Interesting point of view from a long time ED Streamer on Fleet Carriers
- Thread starter Powderpanic
- Start date
Failed streamer rants about his open only entitlement ; the calamity.
That makes sense one person sqaudrons for carrier access were what I was expecting. This way they just maintain the parity of all the modes.
Another positive point with FDEV's approach is that as actual squadrons will probably have a few carriers available we'll be able to have handy close by large pad repair+resupply in every system we are fighting in. It also eliminates internal rows about exactly where the carrier needs to be.
To me squad-only FC sounded like a death knell for squadrons.
Day 1 : FC released
Squad leader: right everyone, start collecting for my, sorry our carrier!
Squad member: can't I have one?
SL: nope, one per squad
SM: but you'll let me control it?
SL: are you in charge?
SM: not unless I leave and start my own squad
SL: hey! Where did you all go?
As others have said, this is probably the way to go. Squadrons seen to have imagined that FC = squad missions, but that's never been talked about by fdev afaik
Though obviously squad content would be cool as well.
Day 1 : FC released
Squad leader: right everyone, start collecting for my, sorry our carrier!
Squad member: can't I have one?
SL: nope, one per squad
SM: but you'll let me control it?
SL: are you in charge?
SM: not unless I leave and start my own squad
SL: hey! Where did you all go?
As others have said, this is probably the way to go. Squadrons seen to have imagined that FC = squad missions, but that's never been talked about by fdev afaik
Though obviously squad content would be cool as well.
lmao I love the part where he was like "I speak for all the veterans but if any other veterans disagree with me then they're invalid"
if he wants the game where you and your friends are all bridge crew on a big ship and you need them all to fly it it's called pulsar, go check it out
Im a solo player and kind of agree with him sort of but i still dont get the carrier what is it why spend all that time creating it to just be able to do what 70% of stations can do..... its just another grind fest whats the point. We need gameplay new exciting gameplay...... carrier's just going to end up like multicrew!
Not sure how carriers are going to work, but I can see possible game play reasons to use one. Take the group that repair stations damaged by Thargoids. They could fill a fleet carrier with the required commodities then jump the carrier to the damage station and offload the goods.
I can see that but imagine the grind to refuel and restock lets say 2/3 grind for that when i have 20ly miner thats only 25 jumps to hit 500ly no grind 21ly fighter 23/24 jumps no grind 30ly hauler 16/17 jumps no grind and 68ly explorer 7/8 jumps no grind cmdr's will use it because its new for 3/4 weeks then realise there is no point just like multicrew! Thats my opinion obv.....some actually might like it!
Some people will like it for a mobile base.There's been a few occasions where I've wanted to relocate my entire fleet (usually a player group that I'm flying with going inactive or something, or I find a better place, or there's a new group of folks wanting to start up their new PMF or whatever) and I'll want to stay in one place as a "home" for a few months and then vamoose. Shunting everything around on a carrier would be great for that. And that's just solo.
Groups will find it great for things like operation Ida - I know I wouldn't want to jump a T9 full of insulating membrane out to Witch Head. Or worse, those commodities that are only available in a limited number of planetary ports around the bubble yet are still needed for station repairs. They could have carriers parked around the systems that produce those goods, then once everyone's loaded up, jump them all to a station in need of repair in one go.
Groups will find it great for things like operation Ida - I know I wouldn't want to jump a T9 full of insulating membrane out to Witch Head. Or worse, those commodities that are only available in a limited number of planetary ports around the bubble yet are still needed for station repairs. They could have carriers parked around the systems that produce those goods, then once everyone's loaded up, jump them all to a station in need of repair in one go.
![[VR] Goooost](https://forums-cdn.zaonce.net/data/avatars/m/111/111637.jpg?1589354934){kind=avatar}
Squadron-Only carriers would have killed squadrons straight out of the gate.
Everyone would have ditched their squadrons to create their own so that they could get a carrier. Everyone would have their own squadron.
You say, "But Goooost, if they limited the carriers to squadrons of 10+ people, people would actually start banding together more, not less!" Sort of. I had already talked to my own friends about starting the "carrier pigeons" in the same vein as the fuel rats and the hull seals to temporarily join squadrons to get them to the required size before leaving. If I didnt do it, someone else would. This is a proven concept from back when facebook had the game "mafia wars" and users would group up with temporary friend requests (which would stay in the mafia even after removing the actual friend).
What frontier did instead was genius. They let everyone have their own carrier, BUT they have to pick a role. So now if you want a support ship of every type, you have to join a squadron and have other players choose those roles. Your squadrons will now have the benefit of having multiple carriers, with different roles and functions, in different systems you're invested in. You will have more reason to communicate with each other to get these various carriers around, and you wont have to rely on an absent squadron leader to move the bloody things around.
