I know, it's just one of those QoL things that would be nice someday
Elite Dangerous | System Colonisation Beta Details & Feedback
- Thread starter Paul_Crowther
- Start date
I belive, the whole idea behind these Tier 1/2/3 points is to limit amount of big stations (Coriolis/Ocellus/etc) in systems. It becomes even more clear if you remember about double points requirement after 2 stations are built.
And approach with these points is completely wrong. Wrong from scratch. Correct approach is to make small stations/installations and ground facilities to be more interesting for pilots. There should be no need for many Coriolis/Ocellus stations. Additional (big) stations should be just a waste of time. How to achieve this? There are many posibilities.
- Additional (big) stations should not provide additional benefits (in terms of population, security, etc), or give less benefits after 2-3 stations. This may be relaxed for binary systems, where second star if too far away and for stations near earth-like and water planets.
- It should be possible to improve (upgrade) currently existing stations, and the cost of the upgrade should be cheaper, compared to new station. I.e., by station upgrade we'll be able to increase system population, security level, etc. You may think about as if we initially build only a barebone station, with reserved areas; and we can improve it by filling the space with workers and services.
- Small outposts should be more interesting to players. Currently, 95% of players are interested only in L-sized landing docs. If FDev will allow interaction between big ships and small outposts - the need for exactly L-sized docking will dissapear. For example, we should be able to communicate with station contacts without docking. Bug ships should be able to load/unload cargo, for example, using 'station drones'. Actually, drones may repair and refuel ships as well.
Last edited:
Just wanted to post here first, in case I'm making a big mistake, but I'm also thinking of making this a new thread to get more visibility (if needed)...
The Planetary Settlement sizes are wrong in-game. When placing a Settlement, you are shown the sizes as 'Small', 'Medium', and 'Large. However, the sizes they end up being are 'Tiny', 'Small', and 'Medium'. There is no 'Large' at all. You can check them out after they are completed, as they will show in the left panel when selected. For example, a Settlement selected as 'Large' will show as 'Medium (++)'. A 'Large' should show as 'Large (+++)'.
Now, this may be intended (an "undocumented feature"?), or a bug, I don't know. If nothing else, the sizes should be renamed to accurately reflect the real sizes that are being placed, rather than what they are listed as.
I've seen some old posts that state the 'Large (+++)' are for older Horizons settlements, so I could understand if those are not part of Colonisation. If that is the case, then I really think the sizes listed when going to place a Settlement on a body, should show the actual size they end up being in-game.
The Planetary Settlement sizes are wrong in-game. When placing a Settlement, you are shown the sizes as 'Small', 'Medium', and 'Large. However, the sizes they end up being are 'Tiny', 'Small', and 'Medium'. There is no 'Large' at all. You can check them out after they are completed, as they will show in the left panel when selected. For example, a Settlement selected as 'Large' will show as 'Medium (++)'. A 'Large' should show as 'Large (+++)'.
Now, this may be intended (an "undocumented feature"?), or a bug, I don't know. If nothing else, the sizes should be renamed to accurately reflect the real sizes that are being placed, rather than what they are listed as.
I've seen some old posts that state the 'Large (+++)' are for older Horizons settlements, so I could understand if those are not part of Colonisation. If that is the case, then I really think the sizes listed when going to place a Settlement on a body, should show the actual size they end up being in-game.
misinformation
Last edited:
Hi FDev,
Some more thoughts for consideration:
- Allow us to dismantle / delete structures that people may have built in the wrong place or order. Especially since construction points and market conditions weren't made clear to us at all.
- Allow us to modify or change construction projects. I'd like to grow my outpost into a full starport someday etc.
- Allow construction points to carry across systems if you have more than one system - if you are developing a few systems you should be able to enjoy the construction points across all of them.
- Allow system architect to put or create a player faction in the system as it's origin system.
Some more thoughts for consideration:
- Allow us to dismantle / delete structures that people may have built in the wrong place or order. Especially since construction points and market conditions weren't made clear to us at all.
