General FC - Anaconda

[GrumpyFinn]

So I like the idea of having a Fleet Carrier but, I wish I could have an Anaconda or something long range with a small ship (DBX) inside it. Leave Conda into orbit while I take DBX with SRV down to planet surface. Fill the Conda with spare SRV's, fighter bays, repair limpets, amf's, collector limpets, whatever you might need, just in case, and a way to transfer them to and from DBX, maybe land on a planet to do the transfers.... Have the conda equipped with mining lasers, refineries etc. to drop into those countless rings we map, would make stopping at all the fleet carriers, where ever we could find them, meaningful. To have that capability and an FC would open totally new way to explore the furthest edges of the universe?

In short:
FC as a deep space station, Anaconda as a "satellite" and DBX for exploration...

 

[SlickPBW]

Something very similar to this was mentioned by David Braben himself a long time ago.

 

[metatheurgist]

And they also said they didn't want to do ships in ships (technically too difficult). Which was a far more recent and emphatic statement than DB's dream musings at the start of this journey.

So yeah, not happening.

 

[Dragsham]

SC manages it with several examples of how easy it is. Granted its not perfect but its doable.
I'd like to see fleet carriers either landing on bodies with or without atmospheres, or in low orbit.

 

[metatheurgist]

Right, the game that constantly has ships blow up whenever someone drops a burito, walks, sneezes or anything really.

 

[aRJay]

SC manages it with several examples of how easy it is. Granted its not perfect but its doable.
I'd like to see fleet carriers either landing on bodies with or without atmospheres, or in low orbit.

Fleet carriers, and other stations, would need to be able to move in normal space, low orbit might be doable as is but that just makes the FC harder to reach as more of the planet is out of line of sight.

General comment why do people use different games written by different people using different code/engines with different budgets and staffing levels as an example of how difficult/easy something is to do.

Sorry it’s Monday.

 

[Dragsham]

Simply because its doable and not impossible. Perhaps its impossible with the cobra 3 engine? In which case perhaps its time to update the engine

 

[GrumpyFinn]

And they also said they didn't want to do ships in ships (technically too difficult). Which was a far more recent and emphatic statement than DB's dream musings at the start of this journey.

So yeah, not happening.

Yet they already have Fighter bays and a transition into them while a crew member takes care of whatever you're in.

 

[varonica]

Yet they already have Fighter bays and a transition into them while a crew member takes care of whatever you're in.

The fighter doesn't exist until you enter it, it's not generated as s separate object that needs to be dealt with during high speed maneuvering and travel.

Simply because its doable and not impossible. Perhaps its impossible with the cobra 3 engine? In which case perhaps its time to update the engine

It appears it's also not doable with the SC engine because, well, the litany of fails hugely outweighs the actual successful usage of the feature, and it should be pointed out, even if there was just a tiny, tiny chance of it happening in ED, do you really want to travel across the galaxy in your Conda carrying your DBX and suddenly have the pair of them blow up on you?

 

[Dragsham]

Thats unlikely unless I'm careless.
But **** appens as they say.
As for that other game. I regularly carried a small vessel on my C2. For dabbling with comm arrays hehe

 

[aRJay]

So I like the idea of having a Fleet Carrier but, I wish I could have an Anaconda or something long range with a small ship (DBX) inside it. Leave Conda into orbit while I take DBX with SRV down to planet surface. Fill the Conda with spare SRV's, fighter bays, repair limpets, amf's, collector limpets, whatever you might need, just in case, and a way to transfer them to and from DBX, maybe land on a planet to do the transfers.... Have the conda equipped with mining lasers, refineries etc. to drop into those countless rings we map, would make stopping at all the fleet carriers, where ever we could find them, meaningful. To have that capability and an FC would open totally new way to explore the furthest edges of the universe?

In short:
FC as a deep space station, Anaconda as a "satellite" and DBX for exploration...

Just to point out you want to install something that is a third of the length, half the width and height that has a mass of 260 tonnes into an Anaconda that has a mass of 400 tonnes and still have the Anaconda do things.

 

[varonica]

Thats unlikely unless I'm careless.
But **** appens as they say.
As for that other game. I regularly carried a small vessel on my C2. For dabbling with comm arrays hehe

I am not talking about player initiated dual destruction, I am talking about game bug initiated dual destruction. it's all very well you or me doing something careless and blowing ourselves up (although people have been known to come on to the forums and threaten to rage quit if they aren't given everything back instantly), but SC demonstrates that this feature is apparently not as simple as you seem to think it is and the slight chance of both your ships suddenly going kaboom in the black for no reason is simply not worth the risk. ED players have spent months, even years, cruising around in the black with zero issues, SC players spend 5 minutes trying to land and go kaboom more often than not. So no thanks unless FDEV can literally guarantee the feature isn't a sudden bug away from kaboom!

