You depriving other customers of choice? This is unethical and not democratic!
Fleet Carriers are a mess.
- Thread starter DemiserofD
- Start date
I think a more apt comparison is if every house on the block had a street sign pointing at it, even though only one of them actually allows visitors. Having all those signs makes it much harder to spot the useful sign, while giving no benefit to anyone but the people who live there, who really should already know where they live.
Hey, I'm supposed to be a dystopian space Elitist MurderhoboYou depriving other customers of choice? This is unethical and not democratic!
![[VR] Bulbulunufus](https://d2aefvhu2f0gi9.cloudfront.net/data/avatars/m/261/261245.jpg?1671230473){kind=avatar}
I definitely think there should be a mechanism by which carriers in are encouraged to use vacant systems, or rather systems vacant of carriers. If upkeep cost is such a motivation then modulate it so that it's more expensive in busy systems with high demand.
You could make it a real-estate market where you have to pay more for the most desirable spots in a system. In systems with no carriers the price is low everywhere.
And here's a cool idea - have all carriers offer something(s) that makes them interactible. E.g. all of them have a search and rescue facility: if you're low on fuel there's always a "request fuel assistance" button alongside the request docking one, push it and a ship comes and fires a couple of limpets at you to get you limping on your way.
You could make it a real-estate market where you have to pay more for the most desirable spots in a system. In systems with no carriers the price is low everywhere.
And here's a cool idea - have all carriers offer something(s) that makes them interactible. E.g. all of them have a search and rescue facility: if you're low on fuel there's always a "request fuel assistance" button alongside the request docking one, push it and a ship comes and fires a couple of limpets at you to get you limping on your way.
Worst idea in this thread.
You are right but I disagree. Apologize for my English, I'll try to explain my point of view.
Yes, FC was originally an asset for "Guilds". They failed to do that, as the specialized auxiliary ships, and with a big delay, they released an skin for a moving station.
Yes, probably it was stupid that the only new content for a long time, will going to be an expensive guild asset, when in general in mmo most people play alone or in small groups (well known in other games years ago, in times of more transparency). The problem was obviously budget, as ever.
But, they solved the problem the easiest, weakest, cheapest (a delayed product with the bridge released in Odyssey times) and the messiest (because design compromise) possible way of do that. As they don't have the will to invest a bigger budget in Elite (retrospectively is so obvious), what they should have done is an assete well designed for sole players/small groups (like a Panther Clipper) AND finish the asset originally designed and so better balanced for "Guilds". They finally released only one asset with design problemas becasuse the budget cutted.
Last edited:
While we're at FC suggestions that will never get implemented:
I could see reason in an upper limit on the carrier bank account. Enough to pay max upkeep (minus travel costs) for a year or three but not ridiculously more. Say 10bill. max?
Would that hinder trading/money laundering through the FC market?
To address the thread title, have you considered hiring a cleaner?
Exactly what services do you use on carriers?
This is a random system I picked and scanned for usability. The green carriers are usable in any way. The red carriers either have all systems suspended or are locked to prevent docking.
~60 carriers are completely unusable, with ~30 available for docking and offering basic services. It is not acceptable that fleet carriers are cluttering the galaxy when ~2/3rds of them are completely useless. And even the ones that are potentially functional, a whopping 100% had some or all of their advanced services disabled.
1. Upkeep.
Clearly, the cost of upkeep is prohibitive to keeping them active, but not to keeping the fleet carrier. None of these carriers are in danger of running out of funds, and are unlikely to disappear anytime soon. However, because upkeep exists, they instead disable all their services to reduce it, and become a permanent and useless waste of space in the galaxy. Upkeep is punishing the people who want to help others, while rewarding those who make their carriers completely useless.
2. Clutter
Most of these carriers haven't moved in weeks or months, and if at some point this system became full, it would likely stay this way for weeks to months, as well. There is no system to keep fleet carriers moving, spread apart, or keep systems from filling up. This can vary from annoying at least, to crippling at worst in special cases like Rakham's Peak.
Additionally, why on earth can players see fleet carriers they cannot interact with? Why can I see squadron or personal-only carriers? They do literally nothing but clutter up the game.
3. Discouraging player investment.
Most of these carriers do not carry more than basic services. This makes it clear that most players see the basic FC as the final model, with additional services as a waste of either space or credits.
Fleet carriers were supposed to be a great thing for the game. Instead they've become a huge waste of space and clutter in the galaxy.
