ANNOUNCEMENT Gamescom Reveals - Fleet Carrier Details

[Hoeller]

Strong argument.
That's like comparing two different car's performance and then tripping over one's color.

You can compare NMS space stations with ED space stations, it's not just the color.
Or planets from orbit...
NMS is fun though.

 

[Factabulous]

What about the module storage? Will we be tied to limit of 120 modules in storage? For how long we will be buying Vipers and use them as extra storage?

I don't think Fleet Carriers have modules like ships, so they won't use any of your 120. If they do have modules I doubt they will fit in a viper

 

[Northpin]

For how long we will be buying Vipers and use them as extra storage?

vipers? pff, pleb

i have a crusader, gunship, fas and a 2 dropships as mules for module storage
also an asps and a dbs

 

[XW_Ziggy]

Can they be shot down, or are they impervious to total destruction?

I'm just thinking about the 'large amount of credits' on the rebuy screen.

 

[Gracey Field]

 

[cmdr Ramius007]

Can they be shot down, or are they impervious to total destruction?

I'm just thinking about the 'large amount of credits' on the rebuy screen.

They are supposed to be indestructible. No surprise given current carebear friendly game design.

 

[CMDR-ss47ply]

My only question is who gets the credits for someone restocking refueling and repairing there ship at my carrier and where does the fuel and ammo come from

 

[S0rkvild]

vipers? pff, pleb

i have a crusader, gunship, fas and a 2 dropships as mules for module storage
also an asps and a dbs

Whatever man, I'm using Vipers for storage of whole range small arms and three T-10's for everything else. It is absolutely ridiculous. Instead of enjoying the game and jumping into action straight away we're wasting time doing that shameful module juggling between the donor ship and the recipient ship.

Not grind, not anything else, but storage limit annoys me the most and that is why I gave Elite Dangerous on Steam. I had to. Sorry FD, but with things like that you're ruining not just my game experience but other players too.
I really hope that you double, triple or remove the limit entirely in forthcoming patch. I'd love to give ED on Steam. If you refrain from doing that at least give us a reason why the limit is present and why do we have to buy "storage ships"?

 

[Alien]

Given how much content benefits or is aimed at only multiplayer, and how little content is usable for the solo player (to clarify, that's someone who plays by themselves, not necessarily in solo mode), for example Multi-crew, Wings, Squadrons, CQC/Arena, player made factions ... all multiplayer content, it's nice to see some content us solo players can use.

Will it be a grind to get and maintain? Of course, but at least it's not locked behind a multiplayer firewall (don't give me any rubbish about squadrons of one, you know as well as I do squadrons are multiplayer content). I may never get a fleet carrier, given how slow I progress through the game, but at least it's possible.

I can't say I'm surprised there's some on this forum who can't let solo players have something, and something that's also multiplayer content. People like those who are complaining are the some of the reasons I don't want to be a part of this community any more.

 

[Ian Doncaster]

Persistence - If a Fleet Carrier is tied to a single commander only, is persistence of a FC in the Galaxy dependent upon whether said commander is logged into the game? How is the asset managed by the game exactly? The hope was that by linking a FC to a Squadron that would allow FCs persistence for the entire Squadron by having the FC asset tied to whichever members happened to be online at a given time, rather than rely upon a single "owner" commander needing to be always logged in for the FC to be available to use by the Squadron.

If it's dockable it's got to be more persistent than that or you could get all sorts of weird cases. I wouldn't expect the owner needed to be online for anything except ordering jumps and refitting it.

Pooling Resources - if a Fleet Carrier is linked only to a single commander, does that preclude Squadrons from contributing to its initial purchase cost, as well as running costs for jumps / outfitting? If a Squadron wants to maintain a FC and it is only owned and managed by a single commander, this places an onerous burden on that player and removes the opportunity for Squadron contributions.

Contributions to the initial purchase would probably have to be by Void Opal transfer, but on the other hand if they're intended to be something which a rich player could afford solo, they're probably not going to be as expensive as the "intended for large-ish squadrons" plan, so it might not be all that necessary.

I would hope anyone who can dock can bring the fuel, or it misses out on a lot of gameplay options.

Permissions - it seemed intuitive to tie FCs to the Squadron management UI. Not linking them places another burden on the owner commander of a FC that a Squadron wants to utilise: having the single owner fully responsible for designating access permissions to the FC and plotting jumps / configuration options. If FCs were instead linked to Squadrons they could make use of the current Squadron member permissions settings, allowing members of a given rank to take on FC management if, for example, the FC owner is offline or otherwise unavailable.

Conversely, being limited to only one FC per squadron might be fine for a 10-player squadron, but a bit tough for a 400-player squadron. The larger squadrons might well benefit a lot from being able to go for "who's online with a carrier" rather than setting up squadron roles to allow a sufficient range of players to take control.

Similarly the flexibility to send carriers to more than one place at once might be very useful for a big squadron.

