ANNOUNCEMENT Gamescom Reveals - Fleet Carrier Details

Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.
The simplest option would be to pilot them in SC.
Except you can't pilot an FC. It is just parked in space at FD's choosing.
Maybe in a year there will be more to it.
FD wasn't late getting the FC out, they waited to perfect it as much as possible giving a years runtime before the big expansion is released. They gave it to all players instead of squadrons only. Tell me again how FD never listens.
As for the lame crying about ice planets and atmo worlds. They only have 400 billion systems to work on.
I'm sure anyone here could have it done in a weekend.
 
Don't worry, it's likely that the first iteration will be a miss anyway :D

But yeah, they can't be cheap. Though, thinking about it now, would be nice to get smaller, cheaper versions. For example, only with medium and small pads. And just small pads. To sort of have three tiers and allow people with thinner wallets to make some advantage of FCs. So a player could start with the smallest one and then upgrade when they have more funds.
Thinking about it, why are they fixed with 8L+4M+4S at all?

If it's a modular design, surely there's scope for a selection of different docking modules and why 8 large when the vast majority of the ships in the game are medium? Is it 8 large pads but no extra storage and only 4 of each of the other pads to get on and off the carrier at a time but there is internal hangar space?

Outposts can't support large pads, carriers must be huge!?
 
Thinking about it, why are they fixed with 8L+4M+4S at all?

If it's a modular design, surely there's scope for a selection of different docking modules and why 8 large when the vast majority of the ships in the game are medium? Is it 8 large pads but no extra storage and only 4 of each of the other pads to get on and off the carrier at a time but there is internal hangar space?

Outposts can't support large pads, carriers must be huge!?
And I don’t recall any megaships with that many pads of any size.
 
Wouldn't us deciding what body we want to be orbiting require us to have access to the system data, what if we don't have that yet i.e its undiscovered by me/you
Now really. If system is undiscoverd, it will arrive at main star as usual. Get out with your docked ship, scan the system, get back in the carrier, plot a instant micro-jump to interesting secondary star 800.000 ls furthers with your carrier. Would be nice, wouldn't it.?
 
Don't worry, it's likely that the first iteration will be a miss anyway :D

But yeah, they can't be cheap. Though, thinking about it now, would be nice to get smaller, cheaper versions. For example, only with medium and small pads. And just small pads. To sort of have three tiers and allow people with thinner wallets to make some advantage of FCs. So a player could start with the smallest one and then upgrade when they have more funds.
Yeah, as it's modular... or at least seems to be I can't see a reason not to have smaller, and larger ones through changing modules!
 
Except you can't pilot an FC. It is just parked in space at FD's choosing.
Maybe in a year there will be more to it.
That's what I expect. And it seems a bit weird to me, because I don't know how the hyperspace exit point is going to be chosen? A selected planet? What if it's an unknown system or one without planets? Main star?
So because of this it would make the most sense to move them in SC whenever you need them from the introduction.
 
Those pads do seem very close together - is there room for the standard operation of retracting, rotating, and then moving the ship backwards into the fully docked position?
 
hmmm... 40 pages, so someone may have already asked, but space is big and I have places to be (Bank Holiday; B&Q), so;

  • In addition to jumping directed by Galaxy Map, can it also be directed to a defined point in a system? When not using mine, I'd like it to park up outside our home station. Also, parking near a Resource Zone for mining or bounty hunting would lead to some nice scenes.
  • Can they be shown in all instances, so that (combined with the above) we could see multiples parked up together, but clearly separated by ~20LY safety zones.
  • Please, make large docks for them so that we can have them homed somewhere for repairs (assuming Ship Integrity goes down with use), and please use a non-negotiable autodock to get a great sequence to watch!
  • Fit them with point defense; offers something of a light show protecting launching ships, even if the Carrier can't be damaged, and isn't an offensive weapon.
 

Robert Maynard

Volunteer Moderator
Those pads do seem very close together - is there room for the standard operation of retracting, rotating, and then moving the ship backwards into the fully docked position?
Indeed they do - both longitudinally and transversely. Which might be suggestive of a change from the normal drop > spin > reverse into hangar sequence - which may mean that outfitting isn't available.
 
Indeed they do - both longitudinally and transversely. Which might be suggestive of a change from the normal drop > spin > reverse into hangar sequence - which may mean that outfitting isn't available.
Not necessarily. Maybe they just drop and fields keep enough atmo in the bay for outfitting... It would be a change from standard methods, but with limited space, who knows.
I guess we'll just have to wait and see.
 
Indeed they do - both longitudinally and transversely. Which might be suggestive of a change from the normal drop > spin > reverse into hangar sequence - which may mean that outfitting isn't available.
Considering their 'closeness' and if we get legs, are we going to be able to wander around and gawp in wonder at the sight of all our ships lined up so close?
 
Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom