![[VR] M4st0d0n](https://forums-cdn.zaonce.net/data/avatars/m/182/182772.jpg?1569064854){kind=avatar}
Hardest part is to virtualize thousands of Commodores on an Amazon potato.
FC Usage Charts
- Thread starter Factabulous
- Start date
Hardest part is to virtualize thousands of Commodores on an Amazon potato.
Well, we don't know. I'm not excusing FD, but the BGS is complex enough, adding thousands of moving stations on top of that might be too much for the architecture to cope right now. Its why I wondered how bad things would be if FCs were even more accessible, and how things would be if via squadron exclusivity the situation might have been better.
Well, there are well over 15,000 squadrons on PC, and probably a whole bunch more rapidly created, so I'm not sure there'd have been any fewer FCs.
The maps look silly but I haven't noticed any performance issues in Colonia from them - I suspect the issue is not the Fleet Carriers as such, but the number of players the FCs support going to and staying in the top systems, and the way the FC's large cargo hold lets people generally stay in-system rather than having to spend a lot more time travelling (and therefore more spread out)
We dont know for sure. Squadron exclusivity for carriers making it better is just your opinion.
I'm not sure by using raw squadron numbers as a metric though, since a lot of them are one person outfits anyway. If the entry and upkeep requirements were steeper so 'real' squadrons could only support FCs I imagine they'd be more of a prestige item and less of them about causing less server havoc.
If they cost 10 billion with say 150 million a week in upkeep it would weed out the weak squadrons and ensure FCs were operated by functional squadrons. But then I'd also expect more from the FC- perhaps when decommissioning kicks in after the novelty wears off (and the other issues) numbers might get to a normal level.
If so, ED would have had 2 more 1 person squadrons. And I would still had a carrier for each account.
Last edited:
'Squadron' as in 'real squadron' with prices and upkeep to actually justify both features- that, and make FCs actually a real base of operations.
Even tho it seemed way too much, I wasn't really against 260 millions per week upkeep
Even tho it seemed way too much, I wasn't really against 260 millions per week upkeep
Its a sad irony of yet another fumbled feature. You have too many FCs the game breaks, make them what they should have been and some squeal blue murder because not everyone can have one.
Its what you get for trying to hedge your bets.
I'm not going to argue with anyone who says that releasing Fleet Carriers in their current form perhaps wasn't Frontier's smartest move ever, but there wouldn't have been enough salt in the galaxy to supply the furore that would have erupted if Frontier had said, "Here's the only major bit of content we're releasing in two years - and most of you can't have it."
Sometimes you have to have courage and do something that fits what FD want to achieve. FCs were squadron assets (or aimed at that level) but got thrown off course by the forum headbangers. If you are going to get salt regardless, actually have some balls and do what you intended to do. FD are so risk adverse with ED you are winding up with too many compromises.
Well, back after the Powerplay thunderbolt FCs were mooted to be for squadrons, weren't they?
Okay, so 150M/week upkeep ... that'd require a top-1000 squadron to keep it minimally running, or a top-500 squadron to maintain it without requiring them to dump the majority of their funds into it, with top-100 squadrons comfortably able to maintain multiple carriers, based on trade leaderboard earnings (and therefore able to split, if there's some silly "one per squadron" limit) ... or an individual player doing an hour or two of optimised mining/massacre stacking/carrier-assisted trading a week could manage it easily enough.
On the one hand, it'd get rid of the people just using it as a convenient personal ship+module+cargo store and fast transfer (and probably also most of the DSSA, which is both an interesting use for them and one that doesn't clutter up $system-of-the-week with them)
On the other hand, how many of its other features are actually useful to squadrons? They're mainly a giant convenience feature to allow you to skip any gameplay you don't like (be that supercruise, interdictions, ship transfer delays, having to return to the bubble to sell data) and they lose most of that if you have to argue with thirty other people where it should be going today. So they'd probably need a bunch of additional features in that case ... but what?
Thats the thing- FD should have made FCs real hubs and vital with supporting high level gameplay. Currently they are invincible storage with markets, to me its that foundation thats wrong. Personally squadrons and FCs should have been one feature- like an aircraft carrier with strike wings with either FC v FC gameplay, or, take megaship specialisms (tanker for example) and build a need for them. With the latter that could come in the form of service contracts to supply x amount of y to faction z, so you have a squadron who mine, transport and sell to monthly quotas for the mission reward- all the time each FC has megaship vulnerabilities.
So rather than being the skin deep franchise we have, we have deep co-op mechanics in a squadron hierarchy that when everyone pulls together gets the reward (which is from being part of the team but also money / other).
I'd write out a suggestion because I have seeds of ideas, but the die is cast with FCs.
Squads and squad mechanics and development is the reason why ED is still so bare. That's my opinion.
At least NMS was smart enough to actually put stuff in the game and leave the MP at a minimum.They had about five years between KS funding and 3.3 during which the only features requiring multiplayer were Wings and CQC.Squads and squad mechanics and development is the reason why ED is still so bare. That's my opinion.
If they didn't get the content you wanted in then, spending part of one release on a simple "but what if you have more than three friends" feature isn't the reason why it still isn't here after another two years.
So they could break the game for squadrons only?
I think the idea of linking refuelling with a player economy was a bad decision,even if it worked and players were happily shipping fuel around the galaxy to service FC’s the cost would mean more grinding to fund it.
We’ve ended up with a system that is impossible to balance and if by some miracle a happy medium is found,one poorly implemented update can throw the hole thing into chaos.
We’ve ended up with a system that is impossible to balance and if by some miracle a happy medium is found,one poorly implemented update can throw the hole thing into chaos.
Looks like we're getting a slight rebound on the FCs being updated each day - people must be finding something to do on them (red line is the 7 day trend).
Past week or so has seen a lot of 4k ports offering huge supplies.