 

[HRDiagram]

The bridge of the Beluga is so uselessly large, that it could be easily turned into a hangar for a Sidewinder (or perhaps even a bigger ship, can't remember).
I'd love nesting ships, but I don't think it is going to work in ED, as the game is not designed with that mechanic in mind.
And, as mentioned by others, there is a popular software disaster, which can be loosely identified as a game, where such mechanics exist (can't say by design, because there's no design involved), and it's a critical bug waiting to happen at every turn, at least in my experience.

 

[metatheurgist]

Yet they already have Fighter bays and a transition into them while a crew member takes care of whatever you're in.

The reason we got SLFs was because they permanently mothballed ships in ships, that was the (doable) replacement. Funny hey?

 

[Dragsham]

Personally I disagree. Housing a ship in a ship in SC isn't the problem. Bad coding is the problem. Clipping errors etc.
The actual mechanic can work. I'm not saying it does cos it doesn't sometimes. Hence that other game being what it is, a mess of spaghetti code.
But elites pedigree stands a good chance of getting nested ships right.
Like the SLFs which do work very well.
The techs there, just a few beers away from upping the ante a bit.
Ships like the anaconda, Cutter, corvette, types 9 & 10 would be suitable given their size, to house a sidewinder or eagle.
Which in turn could be used to great effect on planetary surfaces. In particular mountainous regions.
The combat side too would be a hoot!
It's got legs it just needs propper implementation.

 

[aRJay]

Personally I disagree. Housing a ship in a ship in SC isn't the problem. Bad coding is the problem. Clipping errors etc.
The actual mechanic can work. I'm not saying it does cos it doesn't sometimes. Hence that other game being what it is, a mess of spaghetti code.
But elites pedigree stands a good chance of getting nested ships right.
Like the SLFs which do work very well.
The techs there, just a few beers away from upping the ante a bit.
Ships like the anaconda, Cutter, corvette, types 9 & 10 would be suitable given their size, to house a sidewinder or eagle.
Which in turn could be used to great effect on planetary surfaces. In particular mountainous regions.
The combat side too would be a hoot!
It's got legs it just needs propper implementation.

While I am sure you are right about the game I have never seen, not really wish to, and about the technical aspects of Elite. I really don't think the idea has legs anymore 6 to 10 years ago maybe but now I don't see it.
But a Sidewinder or Eagle is much more possible than the OPs idea of a DBX on board.

 

[Greasetrap42]

But a Sidewinder or Eagle is much more possible than the OPs idea of a DBX on board.

I can fit up to 40 Anacondas on a single fleet carrier. The trick is designing more space inside than what appears on the outside!

It is the same as your coat closet IRL. Smart designers build it bigger on the inside so it can hold more.

 

[Fizzatron]

Personally I disagree. Housing a ship in a ship in SC isn't the problem. Bad coding is the problem. Clipping errors etc.
The actual mechanic can work. I'm not saying it does cos it doesn't sometimes. Hence that other game being what it is, a mess of spaghetti code.
But elites pedigree stands a good chance of getting nested ships right.
Like the SLFs which do work very well.
The techs there, just a few beers away from upping the ante a bit.
Ships like the anaconda, Cutter, corvette, types 9 & 10 would be suitable given their size, to house a sidewinder or eagle.
Which in turn could be used to great effect on planetary surfaces. In particular mountainous regions.
The combat side too would be a hoot!
It's got legs it just needs propper implementation.

In principle I agree with you, there are so many fundamental things wrong with SC that someone might say no thanks to being able to walk up/down stairs in Elite, but we do with no problem. However, I also do fully agree with the sentiment that nesting ships is a bit more involved than the bread and butter stuff that still randomly breaks SC, which may put it into a major overhaul rather than reasonably quick addition.

Without writing a wall of text and making assumptions, what you are suggesting would change the game from letting you access one ship at a time to multiple ships concurrently, and with it affecting all sorts of code that relates to the positioning/access/destruction of said ships. It is the kind of overhaul that I think would be of benefit to the game as I think it would open up more freedom for the player but at the expense of complexity of the game keeping track of it and the work involved to implement it. The current system works and is stable for the most part so I'm fine with waiting till after we get water worlds/gas giants/atmospheric/fauna etc..

 

[HRDiagram]

Without enabling multiple ships, it could still be treated as a single ship: the moment the pilot moves to the other ship, the game would treat it as a normal swap of ships in a shipyard.
The other ship would simply disappear (in the hangar if it's the little one) or be dismissed after an animation (if it's the large one). I don't think it would be possible to keep the large ship around, like when piloting a SLF.

One obstacle would be the change in the code that doesn't let a CMDR swap ships when there is cargo and the capacities of the ships are different.

 

[Northpin]

SC manages it with several examples of how easy it is. Granted its not perfect but its doable.
I'd like to see fleet carriers either landing on bodies with or without atmospheres, or in low orbit.

The only thing SC manages is to kill you in the most hilarious and/or embarrassing ways