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

But you are assuming these fleet carriers can be piloted by a single Commander just like any other ship.
Actually, no I am not. If I am making any assumptions, it is that they will NOT be pilotable at all and essentially can be considered a player controlled version of Jacques (effectively a station that can do a point-to-point/system-to-system jump). The cost of jumps may make it unfeasible for an individual to do them on a regular basis but that is besides the point.

As I have already pointed out even solo or small groups of explorers would have use for refuel/rearm/repair facilities away from known space. There are currently a few limits to in-the-field repairs and rearming that would make a mobile station like facility an ideal solution.
 
Last edited:
I disagree - as I have explained there are some repair and resupply issues that can only be done (currently) while docked somewhere which means an individual who wants to explore outside the bubbles for protracted periods would be able to do so almost indefinitely (cash allowing presumably - repairs/rearms are unlikely to be free).

If you use the "not needed" argument against solo players, then the same could be used against groups too. Ultimately, there is no difference if we are talking about a single individual or 100 people - the same argument could be legitimately used.

The natural limitation of the carriers in the exploration context would be that any exploration data or cargo gathered would notionally not be either stored or turned-in there. As a respawn point, that could save an individual ALOT of time if they are exploring a remote region for example.

Maybe fleet carrier classes should be a thing,covering single player small group and large group requirements.
Surly the grind for a single player to attain what a large group could achieve rules out the single player element.
 
FWIW, my only real interest in Fleet Carriers is the possibility that I could move one way out into the middle of nowhere, either somewhere near Beagle Point or, perhaps, deep into the "Delta Quadrant", park it and then leave it there so anybody could join my "Squadron" in order to make use of it.

If anybody's interested in forming an "exploration squadron" for that purpose, gimme a call when Squadrons goes live. :p
 
Maybe fleet carrier classes should be a thing,covering single player small group and large group requirements.
Surly the grind for a single player to attain what a large group could achieve rules out the single player element.
The smaller group could still achieve what a larger group could given time and patience - a larger group may be able to do something quicker but it does not make the same thing impossible for a smaller group necessarily.

I think such things should also not be visible outside of the instances where the owning squadron members are present.
 
I disagree - as I have explained there are some repair and resupply issues that can only be done (currently) while docked somewhere which means an individual who wants to explore outside the bubbles for protracted periods would be able to do so almost indefinitely (cash allowing presumably - repairs/rearms are unlikely to be free).

If you use the "not needed" argument against solo players, then the same could be used against groups too. Ultimately, there is no difference if we are talking about a single individual or 100 people - the same argument could be legitimately used.

The natural limitation of the carriers in the exploration context would be that any exploration data or cargo gathered would notionally not be either stored or turned-in there. As a respawn point, that could save an individual ALOT of time if they are exploring a remote region for example.

You are missing the point. These fleet carriers need stuff to make jumps. It could take a single commander weeks to get enough materials to do a jump and if that jump has a limit of 1000ly what will be the point (I have to assume that these ships will have a range limit). Probably faster finding the nearest asteroid base or jumping back to the bubble for repairs. I would also have to assume that things like repair,refuel and restock would also need stuff to keep working. So all you would be doing during your weeks of exploration is stocking up your ship with stuff for weeks on end, just to make a jump you can do in 20 odd minutes without the Fleet carrier.

I just cannot see the point in having one as a lone commander.
 
You are missing the point. These fleet carriers need stuff to make jumps. It could take a single commander weeks to get enough materials to do a jump and if that jump has a limit of 1000ly what will be the point (I have to assume that these ships will have a range limit). Probably faster finding the nearest asteroid base or jumping back to the bubble for repairs. I would also have to assume that things like repair,refuel and restock would also need stuff to keep working. So all you would be doing during your weeks of exploration is stocking up your ship with stuff for weeks on end, just to make a jump you can do in 20 odd minutes without the Fleet carrier.

I just cannot see the point in having one as a lone commander.
I think it is you who is missing the point... What does it matter how long it takes a given player to do something if they are willing to do it? Just because at least some in these forums are addicted to instant-gratification and/or lack any patience does not mean everyone does.
 
I think it is you who is missing the point... What does it matter how long it takes a given player to do something if they are willing to do it? Just because at least some in these forums are addicted to instant-gratification and/or lack any patience does not mean everyone does.
Because the reality of that doesn't sound like something you'd want to put in your game as a developer.
The scenario of some random player deciding to set up a fleet carrier,unaware of the mammoth task ahead of them and the ensuing meltdown when they realise they just spent three months to get a fraction of the resources.
It's just not a nice thing to do to your player base.
 
So...it'll encourage people to come and work together for each other's benefit?

I'm sorry, is that supposed to be a bad thing?

Of course people will go back to doing whatever they want to after accomplishing a goal, why is that somehow unexpected or a bad thing?

Not a bad thing at all, its more re-iterating that all this hand wringing and woe is me about Solo players missing out on Fleet Carriers so far is just hot air. If a player wants to have one, they will work out how to do it and still play in solo.

Personally, I like the idea that it promotes multiplayer and players joining up and doing things together, but that is how I play my game, I don't want or feel entitled to force how I play on anybody else...
 
For many, carriers are one of the highlights of the year so again care needs to be taken in their implementation. However right off the bat carriers have a few problems

The need to offer more than a space station, otherwise there is no point to them being there. As a mobile carrier of a players ships they also have pitfalls.

The biggest enemy of the carrier isn't if they can be brought by a single player it's discord.

What is the point in having a whole load of players running around, collecting grind-o-nium when all that needs to happen is someone to post up a message saying "Hey lets' all do the CG tonight" in discord. Basically, carriers are a game feature looking for a point.


What happens if a player wants to go to one place, another somewhere else and the leader somewhere totally different. The benefit to the individual squadron member is therefore limited and they would be better off using a station for their fleet and travelling to wherever the squadron wants to go.

Carrier pricing and acquisition.

Elite currently has a money problem, many, many players have more than they know what to do with and this contributes to a feeling of general dissatisfaction

There has been much debate over should carriers be able to be purchased by individuals not.

I am going to come down on the “yes they should” side for the following reasons
• It gives wealthy players something to save for and use the billions they have laying around. In short it gives an aspirational goal and reduces the effects of too many liquid assets

• If you set a minimum player number to acquire one, then all that will happen is a bunch of friends will join the squadron, the leader then buys the carrier and their friends then leave. In short it makes any numeric restriction pointless

• If you are starting a new clan, you are competing for members with every other clan in the game. If they have a carrier and you do not then it is making a hard job even harder. Simply speaking it puts new squadrons at a huge disadvantage.

• If you limit their use to only the largest clan, or even only existing player groups in game it has the potential to lock players out of content, so rather than be a tool for inclusion, they become a mechanism for exclusion.

Pricing

Carriers should be expensive but also attainable, So I would suggest a fairly cheap basic price (say 2bn for a basic carrier) but it is able to be upgraded by modules and add ons.

This would allow even the smallest squadron to have carrier, and then give the squadron a corporate goal of extra modules to work for over time(just like for example we start in a sidewinder and work towards other ships from there).

Having a set total cost of say 20bn all in puts a carrier out of reach for the many and provides little incentive to carry on improving it. Much better to start at a basic level and allow squadrons to expand and grow into it.

Sort of like how you can buy a basic Anaconda for 120 ish Million but spend many times that on upgrades

Destructibility of carriers

Carrier should not be able to be destroyed by player action, or indeed damaged.

Otherwise this becomes a griefiers paradise, with squadrons being bled dry of funds due to constant damaging, destruction or inconvenienced by making them flee.

Regardless of size of squadron it is impossible to defend anything 24X7X365. This is especially true if the carrier is able to be encountered in open or in private group.

Simply use a private group where there are no squadron members in and it’s open season on the target carrier.
It has also been shown that regardless of a ships defences a concentrated effort by a few players will always defeat the NPC

There are of course some down sides to indestructible carriers and that is their potential impact on the BGS and of cluttering the navigation/contacts panel up.

While having an “enemy base” in system is indeed a factor to consider, it should also be remembered that camping a system a jump away or staying in solo/PG will have a greater effect and that currently blockading a system is impossible. So the reality is, is that because of these other factors an enemy carrier in system is unlikely to be the deciding factor.
 
Makes no sense to me.

Establishing an arbitrary squadron requirement is IMO pretty pointless. After all, it's a FLEET carrier. I have a fleet of ships, and the idea of being able to have them all in one place, with the added ability to move them all at once is very appealing.

Of course a carrier shouldn't be 'runnable' by one person - that's why you'd hire 4+ NPC crew to run it for you - you're still paying a wage (moneysink), and you can't just get one on a whim - I would suggest you need to be top rank in either superpower to be able to earn one somehow.

But to limit it to those with sufficient 'members' is basically akin to a 'guild hall' in other MMORPG games. And Elite is supposed to be primarily a solo experience (I'm not going to try and argue this point again, it's my opinion and the way the game was initially designed), so limiting such desirable features to groups (clans/guilds) is just going to make the whole 'elitism' that already exists in the game to be more prominent.
 