Solo carriers mostly benefit Open play.
Everyone would have ditched their squadrons to create their own so that they could get a carrier. Everyone would have their own squadron.
You say, "But Goooost, if they limited the carriers to squadrons of 10+ people, people would actually start banding together more, not less!" Sort of. I had already talked to my own friends about starting the "carrier pigeons" in the same vein as the fuel rats and the hull seals to temporarily join squadrons to get them to the required size before leaving. If I didnt do it, someone else would. This is a proven concept from back when facebook had the game "mafia wars" and users would group up with temporary friend requests (which would stay in the mafia even after removing the actual friend).
What frontier did instead was genius. They let everyone have their own carrier, BUT they have to pick a role. So now if you want a support ship of every type, you have to join a squadron and have other players choose those roles. Your squadrons will now have the benefit of having multiple carriers, with different roles and functions, in different systems you're invested in. You will have more reason to communicate with each other to get these various carriers around, and you wont have to rely on an absent squadron leader to move the bloody things around.
Solo carriers mostly benefit Open play.
I think there were some valid points in there
And not a potty mouthed as the first few posters suggest once you get past the first few minutes.
At the end of the day I cant disagree with the assertion if this is a multiplayer game there needs to be reasons to play with people.
There can be game play developed for squadrons that doesn't cater for the lone wolf player
Fleet Carriers may or may not be it.
And not a potty mouthed as the first few posters suggest once you get past the first few minutes.
At the end of the day I cant disagree with the assertion if this is a multiplayer game there needs to be reasons to play with people.
There can be game play developed for squadrons that doesn't cater for the lone wolf player
Fleet Carriers may or may not be it.
![[PS4] Filthymick420](https://forums-cdn.zaonce.net/data/avatars/m/201/201444.jpg?1555738739){kind=avatar}
It was a Tigger warning. They're bouncy and funDid you guys not read the trigger warning?
Hey! It's that guy who was sure BGS would be Open Only by the end of 2017. He knew it, and Frontier Development knew it. And if you disagreed you knew nothing about game design. And now he made a little incoherent video.
This clueless feller just needs a hug. Bless him
This clueless feller just needs a hug. Bless him
I respect 90sKid and he speaks some true words. While I personally don't find it too bad that carriers are purchaseable by solo players, I am still sceptical on the pricing. If it is just 10 billion, well then everyone gonna have a carrier some day. It should be extraordinarily expensive to buy and upgarde one, starting price 50 billion credits and there should be a way for a squad to contribute towards that carrier together, right now VO dumping will do the job.
Overall 90sKid has one major point that is 100% true: The multiplayer part in this game is pretty much unsupported. You can't interact with players besides chatting and shooting them, you can't form a guild for any purpose like BGS or PP, it is soley for the squad tag, there is no functionality to it, PvP is generally discriminated and excluded from the game's mechanics as players don't drop materials or significant amount of merits and yes, the relation to DayZ is correct too. Why would I care for new content as long as the old content is still a huge pile of smelly dogpoo? The game is unbalanced, broken, unstable (client and networking wise), random and has next to no meaningful background story with influence. new ship released? Well, poor Asp Scout but you are made as a joke and meme. New Thargoid variant? Better grind more synthesis materials and do the very same tactic for 30 minutes longer. Interstellar Initiatives? Another good joke. Community created events? Let's make a megaship jump 5 lightyears because we don't want the community to decide!
The last point is its major problem and combined with another point, FDev's cowardly staying silent about all developement processes makes it even worse. There is absolutely no explaination why something happens. There is absolute no explaination why something does NOT happen like balancing changes or the Icarus Cup (RIP).
I don't care for FDev or their team, just please don't screw up this game any further because I highly doubt FDev has still the competence available to develope a game of this scale.
For almost a year now I refused to purchase any skins, ship kits or whatnot and despite I would like to, this company isn't worth a penny anymore as trust has been broken and issues resulting out of failures remain unsolved.
Luckily we are getting ARX so I will never need to pay a penny for them again (for cosmetics).
It also is astoundishing how a whole company can be so naive and ignorant and just ignore the community. And while some wishes are getting adressed, the vast majority won't even get considered. Most importnatly bug fixes for long term bugs are put on the low priority list (?). Too difficult to solve and fix? Get omeone who has the competence. With the new issues tracker we can even see what has been confirmed and acknowledged but where is the fix for these bugs? Where is it? I can't find it. Help me find it, it must be somewhere no? What does the issue tracker use if it uncertain wheather a bug is fixed in the next patch or not? Because the current 3-4 month frequency of patches means that a bug can very well persist for years. And you know what's especially sad? They do! Despite them taking it "very seriously" they do persist for years, for over 4 years now we haven't even fixed all the bugs from day1 release. You can't make up for it with content or anything anymore, these things have to be done and they are already long overdue.
