Please reconsider fleet carriers for solo players.

[CMDR Big Mike]

This is one I doubt. If FDev wanted us to be able to move our own personal fleets around all the other moveable megaships would have a shipyard and so would the Gnosis.

I think it is important to note that the Gnosis is a research vessel and not a dedicated carrier like the fleet carrier will be. I doubt they will function the same. Also by your argument the fleet carrier should have a market and economy, which I am assuming will not be the case.

They have different missions and will likely have different services available

 

[-VR- Max Factor]

I think it is important to note that the Gnosis is a research vessel and not a dedicated carrier like the fleet carrier will be. I doubt they will function the same. Also by your argument the fleet carrier should have a market and economy, which I am assuming will not be the case.

They have different missions and will likely have different services available

I am not talking just about the gnosis, but every moveable megaship. And also my arguement is that if FDev was okay with us moving out own personal fleets around, they would already allow it.

It's got nothing do with economy, markets and so on.

I also doubt that fleet carriers will act the same as moveable megaships, but I suspect there will be some similarities.

 

[IndigoWyrd]

I am not talking just about the gnosis, but every moveable megaship. And also my arguement is that if FDev was okay with us moving out own personal fleets around, they would already allow it.

It's got nothing do with economy, markets and so on.

I also doubt that fleet carriers will act the same as moveable megaships, but I suspect there will be some similarities.

MRCDM

Mostly Recycled Code, Different Model.

 

[Nadreck]

All the other moveable megaships are community assets, and we are invited aboard as the captain's guests.

That will not apply to squadron-owned Carriers. It should be entirely up to the squadron leader to decide how many ships each CMDR can bring onboard.

There is no in-game authority who can tell me not to put more ships on MY Carrier.

 

[[Diplomacy] Carnegie]

There is no in-game authority who can tell me not to put more ships on MY Carrier.

Right. Like there's no in-game authority who can tell you not to fit more than 4 AX weapons.

 

[Chaparral]

I expect that it's a high percentage, but that's because there's absolutely no reason NOT to create a squadron of 1, even if you never plan on inviting anyone else. That doesn't make it a good measure of who NEEDS a fleet carrier.

It would be like basing the usage of multicrew off the number of people with a Holo-Me.

That is not an accurate analogy. Holo-me is not a multicrew feature.

When you say high percentage, do you mean that most commanders belong to squadrons with more than 3 or less than 3?

I suggest less than 3 because, imo, this game has very soft multiplayer experiences relative to traditional AAA mmo's. A single visit to any hub in a major mmo is a shocking reminder of the multiplayer emptiness of even the most populated hubs like Shin where seeing 10 in the station instance, or sc instance is typically the max.

Squadrons are intended, by definition, as a multicrew feature. Specialized chat, rosters, roles, ranking etc. are multicrew elements. Fleet carriers are linked to squadrons, not individual accounts. However, these tools pale in comparison to those in Discord or AAA mmos. It is definitely guild lite in ED. If you're in a large squadron, my bet is you'll still manage it in Discord.

No one in a game needs anything. There are simply assets you can grind for. Intent of ownership is up to the individual player. You're not one of those guys that whinges about player X not deserving a conda are you? Why put an artificial yoke on a Fleet Carrier? You'll never be invited into the instance to see it, it probably won't show up on your system map as a button since you don't belong to the squad. It won't affect you at all other than missing out on schadenfreude for punishing people without friends in their squads. You're better than that right?

 

[[Diplomacy] Carnegie]

That is not an accurate analogy. Holo-me is not a multicrew feature.

When you say high percentage, do you mean that most commanders belong to squadrons with more than 3 or less than 3?

I suggest less than 3 because, imo, this game has very soft multiplayer experiences relative to traditional AAA mmo's. A single visit to any hub in a major mmo is a shocking reminder of the multiplayer emptiness of even the most populated hubs like Shin where seeing 10 in the station instance, or sc instance is typically the max.

Squadrons are intended, by definition, as a multicrew feature. Specialized chat, rosters, roles, ranking etc. are multicrew elements. Fleet carriers are linked to squadrons, not individual accounts. However, these tools pale in comparison to those in Discord or AAA mmos. It is definitely guild lite in ED. If you're in a large squadron, my bet is you'll still manage it in Discord.

No one in a game needs anything. There are simply assets you can grind for. Intent of ownership is up to the individual player. You're not one of those guys that whinges about player X not deserving a conda are you? Why put an artificial yoke on a Fleet Carrier? You'll never be invited into the instance to see it, it probably won't show up on your system map as a button since you don't belong to the squad. It won't affect you at all other than missing out on schadenfreude for punishing people without friends in their squads. You're better than that right?

Holo-Me was introduced alongside multicrew, to support the visible presence of other players in your cockpit, so in that respect it is a multicrew feature.

I think the vast majority of squadrons contain fewer than 5 members - but that's because there's no downside to forming a squadron of 1. It therefore doesn't mean that everyone who is in a squadron wants a fleet carrier - which was the point I was responding to.

Do I care who does or doesn't have a carrier? No, not particularly.

What I'm not a fan of, however, is the idea of a further dumbing down of exploration by allowing people to carry a portable Universal Cartographics contact around the galaxy with them. Risk in exploration has already been neutered by hull repair limpets and AFMU synthesis - adding the ability to cash in exploration data without returning to a fixed station would be, imho, a step too far.

 

[Vingtetun]

OK. A little open thinking on this.

1. Fleet carriers are available to every man jack with a spare void opal.

Benefits
Individual players get something to land on. Then spend weeks fuellinf up. Then move. Potentially have a little something to do with the bgs

Problems
1600 individual pilots move their megaships to, say, Sol.
A pilot jumps into Sol
Does it show 1600 megaships? How does that work on the instances?
Assuming that isn't the case. One option is to show your own one only.
Another option is to show your one and those of any factions connected to the bgs local factions
However. If instancing is such that YOUR instance is tied to a bubble containing YOUR megaship, then you would be excluding yourself from seeing the other 1600 commanders who each have their own?
Or would it create a capped instance whereby you are paired with 25 of the 1600?
Hurts my head to think about it.

So. A cap on the number in one system? Visibility limited? RNG as to which ones you can see?

On the basis that this is head hurty hard. Restrict it to squadrons. Maybe with more than 1 player. So... Likelihood of having 1 system with 100 megaships in for giggles is still quite high. Do you see 100 items in the contacts? Can you visit someone else's megaship?

Even with 100 it is still head hurty.

I can fully understand why it has taken longer to introduce them as there are some logistical nightmares related to fleet carriers.

If they are for individuals AND no one else can see them as your squadron has 1 person in it, what gameplay does it add that will satisfy the solo player? A time sink to refuel or upgrade? Also does the instancing in open become exploitable?

So. Alternative view. Is available to larger groups. Much salt ensues. However this I feel is a better approach.

Ship tied to squadron tied to faction. So, how does it interact with the local BGS when in a system the faction appears?

How does it interact with the BGS in a system where the faction does NOT appear?

How does it affect powers and superpowers in the area?

What happens to your bonds/bounties/explo data?

When jumping. What about people parked on it? Could they end up stranded? How about ship transfers? It jumps mid transfer. Does the ship being transferred take the same amount of time and same cost? Could this be usable to get cheap transfers to further locations? What is the jump range limit? If it is short the is likely less exploitable.

How do you select destination in terms of arrival location? Can you park one at Hutton or is it always near the nav beacon?

Do local security states affect things like the local mission board/passengers? Or economic states?

What about the commodity market. As the ship moves system to system, does the ship have an underlying economy type and just flogs endless things of the same variety regardless of local supply? Or is it fully dynamic based on what is sold/bought? Would a carrier actually manufacture anything or just buy and sell based on commander offloads/purchases?

Hurty head again.

 

[Konan]

Even though I am in a squadron, I would like to see every cmdr have the option of purchasing a carrier. That way my squadron could have multiple carriers ; one stationed in or near a local asteroid field, one near or in ( this would be awesome) a compromised nav beacon, one with a group of explorers out in the black...the possibilities are many in how useful it could be. If a cmdr wants to risk the struggle of owning one then who am I or you to deny them? Options are always good even if some them are harder than others. What one person deems as a grind another player may enjoy it as gameplay. I say let every cmdr have this option. As a matter of fact I will be sorely disappointed if they didn't let everyone buy one. I do hope that we are to buy fuel at stations and use it to refuel them. I've never tried to see how many fuel tanks I could fit in a ship. Hopefully we can convert some ships to tankers. Would finally make all that hydrogen fuel useful in every station I dock in. Right now it's a useless commodity imho. I also hope the carriers are modular in design. I will also be very disappointed if they are not. I also hope commodities can be stored in them......I'm probably setting myself up to be sorely disappointed but carriers need at least these basic ideas for me to purchase for my squadron. Just docking ships would be a complete waste of credits.

 

[Nadreck]

1. Fleet carriers are available to every man jack with a spare void opal.

Benefits
Individual players get something to land on. Then spend weeks fuellinf up. Then move. Potentially have a little something to do with the bgs

Rather odd that you've omitted the main benefit of a Carrier? The ability to carry more than one ship? The ability to swap ships where there is no station shipyard handy?

Problems
1600 individual pilots move their megaships to, say, Sol.
A pilot jumps into Sol
Does it show 1600 megaships? How does that work on the instances?

Just as it does now. Nothing new here, in crowded locations you only get instanced with a few of the ships present. So, no problem that hasn't already been solved.

So. Alternative view. Is available to larger groups. Much salt ensues. However this I feel is a better approach.

Ship tied to squadron tied to faction. So, how does it interact with the local BGS when in a system the faction appears?

How does it interact with the BGS in a system where the faction does NOT appear?

How does it affect powers and superpowers in the area?

What happens to your bonds/bounties/explo data?

When jumping. What about people parked on it? Could they end up stranded? How about ship transfers? It jumps mid transfer. Does the ship being transferred take the same amount of time and same cost? Could this be usable to get cheap transfers to further locations? What is the jump range limit? If it is short the is likely less exploitable.

How do you select destination in terms of arrival location? Can you park one at Hutton or is it always near the nav beacon?

Do local security states affect things like the local mission board/passengers? Or economic states?

What about the commodity market. As the ship moves system to system, does the ship have an underlying economy type and just flogs endless things of the same variety regardless of local supply? Or is it fully dynamic based on what is sold/bought? Would a carrier actually manufacture anything or just buy and sell based on commander offloads/purchases?

Hurty head again.

Issues that mostly won't be relevant to single-player Carriers. So maybe it wasn't a "better approach" after all. Why should a Carrier have a "mission board" etc?

 

[-VR- Max Factor]

Rather odd that you've omitted the main benefit of a Carrier? The ability to carry more than one ship? The ability to swap ships where there is no station shipyard handy?

You are assuming a commanders can have more then one ship on the carrier. These are called squadron fleet carriers. So they will carry whomever is on board, not their entire personal fleet is my guess.

 

[[Diplomacy] Carnegie]

You are assuming a commanders can have more then one ship on the carrier. These are called squadron fleet carriers. So they will carry whomever is on board, not their entire personal fleet is my guess.

I'm sure FDev will figure out how many ships they're going to allow each cmdr at some point in the next couple of months.

 

[Nadreck]

You are assuming a commanders can have more then one ship on the carrier. These are called squadron fleet carriers. So they will carry whomever is on board, not their entire personal fleet is my guess.

We seem to be going around in circles, this has been covered many times. It is an entirely reasonable assumption that CMDR's will be able to put more than one ship on the Carrier, this would be trivially easy to implement, FDev would have to be deliberately obnoxious to deny us this (and will be artificially gimping their new content), and even if they are indeed that obnoxious, those of us with multiple accounts could still do so (and console players can even create alts for free).

 

[Alien]

You are assuming a commanders can have more then one ship on the carrier. These are called squadron fleet carriers. So they will carry whomever is on board, not their entire personal fleet is my guess.

It's entirely possible that you won't have ship transfer to it, and thus only have the ship you are flying docked there. We simply don't have enough information at this time.

As for Vingtetun's sepculation about 1600 carriers in one system, I'm guessing it'll work much like the current matchmaking does, ie: if there's a reason you should be matched with it, you will, if not, you may not be. (Yes that was an over-simplification of how Elite Dangerous works. Please forgive my ignorance.)

 

[Chaparral]

Holo-Me was introduced alongside multicrew, to support the visible presence of other players in your cockpit, so in that respect it is a multicrew feature.

I think the vast majority of squadrons contain fewer than 5 members - but that's because there's no downside to forming a squadron of 1. It therefore doesn't mean that everyone who is in a squadron wants a fleet carrier - which was the point I was responding to.

Do I care who does or doesn't have a carrier? No, not particularly.

What I'm not a fan of, however, is the idea of a further dumbing down of exploration by allowing people to carry a portable Universal Cartographics contact around the galaxy with them. Risk in exploration has already been neutered by hull repair limpets and AFMU synthesis - adding the ability to cash in exploration data without returning to a fixed station would be, imho, a step too far.

I totally agree that carrying about credit turn in hubs on carriers seems a bit odd. Repair, rearm, outfitting, even remote engineering I might be ok with. But carrying about your own bgs influencing mission carrier - not such a good idea.

I honestly don't know how FDEV will manage base building if the bases have missions other than self-construction tasks - since single players aren't assigned to a mf or pmf. They can't really get BGS influencing missions at personal bases imo.

 

[CMDR Karrde Sun]

What I'm not a fan of, however, is the idea of a further dumbing down of exploration by allowing people to carry a portable Universal Cartographics contact around the galaxy with them. Risk in exploration has already been neutered by hull repair limpets and AFMU synthesis - adding the ability to cash in exploration data without returning to a fixed station would be, imho, a step too far.

I wouldn't say it would be dumbing down, it would be fair to earn the privilege. It would mean a lot more if it took a day to two (relative to possibility) to move the thing. It would give meaning to where you go, what you do when you arrive, the whole context.

I probably should stop talking now, because there's a fine line between giving everything for free to new players vs meaningful gameplay vs punitive gameplay and frontier on my scorecard haven't been doing well every time they've tried to balance systems in the last few years.

 

[IndigoWyrd]

[...] adding the ability to cash in exploration data without returning to a fixed station would be, imho, a step too far.

We are in agreement here.

 

[-VR- Max Factor]

We seem to be going around in circles, this has been covered many times. It is an entirely reasonable assumption that CMDR's will be able to put more than one ship on the Carrier, this would be trivially easy to implement, FDev would have to be deliberately obnoxious to deny us this (and will be artificially gimping their new content), and even if they are indeed that obnoxious, those of us with multiple accounts could still do so (and console players can even create alts for free).

I never said it wouldn't be easy. That's not the point. If FDev wanted us to move our entire fleets around, then the Gnosis would have a shipyard and so would the other moveable megaships have one, but they don't. It would be a big shift in their own policy. I'm not so sure that is going to happen. So no I don't think it's a reasonable assumption and no it wouldn't be obnoxious.

These things are called squadron fleet carriers, not personal fleet carriers for a reason. While I doubt that there will be ship storage, I won't rule it out, so if there is I would prefer it to be seriously limited to say 2 or 3 ships including the one you are in.

Otherwise it will be instant ship transfer all over again.

 

[dxm55]

FDev wanted us to move our entire fleets around, then the Gnosis would have a shipyard and so would the other moveable megaships have one, but they don't.

I laughed when I read this.

But I guess it's true. A Fleet carrier should NOT have a shipyard because all the other megaships don''t.
Hence, it would fall in line with the rest of the universe.

But that also means that it becomes truly a SQUADRON fleet carrier, for squadron members to park their current ship in. And not transfer the rest in.
This means that it would effectively be useless for single players.

Yes yes.
Make it so.

 

[Factabulous]

What I'm not a fan of, however, is the idea of a further dumbing down of exploration by allowing people to carry a portable Universal Cartographics contact around the galaxy with them. Risk in exploration has already been neutered by hull repair limpets and AFMU synthesis - adding the ability to cash in exploration data without returning to a fixed station would be, imho, a step too far.

I'd get used to it The Gnosis has UC - on a recent expedition to otherwise unreachable systems you could just hand in once she jumped, very handy. FC based exploration is going to be an interesting change, I'm sure fdev are excited to see what we do with it