and twice as many modules, the modules would have to add storage not subtract since they are supposed to be added, or at least not consume almost half of the carrier's load . If you want to go on a long trip, and take modules to sell in case the companions have forgotten some, you can not take much tritium, since in some cases those accessories consume almost 5K storage units individually, and at this time with the mining of tritium still scarce, it's crazy to leave without enough for the return.
Cargo capacity, of the fleet carrier
- Thread starter ciberloky
- Start date
So you have a room, and you start to put furniture in that room, do you have more or less space in your room?
What if you bring boxes, crates into that room, do you get more or less space in your room?
As the size of the Fleet Carrier does not change when you add/removes modules, so that tells us that the Fleet Carrier should behave just like that room...
What if you bring boxes, crates into that room, do you get more or less space in your room?
As the size of the Fleet Carrier does not change when you add/removes modules, so that tells us that the Fleet Carrier should behave just like that room...
You aren't adding a trailer to the Fleet Carrier, it is a fixed size, and...well when you add containers to a ship it does indeed consume available cargo space, because the containers, you know, go in the hold. So if the hold has enough space for 1,000 containers and you put in 500 containers, you have room for 500 more containers. You don't add 500 containers and then have room for 1,500 containers, that doesn't make any sort of sense at all.
The point you think you are making makes no sense logically so I suggest you maybe go back and think about it a bit, try experimenting with lego bricks and a small tupperware container to see how putting stuff into a container like a fleet carrier actually reduces the amount of cargo space equivalent to the amount of bricks you have put in!
There's a balance on storage which depends on what you are using the FC for, i only have modules for ME therefore i have more than enough Trit for a 60'000LY round trip.
But my FC is predominantly for exploration not for trading or to support a wing with shipyard etc.
O7
A bigger cargo FC is a cargo mega ship its not a FC...
They dump features and remove landing pads to run more cargo they dont instantly get bigger...
The more cargo they have the more smegged the luxury of the mega ship gets....
The biggest cargo mega ships dont even have landing pads as cargo is transfered Containers at a time not single tons...
The next move is to dump FC and own the Cargo mega ship not a FC...
The cargo mega ships only have defence fighter bays You also only get on and off at outposts were they hard link...
The top goal wold be to work your way to owning Pure cargo mega ship..
They dump features and remove landing pads to run more cargo they dont instantly get bigger...
The more cargo they have the more smegged the luxury of the mega ship gets....
The biggest cargo mega ships dont even have landing pads as cargo is transfered Containers at a time not single tons...
The next move is to dump FC and own the Cargo mega ship not a FC...
The cargo mega ships only have defence fighter bays You also only get on and off at outposts were they hard link...
The top goal wold be to work your way to owning Pure cargo mega ship..
I wouldn't mind a more cargo oriented carrier - as in having only 4 large pads/hangars instead of 8, but having more capacity
But i guess i can wait till they introduce the Panther Clipper
That looks a nice idea if your into trading but its absolutely useless out in the Black
So not really a top goal for us exploration folks
O7
Yup the illusive Panther Clipper XL, wonder where that is, its been years. FD have given the two fingers with that one for years even though lot of players asked for it in favour for combat ships, roles, etc. Not a combat ship so not important eh. Have to keep those pew pew happy, never mind the cargo runners and explorers, stuff them.
Advertised and pushed back in Newsletter 08 and 13 a long time ago, way before horizons, fleet carriers or anything else yet its still not here IS IT.
I asked for this in this thread, to increase it to 50k or 100k tonnage
forums.frontier.co.uk
not enough storage space in carrier
Needs to have more storage space, double would be nice. Currently if you wish to take carrier equal or beyond 22,000LY you need about 24,000 trit both ways to get there and back. Even with limited internals installed in carrier you as pushing it to get it there and back. Carrier is also an...
limits exist to force player to make strategic decisions.
So long as there is gameplay value to making such a strategic decision, i dont think effectively eliminating such a limit makes any sense unless the argument can be made that eliminating the limit adds more value than is lost.
I'm not seeing that here. Having "everything" doesn't come with a value add as much as you'd be losing by carriers no longer being at least somewhat specialized.
So long as there is gameplay value to making such a strategic decision, i dont think effectively eliminating such a limit makes any sense unless the argument can be made that eliminating the limit adds more value than is lost.
I'm not seeing that here. Having "everything" doesn't come with a value add as much as you'd be losing by carriers no longer being at least somewhat specialized.
I cannot get over the notion that we could have had modular Fleet Carriers.... that depending on what we install changes how they look... In what order we install modules would change the look... and the only parts that are "fixed" and the front and back, where our modules goes. so as you add modules the longer the ship gets, until a you reach the max size, ie length.
This also opens up for having various Fleet Carrier designs.
Small - a single row of modules in a line (1x1), so these would be smaller than what we currently have. Expands one module at a time
Medium - two parallel rows (2x1). more like how the current fleet carriers look, Expands 2 modules at a time
Large - 3 parallel rows (3x1), arranged like a triangle, Expands 3 modules at a time
Huge - 2 parallel rows stacked back to back (2x2), think two current fleet carrier where one is flipped upside down then docked together. Expands 4 modules at a time.
So if it is a personal FC you could add 1 small, 1 medium and 1 large landing pad, and use leftover space for something else, like storage modules.
And as we add more modules, Fleet Carriers could have different sized FSD, Thrusters etc, so before you reach the max, you need to upgrade FSD, Thrusters, etc, so you can keep adding modules until you reach the biggest size you current variant supports. And of course maxing out a Huge Fleet Carrier would be ALOT more expensive than maxing out a small...
And as we discover more Guardian stuff, and perhaps Thargoid tech, we could get new modules that would allow us to make our Fleet Carriers even longer... Just like we have Guardia weapons, powerplant, FSD booster etc.
And this would actually work as the OP wants, he could now build the Fleet Carrier he envisions with the needed internal modules and enough storage space. Just pick a suitable starter kit for a Fleet Carrier (small, medium, large and huge) and then outfit it for the desired task you want to use the Fleet Carrier for and if you want a big one, it will most likely cost you an arm and a leg...
I'm not quite sure what you're trying to say here. Are you supporting or against the idea?
Oddly enough I often think that the fleet carrier is a cargo vessel given that it comes with a market you can't get rid of but does NOT come with a shipyard.
i'm against allowing "having everything" by removing the existing capacity limits since having everything eliminates the value added to the game's player economy by incentivizing specialization.
Being forced to compromise on what your carrier has allows for there to be a need to rely on other carriers or stations and that benefits gameplay...while eliminating that need to depend on other elements doesn't benefit gameplay.
Okay, thanks for clarifying.
While I agree in principle, I feel like in practice, so many functions are mostly useless, forcing players to choose between them won't actually result in greater diversity, but rather less, as most players choose the more useful modules over the less useful ones.
Carrying ships or modules, for example, is currently essentially useless, yet requires more space than any other option.
While I agree in principle, I feel like in practice, so many functions are mostly useless, forcing players to choose between them won't actually result in greater diversity, but rather less, as most players choose the more useful modules over the less useful ones.
Carrying ships or modules, for example, is currently essentially useless, yet requires more space than any other option.
if they're useless, why are people complaining about not having enough room because they're adding all of the modules?
Either there is a point to the modules and so they are desirable and making players use up all their space ...or that's not an issue and this is a complaint being made by bad players who make bad decisions in equipping useless stuff.
if the former is true, then you're wrong and it's not useless and my statement above applies. If the latter is true then this isn't a game-problem (except that the game is filled with stuff that is useless like most of the commodity board and various modules nobody uses), but rather a player problem that is easily solved by not buying useless stuff.
I get the feeling the modular version that was abandoned was a very limiting setup.
Like Mining, Exploration, Trading, Bounty hunting modules - only one module active at a time.
Or at least that was presented when we got the first glimpse at them Carriers.
TBH, i'm glad that setup was dropped since it was very constraining
