Yeah I'm not too sure about it myself.
Notice Fleet Carrier Update - Known Issues
Yeah I'm not too sure about it myself.
If you'd bothered with the betas, you'd already have been intoduced to it, not Frontier's fault if you couldn't be bothered...
ETA: I didn't like it then, my opinion hasn't changed... feels like they adopted it from some console game - maybe it is to attract the next generation PlayBox crowd?
same here.. except that I don't find my carrier at all..
Does any one else have this issue?
I managed to buy a FC in Skeggiko O but cannot add services to it. The buttons are greyed out as is the button for settings. If I use Carrier Management in the right panel I can open the Galaxy map but if I try via the Carrier itself that button is also greyed out. No access to livery etc etc.
I managed to buy a FC in Skeggiko O but cannot add services to it. The buttons are greyed out as is the button for settings. If I use Carrier Management in the right panel I can open the Galaxy map but if I try via the Carrier itself that button is also greyed out. No access to livery etc etc.
Put some money in the account
To be fair, "bothering with the betas" isn't something everyone had time for, so this will be the first time the UI changes have been seen by that set of people. I don't like what they've done at all either.
Oh for goodness sake. I suspected overlooking something, what an idiot! I played the Beta too - shamefaced
Thanks for the response
And also had to make this video as the FC wins the title of fastest ship in normal space...
Source: https://youtu.be/VNP5Cqvgs9U
I had that problem in the first beta. nice to see it's been fixed.
There were 2 betas, even if it was for just a cursory glance around at what was to come it would only have been a 'waste' of a couple of hours...
Had more players 'bothered' with both betas (I'll be optimistic here) maybe more bugs would have been spotted and reported before yesterday's 'interesting' launch
Even though my buying a FC is a couple of months away (at a guess) I still made time to get in and play it, confirming the bugs I did see during play.
I'm not debating your point, just wondering why any player with an active interest in this game (not, for example, Space Engineers) wouldn't consider participating - but is happy to complain post-patch
Ditto, my systems seem to have gone back at least 2 days
currently also have some conflicts but not one CZ..yet?
Stations and Planetary Settlements have no Flight Control Voice anymore.No one greeds me when im closing to the starport/settlement, noone reacts to my docking permission.
Blimey mate thats a hell of a Ship kit you got there, i'll just pop into the frontier store and buy one. Invisible paint. Nice one FD
Yea, yesterday I couldn't get any services installed, seems better today, but can't install armoury.
But I can for some reason, rearm, and buy limpets.
LOL. I had this this morning about 4.30am too. Went to visit someone else's FC that was 35000 LS from a star in , near nothing. Exactly the same, constant boost to 400 in my ASP and he just got further and further away. No idea if the owner was on board, but if not , self destruct will be the only way back, The driveable FC bug!!
There's a stealth option? Need to check Carrier Management again!!
good, since gp seems to have some experience in deploys, unlike you. let's see: first of all, consider that any such update has the following requirements in descending order of priority:
- not to corrupt existing data
- not to disrupt crucial services
- reduce the downtime to a minimun
now let's analyze what you consider flaws in his assertion:
this one has no relation whatsoever with the issue.
correct. this is simply the cost of a failed update. how is it a flaw in his assertion? note that a short downtime is always less important than loss of integrity. so if an update fails you have to reverse it, delay it and wait. that's what backups are for.
that's the provider violating requirements #1 and #2 for the sake of 3#. technically, that's not a failed update, that's a completely arxed up one which failed to preserve integrity on all levels. may be fixable (maybe not) but likely at a huge cost of effort, time and user disruption.
these are just speculation and subjective opinions that are completely beside the point gp is making. he did clearly allude to a point where the update is deemed not successful. that's a complex decision neither he nor you get to make, and neither will i. although we're all entitled to our opinions! you might disagree but that still doesn't make your disagreement a flaw in gp's assertion. i've had a quick glance over the failures and it's pretty impressive for my standards (even for frontier standards) and could merit a rollback but, again, that's just my opinion. however, you saying "hey, it will just go away with a few patches and waiting for server warm up" doesn't really float ... in a professional sense.
well, this comes down to work ethics. it's admittedly a bad situation, very bad, a typical arxe up. granted, it's not the same to stall a business, a hospital, a national election or a game. the response will vary with the perceived importance, possible consequences and the resources available. but note that this is already beyond the point of admissible failure, where every due process has failed. yes, it is not uncommon for tech professionals to be sleep deprived on these occasions. comes with the job and, if these occasions are anything but very rare exceptions, it's time to look for another job.
look, it's not really rocket science. you simply:
1. test the new version in parallel in an environment as similar as possible to production.
2. you back up, and close shop
3. you swap versions and test live internally
4. if all goes well you have succeeded, you open the gates for users and keep the back up handy just in case
5. if not, and if you can't fix it immediately, you restore to previous state and reschedule
it's just that frontier either doesn't know and observe this basic professional behavior that would be expected from any serious software developer, or doesn't give a damn about ... you, the customer. you filthy gamer you! if you're fine with that, that's perfect (i guess), but trying to lecture people who do have a background in these procedures with your ignorance is just ... embarrassing.
There were 2 betas, even if it was for just a cursory glance around at what was to come it would only have been a 'waste' of a couple of hours...
Had more players 'bothered' with both betas (I'll be optimistic here) maybe more bugs would have been spotted and reported before yesterday's 'interesting' launch
Even though my buying a FC is a couple of months away (at a guess) I still made time to get in and play it, confirming the bugs I did see during play.
I'm not debating your point, just wondering why any player with an active interest in this game (not, for example, Space Engineers) wouldn't consider participating - but is happy to complain post-patch
I appreciate you're not debating the point, but just for the sake of example, during those two Betas, I had a set of work circumstances that meant having very limited free time. I imagine I'm not the only one, and then what does one do with the limited time available? Download and play-test a set of new software that may or may not be enjoyable, looking out for bugs, with maybe the admin of taking notes and writing bug reports, or spend time getting away from the PC for an hour before bed? Maybe with a glass of something pleasant
I don't think it helped much that the beta was specifically positioned as "Fleet Carriers"; if one didn't have any interest or ability to own an FC*, it didn't look like there was anything in the beta to check out anyway. I know that there were some quiet additions, like the UI changes, but I think one could be forgiven for not knowing they were in it in amongst the FC related discussions.I don't think highlighting pain points is invalid, either during or post-patch, regardless of whether the beta was played. It also seems like there are a number of bugs that no one in the beta noted anyway, e.g the ring hotspots not highlighting, surface installations missing, tourist beacons vanishing
Though they may not have been there during the beta, to be fair - it's possible that was all introduced as part of the live build process, but who knows *There should be another abbreviation for them really. I can't help re-reading that and thinking it looks like I'm talking about the ability to own a football club, which unless one is Elton John or Roman Abramovich, is highly unlikely