- Allow us to modify or change construction projects. I'd like to grow my outpost into a full starport someday etc.
- Allow construction points to carry across systems if you have more than one system - if you are developing a few systems you should be able to enjoy the construction points across all of them.
- Allow system architect to put or create a player faction in the system as it's origin system.
FDev -- I have a system with two ELWs, but no landable bodies. It seems like it should be possible to build a thriving economy with at least one large orbital, but will that work?
Well, you never know, they might be planning on adding Large +++, SuperLarge ++++ and Absolutely Ginormous +++++++++
Earthlikes are useless for colonization purposes... Read this a few times and think about it.
Apparently the rules of colonization were planned by hidden Thargoid agents
Is it?
Takes me 4 minutes per round trip of 720t. That's 15 runs per hour or 10,800t.. 21,600t hauled in 2 hours.... so maybe 2.5hr if you program in some fat.
I thought we could place Horizons settlements - the "Hubs", without landing pads? Is it that some, but not all, are included?I've seen some old posts that state the 'Large (+++)' are for older Horizons settlements, so I could understand if those are not part of Colonisation. If that is the case, then I really think the sizes listed when going to place a Settlement on a body, should show the actual size they end up being in-game.
I've seen lots of people report this on the forum and this is a really clear summary, nice. This is in the Issue tracker but despite dozens of people mentioning it here it has barely any confirmations, so can you all please pile on and confirm:
Issue Tracker
issues.frontierstore.net
Have also added a warning about it in the Wiki.
maybe if it's to an open station entrance 4Mm
not if it's planetary landing, station on far side of planet, planetary landing on far side of planet, etc. etc. etc.
you guys calling for nerfs of FC to suit your own personal convenience are causing me a panic attack
it is literally a half day under relaxed circumstances to load a carrier solo. and no i dont have full mods on the FC so it does carry somewhere over 20k
and you guys calling for nerfs to FC parking time limits... what exactly is your counter proposal? we have to move them every 5 hours? they have to park somewhere.
I assume the problem they're trying to fix is people parking around resource hubs and taking up a parking space. They could probably resolve that issue by making the colony hub ships behave like normal megaships, and have them jump around in a loop. Maybe add some variability to the body the hub parks at for any given system, and then parking at a hub for more than a day doesn't matter.
I'd like to introduce regular Privilege Checks, where in any full system, someone with an FC has to forfeit 250m Cr to someone who doesn't have an FC or a T-9 but has somehow managed to build an Outpost in a week because actually guys c'mon now.
Quick suggestion...
- Add a new button under Ship Cargo --> Transfer for all or 'max' of a commodity to on or off of a Fleet Carrier. I could see a small button next to each commodity on the list. The Transfer 'time' is much slower than buying/selling commodities, and this would help a CMDR move items much more quickly. Using a "move max" would take care of the problem of not having enough room on either side but still would transfer as much as possible.
- Add a new button under Ship Cargo --> Transfer for all or 'max' of a commodity to on or off of a Fleet Carrier. I could see a small button next to each commodity on the list. The Transfer 'time' is much slower than buying/selling commodities, and this would help a CMDR move items much more quickly. Using a "move max" would take care of the problem of not having enough room on either side but still would transfer as much as possible.
@Paul_Crowther Greetings! Me again.
Was wondering around certain systems, hauling goods for good prices and such. I did notice something... that would be beneficial to developing systems, but I am surprised that such a thing didn't make it into Trailblazers.
https://elite-dangerous.fandom.com/wiki/Bulk_Cargo_Ship
Are you aware how many hamsters we can haul with these monsters?
o7 CMDR.
Was wondering around certain systems, hauling goods for good prices and such. I did notice something... that would be beneficial to developing systems, but I am surprised that such a thing didn't make it into Trailblazers.
https://elite-dangerous.fandom.com/wiki/Bulk_Cargo_Ship
Are you aware how many hamsters we can haul with these monsters?
o7 CMDR.
Feedback / thoughts on limiting people to 20 systems they can claim.