And, of course, being easily able to invite allies who aren't in your squadron onto the carriers, whether for a formal joint operation, or simply because one of your friends normally flies with another squadron doing other stuff entirely but is helping you tonight.

So long as they have an easy "allow all squadron members to dock" option for the carriers, this way will probably be better for group play.

 

[Sierra_Hotel]

Well alright then. This will definitely get me back into the game

 

[Cmdr. Lowdrag]

Exactly what is the cost for the Carrier going to be and how hard will it be to find fuel?

 

[Slick500]

I wonder just how much this ship is going to cost. I have a fully decked out Corvette which is worth 868 million credits.
So I would like to know some ballpark figure so i can plan to have the necessary credits available to purchase it.

 

[Lightspeed]

Sells fleet .... buys fleet carrier

 

[Ashnak]

Exactly what is the cost for the Carrier going to be and how hard will it be to find fuel?

1) "A lot of credits"
2) current guesses tend to "rather hard"

 

[Khoraak]

Looks nice, would have been great to build squadrons around them and, you know, with the guild we have built up in Squadrons as a community to work together, but I guess this is really just a shallow, single-player game that occasional has some multiplayer aspects. Basically, this emphasises the lack of support I see for the future of Squadrons, with the bowing to Solo players because they moan loud against anything that smacks of not being available and earnable individually, is starting to wear thin. So now the guild leaders get to try and keep their groups together with no support for the long foreseeable future unless they like to hunt Thargoids or look at pretty starscapes, because that's the only thing we hear about from community managers who don't answer emails and only talk to the super large player groups or fancy screenshot'ers.

Hell just take squadrons out now, it's not needed, the only thing will be for people to join a Squadron is for a promise for earning enough money with a group then ditching them.

So pretty ships, and no use to squadrons. Let's just keep on not supporting the groups who actually play together and bring up new players.

How is it no use to Squadrons? What are you complaining about? Are yuou complaining that solo players didn't get excluded? LOL, what kind of argument is that?

I fly in a Squadron, we decide to use a carrier. Happy days. What's the problem? Please don't see things as solo players Vs Multiplayers in some kind of RL pvp contest of who can ruin who's lives. It's right and just that EVERYONE gets to own these. Jeez, If you want to argue about something, complain how the Cobra 4 is denied to anyone who wasn't around giving David money at a certain time. That's complain-worthy. He could have made it available for everyone but free for those elite exclusive groups who live on Twitch and do all that social cuddling/money-spending, as if their lives depend on it.

Ok, ok, so What are these Arx or Arcs then? Is it fictitious currency bought for real currency? AS WELL AS earned in game? Just wanna know.

 

[jonesskill]

Thaank you frontier for the carrier! A very nice adiction for the game, bringing purpose to old players come back again.

Some questions:
1- We will be able to upgrade the carrier? (like if the carrier come with E grade modules and we can buy/equip A grade ones?)
2- The carrier will have some sort of defensive system - turret weapons - (And this system can be upgraded?) to create a ~safe~ zone on the carrier radius.
3- The carriers will have cargo storage to store comodities? (And this system will can be upgraded?) this will be great to make a mining/trading routes carring a large ammount of

 

[Stephen Benedetti]

Greetings Commanders,

I just want to say thank you to everyone who has contributed to this thread, it is really exciting for us to see the hype around Fleet Carriers.
I know there are a lot of burning questions, and I want to let you know that we are going through these and putting together a response. This might take a bit of time, but we hope to get you some answers by next week.

o7

 

[Khoraak]

This is sad but true. No man's sky had capitol/fleet carriers for a while now. I feel that elite is just trying to play catch up at this point. Other things elite needs that No man's sky already has include space legs, atmospheric landings and base building. No Man's Sky has what elite don't. And when ever elite does release what little content they do, we praise it like the coming of christ because of how starved for content we all are.

wow what a comment. Pretty good, the quote included as well, all bang on. This was my point somewhere on here; All you have to do is press a key and bam, your Freighter appears and it does need fuel too, but you can get it and fuel it without having to break your blood vessels in your brain from sleepless nights of grind-farming either. But I'd better wait to see what comes out, I mean, the content in Elite is I have to say way better than NMS, or any other space game I've played. The SRV and it's functions - its radar detection mini game for mats is really really cool and I do like it, because I get to do science and find stuff with radar signatures, this makes it cool engaging content that I was happy to pay for, gladly.

Personally, I was hoping we'd have a Space station of our own that can teleport around with us. This is more future-ready, but hey - if the Fleet carriers are big enough, then yup, Dave can deffo install crew quarters, restaurants, mission givers, mess halls, engine rooms, etc etc. I'd like David to expand on what NMS has touched upon; Put more mini-games into managing the Fleet carriers, in the same way as you can land on a frigate in NMS and go around, repairing it with stuff. That I REALLY found interesting, engaging and made the content that bit thicker with extra sandwich filling, if ya know what I mean.

 

[Mirakosh]

All the yays! Can't wait