It took a year to fix the heat bug for large instances and took over a year to balance the heat meta, how long are we gonna wait for the other thousands of issues?
Overall 90sKid has one major point that is 100% true: The multiplayer part in this game is pretty much unsupported. You can't interact with players besides chatting and shooting them, you can't form a guild for any purpose like BGS or PP, it is soley for the squad tag, there is no functionality to it, PvP is generally discriminated and excluded from the game's mechanics as players don't drop materials or significant amount of merits and yes, the relation to DayZ is correct too. Why would I care for new content as long as the old content is still a huge pile of smelly dogpoo? The game is unbalanced, broken, unstable (client and networking wise), random and has next to no meaningful background story with influence. new ship released? Well, poor Asp Scout but you are made as a joke and meme. New Thargoid variant? Better grind more synthesis materials and do the very same tactic for 30 minutes longer. Interstellar Initiatives? Another good joke. Community created events? Let's make a megaship jump 5 lightyears because we don't want the community to decide!
The last point is its major problem and combined with another point, FDev's cowardly staying silent about all developement processes makes it even worse. There is absolutely no explaination why something happens. There is absolute no explaination why something does NOT happen like balancing changes or the Icarus Cup (RIP).
I don't care for FDev or their team, just please don't screw up this game any further because I highly doubt FDev has still the competence available to develope a game of this scale.
For almost a year now I refused to purchase any skins, ship kits or whatnot and despite I would like to, this company isn't worth a penny anymore as trust has been broken and issues resulting out of failures remain unsolved.
Luckily we are getting ARX so I will never need to pay a penny for them again (for cosmetics).
It also is astoundishing how a whole company can be so naive and ignorant and just ignore the community. And while some wishes are getting adressed, the vast majority won't even get considered. Most importnatly bug fixes for long term bugs are put on the low priority list (?). Too difficult to solve and fix? Get omeone who has the competence. With the new issues tracker we can even see what has been confirmed and acknowledged but where is the fix for these bugs? Where is it? I can't find it. Help me find it, it must be somewhere no? What does the issue tracker use if it uncertain wheather a bug is fixed in the next patch or not? Because the current 3-4 month frequency of patches means that a bug can very well persist for years. And you know what's especially sad? They do! Despite them taking it "very seriously" they do persist for years, for over 4 years now we haven't even fixed all the bugs from day1 release. You can't make up for it with content or anything anymore, these things have to be done and they are already long overdue.
It took a year to fix the heat bug for large instances and took over a year to balance the heat meta, how long are we gonna wait for the other thousands of issues?
reads comments
90sKid is a Rorschach Test confirmed.
90sKid is a Rorschach Test confirmed.
So I watched the video and I have a question.
What multiplayer portion of the game actually exists? Open isn't multiplayer game play, it's only instancing. What content exists that is multiplayer related that isn't emergent content? Maybe the ability to wing up? What else? I've never seen a mission or anything in the game that serves multiplayer(s).
Everything else is just preachy, pontificating filibuster.
What multiplayer portion of the game actually exists? Open isn't multiplayer game play, it's only instancing. What content exists that is multiplayer related that isn't emergent content? Maybe the ability to wing up? What else? I've never seen a mission or anything in the game that serves multiplayer(s).
Everything else is just preachy, pontificating filibuster.
Because you cannot park a station 15000 LY outside of the bubble and move it at your whim. People complained about transfer times for ships (I complained) and this would be a way to put all your stuffs in a suitcase and take with you, because what's the use in having a large fleet you don't have access to? The game doesn't cater well to operating from one station exclusively and part of the 'fun" of the game is the ability to experience a different ship, to chose a role based platform and have access to it for that time when you've discovered an opportunity for a change in game play. The absence of your fleet throws a dampener on that interest, so having a carrier under your control means you can up and move to anywhere if you're willing to do the work, even to systems that don't even have a station.
We dont even know what if any game play is attached to fleet carriers yet.
I have personally speculated that they could possibly adapt some of the management mechanics from their theme park games and apply them into elite.
An example would be crew happiness. If you have an explorer carrier but dont explore, your crew get unhappy and leave the ship. That could increase maintenance costs and cause things to stop working, or reduce the effectiveness, so you need more fuel to make a jump, or can now only jump 300 lyrs instead of 500.
I have personally speculated that they could possibly adapt some of the management mechanics from their theme park games and apply them into elite.
An example would be crew happiness. If you have an explorer carrier but dont explore, your crew get unhappy and leave the ship. That could increase maintenance costs and cause things to stop working, or reduce the effectiveness, so you need more fuel to make a jump, or can now only jump 300 lyrs instead of 500.