I am not fond of the idea of being limited to just 20 systems however, I suspect I am not going to reach that limit myself unless Elite Dangerous manages to last another 10 or 20 years (I hope it does - with many updates etc.). I assume this was done for server stability / prevent the bubble from going to far from where it is now (I can think of a few more reasons but I am just guessing). Also given the number of systems in the galaxy I don't consider running out of systems to be a concern at all.
However, I would suggest this might hamper people using their claims as they might choose to wait for others to do so, to allow them to then get a preferred system (similar to the sniping but not necessarily the same thing since there is no need to wait for hundreds of claims in a line for this to be something that happens. To prevent this issue I would suggest that a give up claim on a system is permitted so people can pick their best 20 systems at any time. I think this would work better overall.
I would also suggest that if a system is abandoned all structures should be deleted and the system be left for anyone else to claim if they wish.
If implemented you might want to consider a cool down before a system can be abandoned and anyone docked in a system or storing items these would need to be moved from another system and station of similar size.
I would suggest you could make it an event of some kind to explain the destruction of all structures in the system like a massive disaster for players to experience etc.
Anyway that is my thoughts on limiting people to 20 claims.
(I would support increasing the limit even though I will almost certainly never reach it myself)
I am not fond of the idea of being limited to just 20 systems however, I suspect I am not going to reach that limit myself unless Elite Dangerous manages to last another 10 or 20 years (I hope it does - with many updates etc.). I assume this was done for server stability / prevent the bubble from going to far from where it is now (I can think of a few more reasons but I am just guessing). Also given the number of systems in the galaxy I don't consider running out of systems to be a concern at all.
However, I would suggest this might hamper people using their claims as they might choose to wait for others to do so, to allow them to then get a preferred system (similar to the sniping but not necessarily the same thing since there is no need to wait for hundreds of claims in a line for this to be something that happens. To prevent this issue I would suggest that a give up claim on a system is permitted so people can pick their best 20 systems at any time. I think this would work better overall.
I would also suggest that if a system is abandoned all structures should be deleted and the system be left for anyone else to claim if they wish.
If implemented you might want to consider a cool down before a system can be abandoned and anyone docked in a system or storing items these would need to be moved from another system and station of similar size.
I would suggest you could make it an event of some kind to explain the destruction of all structures in the system like a massive disaster for players to experience etc.
Anyway that is my thoughts on limiting people to 20 claims.
(I would support increasing the limit even though I will almost certainly never reach it myself)
Gee, should this be a separate suggestions thread even though this is directly related to colonization supply ships?
When a system is full of carriers and has no carrier pending a jump in (we'll get to that in a second), the next carrier requesting that system would cause the carrier that has been in the system the longest to jump out to a random system in range at no fuel cost, and the carrier coming in now blocks any other incoming requests until it completes its jump. This would solve parking in every system that has that problem, and would take more hours to rotate out every carrier this way than the five hours suggested earlier in this thread.
Sure, an enterprising group of carrier owners could lock down a system by cycling their own in and out, but it would require effort and fuel (jumping back in) rather than just parking them there now.
Edit - Seeing this pop up in the thread in the last few pages. Is there a limit of 20 claimed systems already implemented, or is that just someone suggesting a limit? If that gets limited at any point, you'll see me buy multiple accounts in preparation the next time the game is on sale...
When a system is full of carriers and has no carrier pending a jump in (we'll get to that in a second), the next carrier requesting that system would cause the carrier that has been in the system the longest to jump out to a random system in range at no fuel cost, and the carrier coming in now blocks any other incoming requests until it completes its jump. This would solve parking in every system that has that problem, and would take more hours to rotate out every carrier this way than the five hours suggested earlier in this thread.
Sure, an enterprising group of carrier owners could lock down a system by cycling their own in and out, but it would require effort and fuel (jumping back in) rather than just parking them there now.
Edit - Seeing this pop up in the thread in the last few pages. Is there a limit of 20 claimed systems already implemented, or is that just someone suggesting a limit? If that gets limited at any point, you'll see me buy multiple accounts in preparation the next time the game is on sale...