It's time to remove the restriction on cargo when changing ships

You may not be talking about doing that but other people are also playing the game.
Okay? I dont see a big problem with it to be honest. People will always find a way to maximise profits vs time played in order to buy better ships or to save for a fleet carrier, so why not let them?
 
Add a remote sell option, and problem solved! Heck, I'd even settle for a "This ship currently has cargo that will be destroyed before transferring. Are you sure you wish to continue with the transfer?" confirmation dialog.


To be fair, it's more about "playing the game" to earn your profit. You could load up a dozen T9s, switch to your 70 LY explorer, jump to your target system far away, then transfer those T9s that would otherwise require a dozen jumps each along with the hassle of NPC interdictions. Personally I think the best option would be requiring all cargo be removed (sold remotely or destroyed at current station) before a transfer takes place. Another option would be to charge a "hazardous duty" fee for the guy piloting your ship dealing with all those interdictions, making it unprofitable to transfer loaded T9s.


Not "exactly."


I'm sure you're not thinking of doing this, but I bet people would. I'm all for your suggestion, don't get me wrong, I just think a simple safeguard (see above) would be needed to prevent abuse.
I agree with this. Restrictions yes. I wasnt thinking about hoarding cargo and having the game transfer your ships to a sell station but I can see how it could be abused. Maybe a limit on the amount of cargo you can store and ship transfer is prohibited when cargo is stored on it. That way the risk is still present when transferring it and you can only sell one ship worth of cargo at a time, so the market stays balanced
 
Actually people pay dearly for owning and using a carrier.
So you should get one if you want to store cargo or to do micro jumps or maxi jumps (every 20 minutes)

But i guess it's simpler just to ask for the benefits without paying the price for them
Why would this kind of gameplay be privilege to inly HC players?
 
Why would this kind of gameplay be privilege to inly HC players?

not sure what exactly means HC players, but i do have a vague idea :)

Anyway, because that's how things are in gaming, generally speaking, and in Elite in particular too
Perks come with a certain level involvement in the game.
You want a Cutter, you do the unlock... same for cargo storage and mini/macro jumps. You get the point.
 
not sure what exactly means HC players, but i do have a vague idea :)

Anyway, because that's how things are in gaming, generally speaking, and in Elite in particular too
Perks come with a certain level involvement in the game.
You want a Cutter, you do the unlock... same for cargo storage and mini/macro jumps. You get the point.
HC meant "hardcore". I don't get the point why a MP game seems to always prefer the asymmetrical option for gameplay between players.
 
Last edited:
Why would this kind of gameplay [fleet carriers] be privilege to inly HC players?
HC meant "hardcore".
Wow. I must be a hardcore player.

Almost all video games I have played are achievement based. The player either gets/unlocks better stuff or more advanced areas as they progress through the game. I'm trying to think of one that isn't, I'm sure there are some. MS Solitaire. Some games with PvP arenas. There must be lots more, maybe puzzle games and simpler arcade style games that reset you to the beginning whenever you start new. Space Invaders, Street Fighter, Frogger, etc.
 
Say the cargo stays with the ship, that would mean that it would not be possible to transfer the ship to a new location as it has cargo aboard, bypassing any risk.

Steve 07.
It's already solved in Ody - cargo is lost if you use taxi and transfer ship.
 
Wow. I must be a hardcore player.

Almost all video games I have played are achievement based. The player either gets/unlocks better stuff or more advanced areas as they progress through the game. I'm trying to think of one that isn't, I'm sure there are some. MS Solitaire. Some games with PvP arenas. There must be lots more, maybe puzzle games and simpler arcade style games that reset you to the beginning whenever you start new. Space Invaders, Street Fighter, Frogger, etc.
They dont require you to play hindreds of hours to unlock basic gameplay.
 
If it may please the court I would like to refer you to my original statement:

that doesn't change a thing.
Carriers got in the game new possibilities and new gameplay. You want those possibilities and that gameplay without paying for a carrier

The point is we shouldn't have to spend over five billion credits just to be able to keep those extra few limpets we left on our mining ship, or the 70t of minerals we forgot to sell before logging off or the hutton orbital mug we've been carrying around for years and now want to do another activity.

But that's exactly the point. You spend 5 billions credits to get to enjoy new stuff, new unique stuff that your carrier will bring to the table
As it is, you want the cake, but without paying/working for it

They dont require you to play hindreds of hours to unlock basic gameplay.

Carriers dont unlock basic gameplay.
They are stated to be endgame content (yea, i know there is no endgame in an openworld sandbox like elite, but still that's the naming convention for late-game-stuff)
 
that doesn't change a thing.
Carriers got in the game new possibilities and new gameplay. You want those possibilities and that gameplay without paying for a carrier
You mean like how most people got their carriers after the Painite boom made them tens of billions shortly before the FC update, or the repeated CG cargo trading, or Thargoid instagibbing, or afk wing stacking in a T10, etc etc.... Seems like everyone who owns a FC wants the rest of the playerbase to think they did station missions for 1500hrs to be able to afford theirs, and anyone looking to make a quick bit of money to buy their own doesn't deserve one.

Yes there are people who will exploit this, but the people who have the money to buy enough Cutters or T9s in order to hoard the required amount of cargo to even make it worth storing/reselling is probably not that far off buying a fleet carrier anyway. I honestly don't understand why people are so against it when it would benefit literally everyone who plays the game at some point in time
 
Wow. I must be a hardcore player.

Almost all video games I have played are achievement based. The player either gets/unlocks better stuff or more advanced areas as they progress through the game. I'm trying to think of one that isn't, I'm sure there are some. MS Solitaire. Some games with PvP arenas. There must be lots more, maybe puzzle games and simpler arcade style games that reset you to the beginning whenever you start new. Space Invaders, Street Fighter, Frogger, etc.

Well Guild Wars 2 was far less like this, it was easily possible to get a player up to max level in a few days, and crafting was a breeze, I played it for about 3 months, leveled 2 max level characters, explored all the areas, and haven't been back to it since, basically they made it to easy. Once you reached max level you had very little to do until the next update came along.
 
The first line: too much RNG involved in that for my taste.
The RNG could be managed by letting player to choose one of few options - which level of NPC will transport the ship - the more experienced, the more you have to pay for service, the less chance to loose cargo or ship. And even if you order elite NPC for the task of delivering shildless T9 full of gold - the probability is still close to 100% that you will get a rebuy as a result :)
 
Back
Top Bottom