Because the reality of that doesn't sound like something you'd want to put in your game as a developer.
The scenario of some random player deciding to set up a fleet carrier,unaware of the mammoth task ahead of them and the ensuing meltdown when they realise they just spent three months to get a fraction of the resources.
It's just not a nice thing to do to your player base.
I think you underestimate the intelligence of individuals in general. A lot will depend on the precise numbers but the kind of level of resources you are indicating there would be idiotic to impose on anything but a massive group and if FD go down that route they may as well not introduce Fleet Carriers at all.

For me personally, Fleet Carriers are not a deal breaker but I think it is the right way to implement any form of relocatable player controlled facility/base which is what a lot of players have been asking for.

But to limit it to those with sufficient 'members' is basically akin to a 'guild hall' in other MMORPG games.
Not all MMORPGs - GW1 did not impose such a requirement for example.
 
For me as a lone wolf it would be something to call "home" or "mine". A place where i keep my ships/modules and do the occasional jump to a new location to do stuff there. Where's the problem with that?

Edit: Oh and all this multiplayer talk makes me cringe. Elite is not a multiplayer game. It has some features to play together with others. But you cant really work together with others or trade modules, materials or money.
You cant compare Elite to any other multiplayer (MMO) game because Elite lacks the core features of those games.
 
Not all MMORPGs - GW1 did not impose such a requirement for example.

Oh, I did not know this... never played it. Must be an exception to the rule though, although in all fairness, virtually all MMORPG's with guild halls also had player housing, so it wasn't really an issue.

So that brings up a point I saw earlier in the thread. Make smaller carriers available for solo players, with maybe less ship hangers and slightly lower spec. I don't NEED to have a huge Megaship sized carrier, but I would like one with similar functionality suitable for the solo player.
 
In Dungeon & Dragons Online you can have a Guild of ONE with the biggest Guild-ship if ya want to pay for it with real world money ! (p.s. i DID got sick of join my guild requests)
or
smallest Guild-ship then rank up guild by doing quests/recruiting more members to get better Guild-ships


So i can not see why they should be locked behind Faction/Group member numbers in ED the only difference between solo & not Solo should be individual workload to supply the ship Mats to perform jump / ship servicing
 
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.

If you don't have enough time to play with a group you don't have time for a carrier.
 
Not a bad thing at all, its more re-iterating that all this hand wringing and woe is me about Solo players missing out on Fleet Carriers so far is just hot air. If a player wants to have one, they will work out how to do it and still play in solo.

Personally, I like the idea that it promotes multiplayer and players joining up and doing things together, but that is how I play my game, I don't want or feel entitled to force how I play on anybody else...

They are missing out on it by their choice though. If they want to partake in it they can if they want to. It isn't that big a deal to join a group.
 
So i can not see why they should be locked behind Faction/Group member numbers in ED the only difference between solo & not Solo should be individual workload to supply the ship Mats to perform jump / ship servicing
In theory yes, in practice you know what will happen

"My new Carrier requires 100,000t of Hydrogen Fuel to make a jump. Thats IMPOSSIBLE for a single player, REDUCE THE JUMP REQUIREMENTS so its fair to me"

Its Group Play mechanics. If it is suitable for Single Player to acheive, its NOT Group Play mechanics
 
In theory yes, in practice you know what will happen

"My new Carrier requires 100,000t of Hydrogen Fuel to make a jump. Thats IMPOSSIBLE for a single player, REDUCE THE JUMP REQUIREMENTS so its fair to me"

Its Group Play mechanics. If it is suitable for Single Player to acheive, its NOT Group Play mechanics

And rightfully so. 100k would be ridiculous.
 
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.

Might it not be wiser to see what gameplay mechanics they offer first of all, and what's the cost is of running such a vessel, before complaining there's a problem with it given your circumstances?

While I sort of agree it might be nice to allow even a single CMDR to own such a vessel, it might be that the mechancs then open up means this isn't possible/wise.

So let's see...
 
Make smaller carriers available for solo players, with maybe less ship hangers and slightly lower spec. I don't NEED to have a huge Megaship sized carrier, but I would like one with similar functionality suitable for the solo player.
I don't think anyone could really oppose this, and I do not believe anyone has... are we likely to get this though? Probably not.

The Carriers are supposed to be upgradable so the number of hangars could be part of those upgrades.
 
Top Bottom