So with all of this hyperbole you are trying to prove it takes more effort to move an FC across a galaxy than it does to park one in the bubble?
I'd say common sense can dictate that just fine on its own.
Fleet Carrier Logistics: Bounty Hunter v’s Explorer – Lets get real
- Thread starter Nutter
- Start date
So with all of this hyperbole you are trying to prove it takes more effort to move an FC across a galaxy than it does to park one in the bubble?
I'd say common sense can dictate that just fine on its own.
Nope! I'm proving that as a Bounty hunter you can be self sufficient with a Carrier, playing your way and paying upkeep as a by-product. However if you play as an explorer you cannot be self sufficient. Thought that was obvious, sorry. Not that a bounty hunter needs to be self sufficient either!
Honestly I don't see (apart from being able to have all your ships in one mobile place) what FC change about exploration or bounty hunting. You still have to travel to your FC to hand in bounties (honestly how much time is that goin to save someone) and you still have to travel back to a station to visit a UC.
Now yes without a UC on board it does stop someone who wants to stay out in the black forever but I don't really see that much gain with being able to cash in your bounties on a FC.
Really FC are just a way to (surprise) carry your fleet. Slowly.
Now yes without a UC on board it does stop someone who wants to stay out in the black forever but I don't really see that much gain with being able to cash in your bounties on a FC.
Really FC are just a way to (surprise) carry your fleet. Slowly.
You could add special modules for explorers, let's say for 5000 units cargo space a pop. i.e.
- tritium scoop
- module that increases jump range
- module for quick charging the hyperdrive
- module that reduced the cooldown
Would all be quite usefull for exploration, even if they would reduce the total storage space of your FC.
What, all of these cmdrs who call themselfs true and only "explorers" dont really get a point about having a fleet carrier for them? Really?
Only thing that explorers can get use from a carrier, is fact that thing can jump 500ly... so they can finnaly put their names on some really remote places, and I am sure that there is more than a few of such places, so they can post pics of their asp or whatever on front of generated planets that are normally out of reach.
From my point of view, that should be enough for them. In end, explorers should not care about profit but rather how far they be able to get. Probly getting a carrier past beagle point is surely hell of work wich probly will require some serious teamwork and time, but few are crazy enough to do that, so I wont be suprised to see something like that soon as carrier went to live.
Only thing that explorers can get use from a carrier, is fact that thing can jump 500ly... so they can finnaly put their names on some really remote places, and I am sure that there is more than a few of such places, so they can post pics of their asp or whatever on front of generated planets that are normally out of reach.
From my point of view, that should be enough for them. In end, explorers should not care about profit but rather how far they be able to get. Probly getting a carrier past beagle point is surely hell of work wich probly will require some serious teamwork and time, but few are crazy enough to do that, so I wont be suprised to see something like that soon as carrier went to live.
Yes, for Bounty Hunters it offers the benefit of actually allowing one to make money...
I can make that money in any station in the system.
FC would only save me (maybe) some time spent in SC.
Like it was already said, the benefit that carrier offers for explorers is not profit but 500ly range wich opens a lot of places for them. Thats why only true explorers will have use of it, as they aint are after profit but achievements.
If someone wants to make money, they should go mine or something, rather crying about how "I am explorer and cant make profits with my carrier" or just go explore without carrier.
Go figure.
I don't think that peopled are worried about profit per se, but rather being able to meet the maintenance costs of an FC without being constantly tethered to populated space.
As someone whose spent a bit of time exploring the canopy of the galaxy above the core the possibility of reaching previously unreachable system is attractive, but it's an outlier case.
The complaint isn't about making a profit, it's about mitigating loss. Explorers want to be self-sufficient and because the carrier has both credit-based upkeep AND no UC, this prevents an explorer from being self-sufficient. This wouldn't be so much of an issue if the upkeep was, say material based or there was no upkeep, or contrariwise if there was a UC to turn in data to pay the upkeep. The fact that BOTH situations exist essentially breaks the explorers' ability to be self-sufficient.
And, Explorers certainly can go explore without a carrier, and if the way they are now makes it into live, that's exactly what they will be doing, which means for them 1.5 years of content drought continues until the vaunted "New Era", whatever the heck that entails.
AND I THOUGHT I WAS BOUNTY HUNTING THIS WHOLE TIME!!
Thanks for finally pointing out the difference, OP
Thanks for finally pointing out the difference, OP
Yes the upkeep costs.... I fail to see that as issue... If someone who have enough funds to buy a carrier, then they should also have a funds to upkeep it... just pump 1 or 2 billion into its bank deposit and done, now thier carrier wont get into a debt for many months while during that time, one can earn many billions more if needed, or actually make use of that carrier for thier own ends during time before "upkeep" costs run out. Just make it part of investment. If they cant do that, then sorry, carriers aint for them.
Not anymore in these days, yes but I should note that I did explored a lot in my earlier days. I reached elite rank as explorer years before UC payouts buff, and my longest travel was over 87k ly... in 41.11 ly bonesconda, long time before even engineering came up. Back then it was not so easy to reach beagle point, and ploting trough core systems had be done manually. Still you gonna say that I "clearly don't explore"? Dont make me laugh.
Again its not about "explorers ability to be self-sufficient" with carrier since carrier is supposed be available only for those who can afford it, including running costs. And again IMO there should be not many of such cmdrs. Also since lots of explorers loves doing thier things at PG, they can also make real teamwork for while with carrier and some exploration with it. I fail to see this as content drought for them.
Last edited:
Yep, and THAT is the problem. Explorers would love to experience this new content too, but unfortunately it is "not for them" as it is currently designed.
I'm glad you now see what the issue is.
Yep, and THAT is the problem. Explorers would love to experience this new content too, but unfortunately it is "not for them" as it is currently designed.
I'm glad you now see what the issue is.
Well, all needed is to organize something like distant worlds III, recruit some rich ones with thier carriers, from a PG or two, and tag along.... I actually wonder how many cmdrs can take aboard single carrier if thing supposed to be persistent across all platforms and modes, so it would act as ferry for those who cant afford to own one, lol.
Looking back in past, explorers community is surely capable to do such thing. There was quite few massive expeditions already done succesfully, so why not another one? With carrier range, I think more than many is tempted to visit new places. Thats why I dont think is not bad as some think it is from side of explorers... its just not much as available for single cmdrs.
Last edited:
Besides UC, the Tritium amount per jump needs to be cut to 1/10th of what it is now. I sure as frak would never subject myself to 5/6 hours to mine 500 tritium every time I wanted to go another 500 ly.
As they are now, for exploration Carriers are just expensive ballast. And while they do allow reaching previously innacessible places, only our grandchildren will live enough to actually get there, and then self-destruct, once they realize they wil have to mine 25000 tritium, which takes over 250 hours, or 125 2-hour sessions, to be able return.
Now let that sink in for a while. 125 evenings, just to refuel the carrier to return from a 25k ly destination (which is really nothing special, even the core is further away). And during those 250 hours spent mining to refuel the carrier:
1 - You're not exploring.
2 - You're not earning money for the upkeep.
3 - You're not travelling to the bubble and back to cash in the data and make money to pay the upkeep (because there's no UC in the carrier).
Now try to imagine going to the other side of the galaxy and back. It's aproximately 120K ly. Over a year and a half of evenings mining, just in one direction. Meanwhile everybody else in the bubble will be simply buying Tritium from the station next door. Easy peasy lemon squeezy.
Now you may argue that FCs, like so many other things in the game, weren't made accounting for exploration. And you would be absolutely correct.
Well put and those stats really bring it home, 250 hours play time wasted on filling up, thats if it does not disappear because you are mining and not going off to pay rent
a grinder bounty hunter dont need carrier.
he already choose an hazardous at less than 2ls from station.
he already choose an hazardous at less than 2ls from station.
If you said solo long range explorers I'd agree with you- a group would drop that number, and I think that was FDs intention.
The other question is, would the carrier be moved out but not back, or would players move it when they had to rather than being the primary ship? I've suggested a few non mining methods (either a fuel scoop that takes x time to refuel automatically, or a passive method like this one https://forums.frontier.co.uk/threa...ically-based-on-system-bodies-present.540551/ that takes into account the system. If no mining was involved (just x amount of time) is that better?