Please don't lock huge capital/carrier ships to only groups.

There are many players, myself included who cannot play at a certain time, regular times, due to work, health, etc, and it makes it near impossible for us to be part of a group.

I am a member of a player faction, but rarely get to meet up with anyone to do stuff for the faction.

Locking huge carriers to groups, or a huge ship, etc, in my view will lead to a person putting in a billion credits, or whatever much, and many many hours into it then find that no one in the group wants to go to the same place, and quickly tire of it, and just continue doing what they want to do.

I myself hardly play since the 6/28 update as the mission/passenger boards are in disarray, and the only thing I enjoy in small amounts is slowly finishing my combat rank to elite.

However, later on this year if II can buy a Farragut, or another large ship with my savings and do what I want to, when I want to, I might actually fall in love with ED again.

I'd love to be excited about ED again.
 
FD seem to have concerns about over-population of the universe with the larger ships. Personally, I believe it would not be an insurmountable issue to address - there are many different ways that particular cat could be skinned.

Overall though, I agree with your sentiment but I do not believe the carriers will be Farragut type vessels (or similar) nor do I expect them to be directly pilotable. I think they are more likely to be like the Thargoid emergency evacuation ships.
 
There are many players, myself included who cannot play at a certain time, regular times, due to work, health, etc, and it makes it near impossible for us to be part of a group.
Don't worry, I'm sure Sandro will say something along the lines of "We have no problem with players buying multiple accounts" the same as they did when they were asked about whether players are allowed to buy a second account and log it in for multicrew bonuses on their main ship. Most likely they saw a large spike in second account sales around that time and are hoping that individual players who want a carrier will buy another 10 accounts to "unlock" it.

At least that is my expectation given that there is no other reason for them to lock content behind an arbitrary number of players in a game that is populated by 99.99% NPCs.
 
If there is a cap on the number of carriers available, It is surely better for as many people as possible to have access to them, than for just a privileged few to lock away that content in solo. Conversely this thread should be in focussed feedback, but for the same reasons of balance and fairness of access.
 
If there is a cap on the number of carriers available
I see no good reason for there to be an absolute cap on the carriers - but it depends on how FD implement them.

They could limit it to one per squadron regardless of size or mode choice and just limit the carriers in a given system and mode/instance on a first come first served basis - if players really need access to their carrier then they can always switch to PG or solo and get guaranteed access there.
 
Last edited:
I hope they add NPC pirate carriers as mission targets. Mission: take out pirate carrier.
Isnt that basically the jist of some threat 4 distress call s? *jump in, see a disabled cap ship, fight off a few wings of pirates then a pirate aligned cap ship jumps in with a few more wings*
 
Last edited:
I see no good reason for there to be an absolute cap on the carriers - but it depends on how FD implement them.
Agreed, an absolute cap seems highly unlikely. It would most likely be a theoretical maximum allocation of server/network draw, decided by the dev leads after arguing out the cost/benefits. We dont know what the detrimental impact to game performance of going over these targets would be.

Presumably if the clamour was relentless enough they would consider increasing their resource allocation to carriers, so everyone could potentially get the candyfloss, but this would likely involve a dramatic increase in the grind to get a carrier (to help reduce the numbers another way) and likely negatively impact game performance for everyone.

So who shouts loudest? People complaining the networking & load times are terrible?, or people complaining that mode-locked access / billionnaire carrier oligarchy is terrible?

It would create an appalling dilemma for those who'd like to complain about everything. Although they could console themselves by also complaining that the devs ignore all feedback and simply engage with the community to justify fait-accomplis, and distract the playerbase from a lack of content & development by divide & conquer forum games.

So the 'Sandro is Machiavelli' folks can have a fight with the 'Sandro is Yossarian' peeps, and meanwhile everyday is exactly the same. But at least if this thread is moved to focussed feedback it would be right where it belongs. (Butt) hurt. But I at least I dont want to do anything to anyone like an animal. Not at 6am anyway.
 
Last edited:
There are many players, myself included who cannot play at a certain time, regular times, due to work, health, etc, and it makes it near impossible for us to be part of a group.

I am a member of a player faction, but rarely get to meet up with anyone to do stuff for the faction.

Locking huge carriers to groups, or a huge ship, etc, in my view will lead to a person putting in a billion credits, or whatever much, and many many hours into it then find that no one in the group wants to go to the same place, and quickly tire of it, and just continue doing what they want to do.

I myself hardly play since the 6/28 update as the mission/passenger boards are in disarray, and the only thing I enjoy in small amounts is slowly finishing my combat rank to elite.

However, later on this year if II can buy a Farragut, or another large ship with my savings and do what I want to, when I want to, I might actually fall in love with ED again.

I'd love to be excited about ED again.
I respectfully disagree.
Buying and maintaining these huge fleet carriers should not be within the means of a single player.
The ease with which we can currently acquire expensive ships like the cutter and anaconda and corvette is already pushing it.

I have no stake in this.
I am a soloist myself, I will never do multiplayer, as a result I too should not be able to purchase and maintain a fleetcarrier.

I understood FDev was thinking about implementing a group based mechanic that is needed to enable the carrier to travel. If so then a solo player will not be able to effectively use a carrier.


I already think that flying larger ships without a minimum crew requirement is wrong.
In Elite II the python could not even take off without 7 crew on board. The Anaconda demanded 10, and the Panther had 15 crew.
I want that npc crew system back in the current game.

A carrier should definitely not be flyable by a single person.
 
Last edited:
I'd be mortified if I'd spent months grinding passenger missions, while watching netflix, so I could buy a carrier, only to find I have to be part of a squadron to qualify.
 
I'd be mortified if I'd spent months grinding passenger missions, while watching netflix, so I could buy a carrier, only to find I have to be part of a squadron to qualify.
1. They have already said they are not going to require lots of cash to buy
2. They have already said you do have to be in a squad
 
My main anger with FD and ED are that there is little I can do for my player faction I am a member of.

I only fight at a CNB for my combat rank progression.

And the boards are screwed up so cargo and passenger missions are out.
 
My main anger with FD and ED are that there is little I can do for my player faction I am a member of.

I only fight at a CNB for my combat rank progression.

And the boards are screwed up so cargo and passenger missions are out.
You can help out your faction just by handing bounties and exploration data in at a station it owns.
 
What's the point of having a fleet carrier that can only move one ship around. But instead of you moving your one ship in 10 minutes, it will take you days with all the material gathering and could cost you credits.

Just to move one ship. I don't see the reasoning behind it and why anyone would want such a thing.

A personal base somewhere, yes I can see that, but a fleet carrier for one of your ships. What's the point.
 
I'd be mortified if I'd spent months grinding passenger missions, while watching netflix, so I could buy a carrier, only to find I have to be part of a squadron to qualify.
Id hope for your sake you'd not be that premature in all things.. how mortified would you be if you'd spent months grinding credits only to find out you needed to complete chain-missions, or mine mats or minerals to get a carrier?

Hopefully you would come to terms with your despair. "O woe, alas, I have billions of credits and literally nothing I can do with it" *Except use it to buy everything else in the game.*

I would demand a refund for ED from Netflix and a refund for netflix from fdev. I would take them to the supreme court and love to see Brabens pudgy straining face as he struggled to force himself to hand over my £30 only for me to pipe up & insist "nay, I demand my repayment in.. Euros.. whoahhahaa .. oh, you were joking Stealthie. You should apparently put a /s or a creepy wink emoji or some people would actually have a go at you for them being too 'challenged' to understand you were kidding.
 
What's the point of having a fleet carrier that can only move one ship around. But instead of you moving your one ship in 10 minutes, it will take you days with all the material gathering and could cost you credits.

Just to move one ship. I don't see the reasoning behind it and why anyone would want such a thing.

A personal base somewhere, yes I can see that, but a fleet carrier for one of your ships. What's the point.
Personally I would park 3 Ships there and just move it to the Thargoid attack places
 
Top Bottom