Fleet Carriers are a mess.

DemiserofD

D
9vCV0L7.png


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.
 

metatheurgist

metatheurgist
FCs were never "a great thing" for the game. They were a vanity asset for groups, then someone pointed out it was stupid to develop crap like that when the rest of the playerbase that aren't even remotely interested in groups are still scratching for content. Without FCs a chunk of the player base would have gone without something for nearly a year. The entire focus on groups was a mistake. I'm glad they finally got off it.
 

TobiasFuzz

T
Side-question regarding this topic: Do a decomissioned FC stay visible in the system? Yes, they do as i can see them on the system map. Are this wrecks there for ever or do they vanish after a specific amount of time?
 

DemiserofD

D
TobiasFuzz said:
Side-question regarding this topic: Do a decomissioned FC stay visible in the system? Yes, they do as i can see them on the system map. Are this wrecks there for ever or do they vanish after a specific amount of time?
Click to expand...
They do vanish eventually, but it takes something like 3 months before they finally vanish for real. Frankly, given the number of carriers that are equally useless without being decommissioned, this is less of an issue than it really should be.
 

Moriarte

Moriarte
Upkeep is needed, as a limiter to the number of fleet carriers in the galaxy. Remove upkeep, there will be thousands more carriers around, cluttering the sky. Remove upkeep and the abandoned FC will clutter the system Forever, think about that. The line has to be drawn somewhere. No upkeep = utopia.

Whether current upkeep levels are justified - that’s another question. I feel they got it just about right. As an owner I’d like to see the upkeep reduced, but in all honesty I got myself covered for another 70 years, with triple R and barkeep, so I have no moral grounds to ask for more. But you go ahead :)

Double FC parking limit/remove completely, to solve the LFT 926 problem. Fix UI to make system map look tidy. Foldable FC’s, something like that. Open a few more Jameson memorials in the bubble to alleviate bottlenecking.

DemiserofD said:
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.
Click to expand...

Right. Now why is it a bad thing again? I’d like to keep a personal mobile warehouse for my ships and that’s all I want from fleet carriers at this stage. All commanders are welcome to dock at my platform, refuel, repair, restock and can even talk to the bartender. More services to come in the years ahead!
 

DemiserofD

D
Moriarte said:
Upkeep is needed, as a limiter to the number of fleet carriers in the galaxy.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately, it's doing nothing. How many carriers have you seen getting decommissioned? I've seen maybe 1/1000. All upkeep seems to do is make players disable all their services, so rather than having a flood of useful carriers, we now have a flood of completely useless carriers.

At bare minimum, the option to disable services needs to be rethought. We shouldn't be rewarding players for cluttering the game with carriers that are 100% useless.

Moriarte said:
Right. Now why is it a bad thing again?
Click to expand...

Any time 100% of players have disabled a certain feature, I think there's some sort of problem there that should be analyzed.
 

Moriarte

Moriarte
DemiserofD said:
Unfortunately, it's doing nothing. How many carriers have you seen getting decommissioned? I've seen maybe 1/1000.
Click to expand...

Upkeep regulates the total amount of carriers, less so their decommissioning rate. If it weren’t for upkeep you’d have 10x the carriers cluttering Your sky. In your opinion, why should more carriers get decomissioned when people paid for them and have upkeep reserve?

DemiserofD said:
All upkeep seems to do is make players disable all their services, so rather than having a flood of useful carriers, we now have a flood of completely useless carriers.
Click to expand...

Poor players run no services. Rich players run some services. Extremely wealthy/squadron players run a wide range of services, creating emergent game play around their assets. Working as intended.

DemiserofD said:
At bare minimum, the option to disable services needs to be rethought. We shouldn't be rewarding players for cluttering the game with carriers that are 100% useless.
Click to expand...

If it’s a visual clutter, it’s a UI problem that should and will be solved.
If it’s a vital system access problem, then someone needs to re-think parking limits.
If it’a a Shinrarta problem, build more Shinrartas.

DemiserofD said:
Any time 100% of players have disabled a certain feature, I think there's some sort of problem there that should be analyzed.
Click to expand...

Lets analyze it then. Which feature is disabled by 100% of players?
 

Bigmaec

Bigmaec
LFT 926 is the closest system to permit locked Shinrarta Dezra iirc.

That this system is full is no wonder.

And MY carrier doesn't have to be available to YOU, because it's mine.
Maybe I do some funds transfers and lock out all people who could interfere?
Maybe I just don't want anyone on my carrier? Fleet Carriers offer nothing of value for players except in fringe cases where players provide stuff that is not available to buy,
like the thargoid hearts I occasionally offer on my carrier.

Point is, usage is MY prerogative, not yours. You have no "right" to dock with any carrier.

I agree, the system map is cluttered and should be streamlined, and I also agree we need some mechanic to kick carriers out of systems in certain cases, like
CGs or - in this case - from systems close to POIs.
 

DemiserofD

D
Moriarte said:
Upkeep regulates the total amount of carriers, less so their decommissioning rate. If it weren’t for upkeep you’d have 10x the carriers cluttering Your sky.
Click to expand...
I'm not really sure how you see this to be the case? It only costs 1/10th as much as the basic fleet carrier to sustain it for a year; if they can afford the fleet carrier at all, the upkeep is not an issue. Explain your reasoning.
 

DemiserofD

D
Bigmaec said:
And MY carrier doesn't have to be available to YOU, because it's mine.
Click to expand...

Of course not. But if your carrier is useless to me, why should I be forced to see it?

Imagine if I could come to your carrier and cover it with graffiti and dump canisters of biowaste everywhere, and there was nothing you could do about it. How would that make you feel?
 

Bigmaec

Bigmaec
Курбан Зар said:
I think you won't like it if the shops in the city center are closed, always. You will be outraged that this is unacceptable.:)
Click to expand...
I don't need hundreds of shops out there that all offer the same MY VERY OWN shop offers too ;)
DemiserofD said:
Of course not. But if your carrier is useless to me, why should I be forced to see it?

Imagine if I could come to your carrier and cover it with graffiti and dump canisters of biowaste everywhere, and there was nothing you could do about it. How would that make you feel?
Click to expand...
As said, I agree with you that the UI is cluttered and "less-optimal", to put it friendly. But that is different to "you can land on my carrier, because you want to."
 

DemiserofD

D
Bigmaec said:
As said, I agree with you that the UI is cluttered and "less-optimal", to put it friendly. But that is different to "you can land on my carrier, because you want to."
Click to expand...

Fair enough.

Though at this point, it raises the question of why carriers should be visible by default at all. If most carriers are useless, then it seems more reasonable that carriers be invisible by default.

Though that, too, raises issues. If a system is full of invisible carriers, should I be blocked from jumping mine in, even though there's nothing obvious stopping me?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom