My view on Carriers so far.

I agree that the cost of upkeep is now trivial. In inconvenience of fueling is not however. I hope Frontier will make some more tweaks to make fueling (when out in the black) less time consuming at the end of this beta.

I also hope that frontier will surprise us with specific carrier based game play (specific missions, etc) in the future.
 

rootsrat

Volunteer Moderator
you also said that a lot of ppl support upkeep but since there is little evidence of that I guess that means nothing as well?
This is EXACTLY what I've said:

Judging by the comments, a lot of the players (I don't want to say majority, as I simply don't know that) seems to be OK with the changes and accepts the lower upkeep.
And I stand by it. The comments I've seen on the forums and social media were mainly in favour and it was a massive and drastic shift from the previous feedback from Beta 1.

Upkeep is a dumb mechanic that has caused a real divide in this community, and is why I uninstalled the game - guess this game is no longer for me hmm? 🤷‍♂️
If you want to dismiss a whole game, as massive and amazing as Elite is, on the premise of a single feature on a single piece of end-game content, then I can only wish you good luck in finding the game you will actually enjoy playing. You may have a hard time though, there really aren't many games out there that offer as much freedom and features as this one.
 
If you want to dismiss a whole game, as massive and amazing as Elite is, on the premise of a single feature on a single piece of end-game content, then I can only wish you good luck in finding the game you will actually enjoy playing. You may have a hard time though, there really aren't many games out there that offer as much freedom and features as this one.
I'm not dismissing the game, I am dismissing the development team that thinks that putting in a mechanic to punish people for not playing is a good thing, there is a big difference - That you havent been able to understand that says.. something.
 
I'm not dismissing the game, I am dismissing the development team that thinks that putting in a mechanic to punish people for not playing is a good thing, there is a big difference - That you havent been able to understand that says.. something.
Dismiss the developers because they introduce something different which you, personally, dislike? That's fine, and is your own choice. No-one is going to force you to play any longer than you wish. As you are well aware, rage quits are welcomed with the contempt such crying merits.

Just let me be the last to say "So long, Bye 👋..."


(Assuming that you will quit the forum too)

It is priceless to quit the game because you loathe an optional feature...
 
If you can walk away from the game for 3 to 12 months, why would you care if you lose your stuff?
Because some players have full time jobs and normal lives that get in the way of routine play. Things come up. We shouldn't be punished from simply not being able to play due to conflicting responsibilities.
 

rootsrat

Volunteer Moderator
I'm not dismissing the game, I am dismissing the development team that thinks that putting in a mechanic to punish people for not playing is a good thing, there is a big difference - That you havent been able to understand that says.. something.
You have said exactly this:

Upkeep is a dumb mechanic that has caused a real divide in this community, and is why I uninstalled the game - guess this game is no longer for me hmm? 🤷‍♂️
So yes, as I said - you have literally dismissed the whole game on the premise of a single feature on a single piece of end-game content. Literally.
 
you also said that a lot of ppl support upkeep but since there is little evidence of that I guess that means nothing as well?

Upkeep is a dumb mechanic that has caused a real divide in this community, and is why I uninstalled the game - guess this game is no longer for me hmm? 🤷‍♂️
Baba!

May I have your stuffs!? :D
 
Again, you are being narrow minded about this - I am dismissing the entire COMPANY , not just elite because of choices they are making. Too many companies treat their customers like they exist only to give them money so they ship out the minimum viable product - look at EA with anthem, Blizzard with the warcraft 3 remaster and a boatload of others.

I see this is the first step of Fdev doing the same thing and I will not support a company that goes down that path especially as Elite is not a free to play game, it is PAY to play - I've already paid my upkeep many times over, I do not need them putting an ingame cost on top of that.

They dont even seem to need it to stop systems becoming over populated now as carriers are being pushed into nearby systems if one system is full so that removes that argument from the list.

This upkeep mechanic was not a gameplay choice, it was a management choice to punish players by leaving a ticking bomb for players to keep thinking about when they arent playing.
 

rootsrat

Volunteer Moderator
Again, you are being narrow minded about this - I am dismissing the entire COMPANY , not just elite because of choices they are making.
Well that's not what you originally said, is it? I am not a mind reader, sorry. I can only comment on what you post on the forums. Assuming what your interlocutor means is the first step to misunderstanding and the discussion quality degradation. Same as not expressing your thoughts clearly and presenting opinions as facts.

[Too many companies treat their customers like they exist only to give them money so they ship out the minimum viable product - look at EA with anthem, Blizzard with the warcraft 3 remaster and a boatload of others.

I see this is the first step of Fdev doing the same thing and I will not support a company that goes down that path especially as Elite is not a free to play game, it is PAY to play - I've already paid my upkeep many times over, I do not need them putting an ingame cost on top of that.

They dont even seem to need it to stop systems becoming over populated now as carriers are being pushed into nearby systems if one system is full so that removes that argument from the list.
Fair enough, if that's your opinion. I wish you all the best finding a game you like.

This upkeep mechanic was not a gameplay choice, it was a management choice to punish players by leaving a ticking bomb for players to keep thinking about when they arent playing.
And your source for this very factual information is...?
 
The solution you present seems to be about finding a "compromise" that benefits you. But all these arguments we are making in all these threads seem mainly to indicate that this Fleet Carrier will not be able to satisfy everybody. Luckily FD has indicated more classes of FCs should be coming. Shame they weren't available for testing.

The argument about steam numbers being representative is about as old as it is irrelevant. Steam only records players playing through Steam. FD knows the real numbers. It is about as relevant as suggesting that the arguments presented on the forum reflect the wishes of the player base. Again, no they don't. They only represent the wishes of the forum users, a loud lot of those don't even play the game anymore...

:D S
Excuse my dumb question but do you think about the support vessels or did i missed something? Because it could indeed solve some problems, for example a FC ONLY for exploration that could scoop GG/Stars/ELW but that would have so much disadvantages for others actual gameplay to prevent players for avoiding mining tritium.
 
I am dismissing the entire COMPANY
Fine... You do what you gotta do... does it really matter in the grand scheme of things? You'll obviously feel good dismissing them, such power! Bye 👋
You do realise that the company also operates and runs this forum, if you have dismissed them, what are you still doing here?
 
Excuse my dumb question but do you think about the support vessels or did i missed something? Because it could indeed solve some problems, for example a FC ONLY for exploration that could scoop GG/Stars/ELW but that would have so much disadvantages for others actual gameplay to prevent players for avoiding mining tritium.
not quite. I recall one of the FD staff posting that the Drake Class wasn’t the only Carrier class considered. Cryptic. Especially since we didn’t get the support vessels in the beta.

:D S
 
So, let me recap: 1) a player shows frustration about a very controversial mechanic and it is routinely mocked and dismissed by regulars of this forum and moderators alike. 2) Proofs that a very significant part of the community is against any form of unkeep are dismissed without any real reason 3) Proposed compromising solutions that could make FD vision more palatable to a vast number of players are never debated in their merits.

All of this only cement the hypothesis that people here don't like the unkeep because it solves the cluttering problem (so, the reason FD put it in the first place) but because it's a mechanic that makes the new toy exclusive to them and only those who play several hours every week like them.
The more exclusive, the better (the unkeep is too low is another trope here).
That is why alternative solutions are never discussed here. Because they defy the real point.

In some way I think that it's refreshing to see this forum show finally their true color.
A player is so frustrated by the current FD direction to thinking of leaving the game altogether and people here celebrate it as a step toward the potential restoring of this echo chamber.

This is just sad, honestly.
They warned me that this forum is populated only by a vocal minority of gatekeepers and fanboys and that it is not worth the effort trying to discus here.
But I don't pay much attention to rumours and wanted to check that myself.
You just prove them right.
 
So, let me recap: 1) a player shows frustration about a very controversial mechanic and it is routinely mocked and dismissed by regulars of this forum and moderators alike. 2) Proofs that a very significant part of the community is against any form of unkeep are dismissed without any real reason 3) Proposed compromising solutions that could make FD vision more palatable to a vast number of players are never debated in their merits.

All of this only cement the hypothesis that people here don't like the unkeep because it solves the cluttering problem (so, the reason FD put it in the first place) but because it's a mechanic that makes the new toy exclusive to them and only those who play several hours every week like them.
The more exclusive, the better (the unkeep is too low is another trope here).
That is why alternative solutions are never discussed here. Because they defy the real point.

In some way I think that it's refreshing to see this forum show finally their true color.
A player is so frustrated by the current FD direction to thinking of leaving the game altogether and people here celebrate it as a step toward the potential restoring of this echo chamber.

This is just sad, honestly.
They warned me that this forum is populated only by a vocal minority of gatekeepers and fanboys and that it is not worth the effort trying to discus here.
But I don't pay much attention to rumours and wanted to check that myself.
You just prove them right.
Can I have your stuffs, too!? :D
 
So, let me recap: 1) a player shows frustration about a very controversial mechanic and it is routinely mocked and dismissed by regulars of this forum and moderators alike.

That is why alternative solutions are never discussed here. Because they defy the real point.
The two important points that interested me:
I made the first reply post to the OP - with a suggestion to bypass concerns over a mechanic that exists in the beta today... I don't believe it was 'mocking'...
As for Moderators - they are forum members just like you and I, and are not permitted to moderate in a thread they have commented on - so just another member in those cases...

Alternative solutions?
The only alternative solution to not liking upkeep is to have it removed, surely? Something that, so far, has not been offered by the developers. If you have another solution why not put it forward for consideration?

Dunno about gatekeepers and fanboys here, all I see is other folk with their own views and opinions, someof which I agree with, others I may not... Why give someone a derogatory title just because they are capable of expressing ideas which may not be completely in line with, or directly opposite, to your own?
 
The two important points that interested me:
I made the first reply post to the OP - with a suggestion to bypass concerns over a mechanic that exists in the beta today... I don't believe it was 'mocking'...
As for Moderators - they are forum members just like you and I, and are not permitted to moderate in a thread they have commented on - so just another member in those cases...
Whilst there is nothing inherently wrong in having a moderator participating in a discussion, they should be more considerate in their posts because they are supposed to set the example for the community.
According what it is in full display now I think that they got this part right at least.
Their behaviour is, as a matter of fact, an example of what we should expect from people of this forum.
Alternative solutions?
The only alternative solution to not liking upkeep is to have it removed, surely? Something that, so far, has not been offered by the developers. If you have another solution why not put it forward for consideration?
I've proposed a shortlist of alternative solutions in the first post of mine in this thread. The fact that you missed them is only indicative on how little they have been discussed.
Hence proving my points.

Also:
Something that, so far, has not been offered by the developers.
I don't know where you got the idea that devs gave us a sort of checklist of options and asked us which one we prefer.

The feedback they asked was general, so alternative solutions can and should be proposed.
Solutions that have not been considered so far by FD are, in fact, particularly valuable to them.
Dunno about gatekeepers and fanboys here, all I see is other folk with their own views and opinions, someof which I agree with, others I may not... Why give someone a derogatory title just because they are capable of expressing ideas which may not be completely in line with, or directly opposite, to your own?
Having a different opinion don't make them gatekeeper. Wanting exclusive mechanics for them, and them only, do so.
A while back it was about the big 3. Same discussion, same argument. Ranking should be hard to gain, or even decrease with time (a form of rank unkeep), the corvette is endgame content, it is not for "you" it is for me. Etc..
Now it is the same thing all over again. There's a small but very vocal group of people who want ED content to be as much exclusive as possible.
People in the ED community started calling people lurking this forum gatekkeper for that reason.
People in this forum started to believe that only people in this forum is "the real" ED community, for some reason.
All of this predates the introduction of the FC.

Personally, I still think that gatekeeper are entitled of their opinion, and I have no problem on that.
What I don't like is when they try to suppress ideas, feedback (and even facts) coming from people that threat to burst the bubble they created here.
 
...
Personally, I still think that gatekeeper are entitled of their opinion, and I have no problem on that.
What I don't like is when they try to suppress ideas, feedback (and even facts) coming from people that threat to burst the bubble they created here.
Thanks for expanding on your comments 👍

We are a diverse 'community' and there are many voices who consider feature X (pick any you like!) should be Y'd (balanced, nerfed, boosted... etc.) as it would benefit 'the community' (read them)...

I was indicating that FDev had not mentioned removing upkeep - just reducing it.
...but I will read your suggestions made earlier, as they are forgotten!
 
Yeah, sure, of course... How could I be so stupid as to reply to another comment by another player willing to 'grind' 5 billion then worry about not playing for a long time after...

Some folks 'slimy mechanics' are others 'common sense', isn't it great that we can all think independently of the herd if we so wish?
Lol, eat your words. Couldn't even outfit in some systems in the Beta because the systems are clogged full of carriers. This small oversight exposed a serious flaw with the 2+ years of effort that went into this intended convenience store simulator. If enough players wanted to be A-holes, they could just clog up every system that sells carriers so that players would have a hell of a time trying to outfit them. Even if players weren't trying to be A-holes, this issue of too many carriers in a crucial system still exists. Well, luckily we have this decommissioning system! Only problem is, FDev must wait until the carrier funding runs out to be able to do anything about it.

You think if someone has gotten to 5 billion in credits, they'll play the game until they die? As if they'll never get bored, want to take an extended break, or just quit altogether. I'm sure if a player wakes up some day and decides it's his last day playing the game, he's not going to log in a clean up after himself by decommissioning his carrier or removing funds from it. Also, players may play with their carriers for a couple of months and then lose interest, but want to keep it 'just in case', therefor funding it for years to let it sit.

The issue isn't weather or not the problem will exist, it's the fact that the problem is allowed to exist even though FDev's reasoning for upkeep is meant to address the problem. Either the designers are in the wrong field of work, or they think their community is so stupid that we'll believe anything. I think it's a little of both. The wing money exploit, the potential to wreck the BGS with a carrier full of ships with cargo holds full of powerplay delivery items, these are just a few of the additional issues that were not considered, but which have a huge impact on the game. So, sure, maybe upkeep isn't an intentionally slimy mechanic and an attempt at common sense. But if so, then I'm even more concerned by the incompetence on display with FDev's attempt at 'common sense'.
 
Top Bottom