Anyway, this isn't a suggestion, just a list of my complaints. Make of it what you will, but it'd be nice if something were done about the mess that is fleet carriers.
R3 are provided by most stations in the Bubble.
Same with cartography.
Most of the services you're demanding are pointless to most carrier owners if they're even available to equip.
As Bigmaec pointed out, LFT 926 isn't a random system. What you've gat are carrier owners using Shinrarta (though this is why I find Brestla more convenient).
Last edited:
Free plasma for anyone visiting my carrier when I'm on PC.Hey, I'm supposed to be a dystopian space Elitist Murderhobo
I see your analogy and offer mine:
Stations are like cities, outposts like villages and a system is more of a whole county. FCs are the private RVs parked along the country roads. Some of them offer fuel and ice cream, others don't.
I agree that the system map is not optimal in its (non-)filtering of these private stations.
Unusable to you.
This is a random system I picked and scanned for usability. The green carriers are usable in any way. The red carriers either have all systems suspended or are locked to prevent docking.
~60 carriers are completely unusable
Anyway, an easy solution would be to have an optional additional filter in the left panel (remove all FCs you cant dock) and apply these filters to the system map.
You just answered your own question immediately after asking it. And yes, the cap is not about visibility.
Looks like an UI problem to me.
As someone whose Commanders live on the edge of the bubble (the 'burbs), or close to it, too many carriers is not a problem. Plenty of parking for me. It is only in the city centre areas (CG locations and near permit locked/engineer etc systems) where parking is a problem. So if I have to go somewhere popular, I do "park and ride", park as close as I can and use one of the ships stored within the carrier to make the final leg of the journey. There is no limit on ships!
I find it strange that some believe that their game experience suffers because there are too many carriers in a particular place (especially ones that they cannot access) and/or their inalienable rights to park their carrier where they want are being infringed.
Steve 07.
I find it strange that some believe that their game experience suffers because there are too many carriers in a particular place (especially ones that they cannot access) and/or their inalienable rights to park their carrier where they want are being infringed.
Steve 07.
Hi All 
I generally agree with most of what you've said.
I use my Carrier as a mobile base, generally for exploration, though it's handy in the bubble for collecting materials / commodities for trading missions and other mission related stuff.
Most of the other functions I don't use.
What would suit me better personally would be a ship something like a Carrier but on a smaller scale. The same kind of jump range maybe, cartographic facility, repair dock and maybe provision for permission for other ships to dock (friends etc.).
The same kind of footprint on the Galaxy map as present lesser ships have ie..no persistent image when not logged in to the game. Upkeep similar to the other ships, but I'd expect the upkeep to be on similar lines to the 'advanced repair costs' like the Cutter has, but obviously to be fair, more costly.
Yeah, the Panther Clipper or similar would suit this role, maybe some other bygone ships like the Boa or Imperial Trader etc.
No 'weekly' maintenance, although it's no problem on my Carrier at the moment, for various reasons it niggles me. I don't want a 'hire' ship or one 'on loan', I want to own it
.
Jack
I generally agree with most of what you've said.
I use my Carrier as a mobile base, generally for exploration, though it's handy in the bubble for collecting materials / commodities for trading missions and other mission related stuff.
Most of the other functions I don't use.
What would suit me better personally would be a ship something like a Carrier but on a smaller scale. The same kind of jump range maybe, cartographic facility, repair dock and maybe provision for permission for other ships to dock (friends etc.).
The same kind of footprint on the Galaxy map as present lesser ships have ie..no persistent image when not logged in to the game. Upkeep similar to the other ships, but I'd expect the upkeep to be on similar lines to the 'advanced repair costs' like the Cutter has, but obviously to be fair, more costly.
Yeah, the Panther Clipper or similar would suit this role, maybe some other bygone ships like the Boa or Imperial Trader etc.
No 'weekly' maintenance, although it's no problem on my Carrier at the moment, for various reasons it niggles me. I don't want a 'hire' ship or one 'on loan', I want to own it
.Jack
Least constructive reply in the thread.
The horse has already bolted on numbers of carriers thanks to the LTD boom and fundamental adjustments to how they work isn't going to happen.
All that seems to be needed is 2 changes to the nav filtering- the ability to have bookmarks override hiding anything and another filter added to remove undockable carriers.
All that seems to be needed is 2 changes to the nav filtering- the ability to have bookmarks override hiding anything and another filter added to remove undockable carriers.