I already stated several times what I dismiss in this article: The author's opinion that there is nothing to do with a FC. Overall I thought it was good article; its just that general statement by a 2 week player. You are responding to me like I asked you a direct question when I didn't, but you take my statement about the author's opinion very personally for some reason.
Fleet Carriers Update - Beta 2 has now ended!
- Thread starter Stephen Benedetti
- Start date
Because Krash, the irritation factor runs deep with this one.
I usually agree with this one so his backlash to my statement, which is an obvious truth, has me confused and wondering about what is really going on here.
Seems to get in a foul mood from time to time and despences it indiscriminately.
Edit: I'm not real tolerant of that.
I would defer to a player with more experience about a part of the game in which I have no experience (e.g. BGS). You and I have the same experience pertaining to carriers. That's if you purchased one in the betas and experimented with them. If you did not then you have less experience than the Author of the article and you must defer to her. Contradiction solved. Your welcome (/arrogance)
Her opinion proves the fallacy of giving someone with little experience too many credits too quickly. She was at a loss what to do with a fleet carrier. Such a reaction is predictable.
And now you pontificate. Nothing changes, including your stripes.
Last edited:
Spoken like someone who has never even opened up the codex.
But even if this sentiment weren't so wrong on such a basic level, and we were to grant that "Eh, every biological/geological thing is basically just a reskinned version of the same object", there are plenty unique sights you can't find within 1000ly of the bubble. Look at a system like the collection of wonders, for example.
Traditionally, in a historical earth-based context, this is not particularly representative of "exploration" at all.
The mega-rich throw collossal amounts of money at making any such endeavour as easy as possible, and then reap a ton of credit when the expeditions they finance accomplish something of note, and it's all romanticised after the fact.
Same with taking a carrier along.
Knowing what to do with a carrier requires past experience in which she obviously lacks.
You're right.
A smart solution is to make sure every task has enough nuance to it that interactivity matters, that paying attention matters, that skillful play is possible and desirable. Anything less than this = boring game. That's why Hyperspace is terrible, and Supercruise is only slightly better, with Glide Mode and Orbital Cruise being probably the bare minimum threshold of meaningful interactivity to avoid being considered The Boring Part of the game. A dev who cares about their game will work to make these areas of play, which take up easily half of all players' time, into something nuanced, interactive, skillful, and warranting of their attention. Frontier's solution has been to provide workarounds: longer jump ranges = fewer jumps = less time trapped in The Bad Part Of The Game; auto-pilot and auto-dock = less penalty for not paying attention to the Boring Skilless Part of the Game.
Elite Dangerous is a Game About Waiting. That's really all Frontier knows how to do to balance their game, is make players wait for things. It doesn't work. It doesn't make the Galaxy feel vast it makes the game boring and slow. If they aren't going to fix any of this, then I can't blame them for whittling away at the number of jumps needed to get around. It's a bandaid on a bullet wound but it seems to be all they're willing to do.
I disagree with those experienced commanders. A player with only 2 weeks playtime makes it easy to dismiss her opinion as rubbish.
FWIW, I ran into "no available slots" all over the place in the middle of nowhere (between Colonia and Sag A*). I even flew to one to see if I could figure out why... have no clue. There were multiple bodies, and no one there (of course). I think there is some flaw in the slot-finder. These were, of course, all systems I had never visited; but I should be able to set any such system (within range) as a FC destination. Instead, I had to hunt around the galaxy map for a nearby system it would let me set as the destination (i.e., a lot of systems would say "no available slots").
I still thing a fuel tank module is desperately needed if the FC is to be used for exploration. It's unacceptable that I need to meet up with the carrier every 4 jumps, land my Diamondback, switch to my Type-9, load it with Tritium, deposit the Tritium, repeat (the Type-9 can't hold 1000 cargo), switch back to the Diamondback.
There needs to be some way to either have a larger "tank", or be able to remotely transfer Tritium from the FC "hold" to the "tank".
Everything she described about the game, about carriers, about how they work and what the features are and how they interact with the rest of the game, was accurate. Her insights into why all of that is uninspiring, was well informed and well articulated. And I've had more experience with Elite than I care to admit but I agree with her assessment.
And I agree that such a reaction is predictable, though probably not for the same reasons as you. You think the problem is with her prior experience and who she is. I think the problem is with Fleet Carriers.
She clearly understands the game and how it works just about as well as most anyone else who plays Elite. Many players who understand the game are at a loss as to what to do with a Fleet Carrier, because many of the features of Fleet Carriers are set up in such a way as to negate their own potential benefits. The limitations of the shipyard and commodities market are particularly egregious examples, and well articulated in the article, though of course there are many more which have been discussed at length in these forums.
Continually handwaving away all concerns on the basis that anyone who has a problem with something is just the wrong kind of person for the product is only going to get you so far.
I suggest to read a bit in this thread, just in case you are able to recognize other opinions besides your own:
Rock Paper Shotgun: "Elite needs to make its FCs worthwhile", "reasonable conclusion to infer is that FDev are establishing groundwork for New Era"
https://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2020/05/27/elite-dangerous-needs-to-make-its-fleet-carriers-worthwhile/forums.frontier.co.uk
I just saw you are even posting there. But are you reading, too?
Instead of using other rubbish opinions to back up your bias, why not explain what you did with the carrier you purchased in beta and how that disappointed you?
I've stated here and other threads that it is a good article. Never once did I say I have a problem with who she is. I'll reserve the right to dismiss her statement that there is nothing to do with carriers which I attribute to her quick/easy start.
Sounds like you have a use for fleet carriers after all. You may want to inform your author friend. Maybe she'll issue a correction.
I agree many experienced cmdrs will choose not to use a carrier due to their playstyle. That's the way it should be. Don't spend 1 credit on a carrier if you don't like the functionality.
