Carrier parking spots in the deep space part of every system

[Tikanderoga]

We all know the blight of carriers infesting a system, especially when a CG is happening.

Why now make carrier parking spots above or below the planetary plane?
They would be considered in "Deep space", not orbiting a planet, which would mean faster dropping in and getting away.

That way we could have unlimited carriers in a system, CGs with delivery goals could have enough carrier parking spots, not just the first come and hog the place until the end of the CG, but the truckers could actually park and unload quickly and leave again. With parking spots like these, there wouldn't be a shortage anymore.

In order not to clump them too much, the carriers could be arrange in a cube formation, say 10 x 10 x 10, and you got 1000 carrier parking spots right there. Move that into the readily available empty space of any solar system, and presto. If needed, add some more of these parking cubes.

The next issue to sort would be to filter them, as the navigation pane and the map would explode otherwise.

 

[SCiARA]

I have said this a few times now, not sure why I wouldn't work tbh

 

[varonica]

That way we could have unlimited carriers in a system, CGs with delivery goals could have enough carrier parking spots, not just the first come and hog the place until the end of the CG, but the truckers could actually park and unload quickly and leave again. With parking spots like these, there wouldn't be a shortage anymore.

You can't have unlimited carriers in a system, there's a limit defined by the number of obejcts a system can have, that and no more. Also since carriers aren't stellar bodies but are based on the station code like stations they must be associated with a body, either the primary star or a planet or moon of a planet, it's a database and you can't have lower level objects not associated with high level objects otherwise there is no way to associate them with a particular system, and if they aren't associated with the system they effecitively won't exist for the player.

 

[Ozric]

That way we could have unlimited carriers in a system

No you couldn't. There's a limit for a reason.

 

[Nadreck]

There are several different problems which require several different solutions.

1. Not being able to park in a system: not really a problem, just park in a nearby system. During both the Coalsack trade CG and the ammonia-world scanning CG, the CG system was maxed out, but there were no other Carriers where I parked mine, still only one jump away (and close to a smallish star, so I was near the Carrier every time I jumped into the system). So only really an issue if the CG station is a long way from its star.

2. Map/panel clutter. We still need the ability to filter Carriers out of the system map (or a "Carrier group" expandable icon), and we still need the ability to filter out all Carriers on the Nav panel except one (preferably a bookmark-based override, for when we're operating from a Carrier that isn't ours).

3. Problems with game stability in crowded systems. Probably not easily fixable, and the effect seems to be very variable. I've found it to be only an occasional problem.

 

[Tikanderoga]

1. Not being able to park in a system: not really a problem, just park in a nearby system. During both the Coalsack trade CG and the ammonia-world scanning CG, the CG system was maxed out, but there were no other Carriers where I parked mine, still only one jump away (and close to a smallish star, so I was near the Carrier every time I jumped into the system). So only really an issue if the CG station is a long way from its star.

3. Problems with game stability in crowded systems. Probably not easily fixable, and the effect seems to be very variable. I've found it to be only an occasional problem.

1. That's what I did too. But eventually even those systems become overcrowded, plus it extends the time needed to unload the carrier. Assuming my idea is feasible, one could do a round trip in 1-2 minutes.
Currently, if you are unlucky and you have to park at a planet that is 2k ls or more away, one round trip turns into 6-8 minutes. Needless to say what the benefits are of a quick unloading.

3. That's for another day to solve.

You can't have unlimited carriers in a system, there's a limit defined by the number of obejcts a system can have, that and no more. Also since carriers aren't stellar bodies but are based on the station code like stations they must be associated with a body, either the primary star or a planet or moon of a planet, it's a database and you can't have lower level objects not associated with high level objects otherwise there is no way to associate them with a particular system, and if they aren't associated with the system they effecitively won't exist for the player.

What sets that number of objects a system can have? The stellar forge?
I've seen systems with 100+ stellar bodies. One stellar body can park 15 carriers IIRC, so that'd be 1500 carriers right there. Not exactly unlimited, but well populated enough.

Add 10 tiny/minuscule stellar bodies with 0 gravity to any system and you have 150 parking spots.

 

[Fake Newts]

One of the few really universally pragmatic carrier uses for BGS groups is to be able to park them adjacent to combat zones which spawn around planets. If your suggestion were implemented this would no longer be possible and the QoL evaporates vs just cruising / jumping to a nearby station. This also applies to bounty hunters and miners.

It would be much better to just have a means of filtering them out of your HUD for those that want it.

 

[varonica]

What sets that number of objects a system can have? The stellar forge?
I've seen systems with 100+ stellar bodies. One stellar body can park 15 carriers IIRC, so that'd be 1500 carriers right there. Not exactly unlimited, but well populated enough.

No, the number of objects in a system is determined by the available number ID's per system, and this is determined by the size of the reserved area in the 64bit integer used to assign unique ID's to every object in the galaxy, in the case of systems the length of the reserved area is either 8 or 9 bits, which gives us a total of either 256 or 512 possible objects per system. My thoughts are it is 8 bits and the max number of objects is 256, so the number of stars+bodies+stations+asteroid belts is subtracted from that number and that's the maximum number of FC's you can have in a system. This of course ignores any ID's FDEV have reserved for future use which may further limit the number of FC's!

You can talk all you like, but this has been clearly laid out by FDEV, there is a limit to the maximum number of Fleet Carriers per system, the use of the 64bit integer for unique ID's has been discussed and explained by FDEV, all this information is available publicly.

 

[Tikanderoga]

No, the number of objects in a system is determined by the available number ID's per system, and this is determined by the size of the reserved area in the 64bit integer used to assign unique ID's to every object in the galaxy, in the case of systems the length of the reserved area is either 8 or 9 bits, which gives us a total of either 256 or 512 possible objects per system. My thoughts are it is 8 bits and the max number of objects is 256, so the number of stars+bodies+stations+asteroid belts is subtracted from that number and that's the maximum number of FC's you can have in a system. This of course ignores any ID's FDEV have reserved for future use which may further limit the number of FC's!

You can talk all you like, but this has been clearly laid out by FDEV, there is a limit to the maximum number of Fleet Carriers per system, the use of the 64bit integer for unique ID's has been discussed and explained by FDEV, all this information is available publicly.

The more you know.

I thought it was an idea worth sharing.