We still don't know why Carriers were dropped from the 3.3 update, or how far along their development was, or when (or if) they will be introduced. And we didn't get to the stage of having a "focused feedback" thread to discuss them properly with Frontier.
So I'd like to use this thread for a number of Carrier-related purposes:
1. Sharing what little we know about how Carriers were supposed to work.
2. Speculating about the stuff we don't know.
3. Attempting to correct what we consider to be unwise design decisions.
4. Presenting our own suggestions.
For 1, as I recall: Carriers will be linked to Squadrons, with presumably one Carrier per squadron. They will have "hyperdrives" rather than frameshift drives, will emerge from hyperspace directly into orbit around a specified body (star, planet, moon), and cannot supercruise. Like existing megaships, they will be invulnerable to normal attacks. Unlike the Gnosis and other existing megaships, they won't be restricted to jumping only once per week, but can jump whenever they have enough of an as-yet-unspecified resource. They will act as resupply and respawn points for ships based on them: it's also generally assumed that they will carry docked ships with them when they jump.
If they can appear in orbit around a specified body, it's reasonable to infer that they would be capable of in-system microjumps (if this isn't specifically implemented, the same result could be achieved by jumping to another system and then back to a different body). This has implications for trade with stations distant from the primary star (e.g. Hutton Orbital).
It has been suggested that a squadron would need a minimum membership size to qualify for a Carrier: a decision that has been widely criticised and will probably be unenforceable. It's already been confirmed that a squadron won't disband until the last member quits, and that's when the Carrier will be scrapped: so single-owner Carriers will be possible, and people could temporarily join each other's squadrons to meet the target. And IIRC console players can create alternate accounts free of charge, and will simply create as many as they need. For a single player with multiple ships, a Carrier is arguably more useful than for multiple players with one ship each, as the single player can only fly one ship at a time.
We don't know if Carriers will have shipyards, or some similar facility to allow one CMDR to load more than one ship onto the Carrier. The existing ones don't, but this could be justified in-game as the captain's policy, allowing anyone to bring one ship each. For a privately-owned squadron Carrier, this won't work: it should be up to ME to decide if I want to put several of MY ships on MY Carrier! A Carrier without such a facility wouldn't be completely useless to a single player (it could be a mobile base for deep-space exploration or mining), but its usefulness would be greatly reduced for no good reason. It would also inconvenience conventional groups too, because whoever has to fly a supply freighter (to fetch fuel etc) can't park another ship on the Carrier too. During the Gnosis Incident, I was operating from the Orion Nebula Tourist Centre (700ly away) because it was the nearest shipyard, the only place I could park multiple ships.
IIRC, it has been said that Carriers would be "visible in all instances". If so, I'd consider this to be a bad decision that should be abandoned. Popular systems could become crowded with hundreds or thousands of Carriers! Perhaps that's why Frontier want to limit their availability? But there's no need for that. A Carrier should only be visible if members of the owning squadron are present in the instance . When the last squadron member logs out or leaves the system, anyone else present sees the "entering hyperspace" animation, and the Carrier leaves. And in a busy system, even in Open, you only get instanced with maybe one other squadron plus their Carrier only. There's no point in getting instanced with multiple unattended Carriers, it's a waste of resources.
So I'd like to use this thread for a number of Carrier-related purposes:
1. Sharing what little we know about how Carriers were supposed to work.
2. Speculating about the stuff we don't know.
3. Attempting to correct what we consider to be unwise design decisions.
4. Presenting our own suggestions.
For 1, as I recall: Carriers will be linked to Squadrons, with presumably one Carrier per squadron. They will have "hyperdrives" rather than frameshift drives, will emerge from hyperspace directly into orbit around a specified body (star, planet, moon), and cannot supercruise. Like existing megaships, they will be invulnerable to normal attacks. Unlike the Gnosis and other existing megaships, they won't be restricted to jumping only once per week, but can jump whenever they have enough of an as-yet-unspecified resource. They will act as resupply and respawn points for ships based on them: it's also generally assumed that they will carry docked ships with them when they jump.
If they can appear in orbit around a specified body, it's reasonable to infer that they would be capable of in-system microjumps (if this isn't specifically implemented, the same result could be achieved by jumping to another system and then back to a different body). This has implications for trade with stations distant from the primary star (e.g. Hutton Orbital).
It has been suggested that a squadron would need a minimum membership size to qualify for a Carrier: a decision that has been widely criticised and will probably be unenforceable. It's already been confirmed that a squadron won't disband until the last member quits, and that's when the Carrier will be scrapped: so single-owner Carriers will be possible, and people could temporarily join each other's squadrons to meet the target. And IIRC console players can create alternate accounts free of charge, and will simply create as many as they need. For a single player with multiple ships, a Carrier is arguably more useful than for multiple players with one ship each, as the single player can only fly one ship at a time.
We don't know if Carriers will have shipyards, or some similar facility to allow one CMDR to load more than one ship onto the Carrier. The existing ones don't, but this could be justified in-game as the captain's policy, allowing anyone to bring one ship each. For a privately-owned squadron Carrier, this won't work: it should be up to ME to decide if I want to put several of MY ships on MY Carrier! A Carrier without such a facility wouldn't be completely useless to a single player (it could be a mobile base for deep-space exploration or mining), but its usefulness would be greatly reduced for no good reason. It would also inconvenience conventional groups too, because whoever has to fly a supply freighter (to fetch fuel etc) can't park another ship on the Carrier too. During the Gnosis Incident, I was operating from the Orion Nebula Tourist Centre (700ly away) because it was the nearest shipyard, the only place I could park multiple ships.
IIRC, it has been said that Carriers would be "visible in all instances". If so, I'd consider this to be a bad decision that should be abandoned. Popular systems could become crowded with hundreds or thousands of Carriers! Perhaps that's why Frontier want to limit their availability? But there's no need for that. A Carrier should only be visible if members of the owning squadron are present in the instance . When the last squadron member logs out or leaves the system, anyone else present sees the "entering hyperspace" animation, and the Carrier leaves. And in a busy system, even in Open, you only get instanced with maybe one other squadron plus their Carrier only. There's no point in getting instanced with multiple unattended Carriers, it's a waste of resources.