General Reducing the price of maintaining an aircraft carrier.

[SergMx]

When I go in on Thursday I see a notification that the payment for the aircraft carrier has been withdrawn.
I suggest you do it as a billing statement. Going in on Thursday I pay this invoice in time and I am charged only 50% of the payment (all this is automatic, going into the game is a command to pay).
If I log in once every 2 weeks, the amount of payment will be 100%. But if I come in a period of more than 3 weeks, the penalty for late payment will be charged and the total amount of payment will be 150%.
Going to the game once a month I will be forced to pay 200%.

 

[Dragsham]

?

I don't understand this post at all.
But I've had torgnys revenge since day 1.
She's modded out with most services.
Costs me about 30 million a week.
If I suspend services if I don't login for a long period it drops to about 9 million a week.
It all depends on how you use the carrier and what services you install.
Remember we RENT the Carrier we don't own it

 

[SergMx]

?

I don't understand this post at all.
But I've had torgnys revenge since day 1.
She's modded out with most services.
Costs me about 30 million a week.
If I suspend services if I don't login for a long period it drops to about 9 million a week.
It all depends on how you use the carrier and what services you install.
Remember we RENT the Carrier we don't own it

Discussing PP2 on the forum, the question arose as to how many active PMFs there are at the moment. I thought, and how do I know if all that pile of aircraft carriers around me and prevents me from putting my aircraft carrier in the system, really exists.
Maybe these carriers are long abandoned and just waiting for time when they run out of money on the balance ? Maybe we need to help them with that ? And at the same time encourage people who regularly play the game.

 

[Dragsham]

As for fleet carriers abandoned, if the carrier has it's services suspended and 20 billion balance that's alot of years real time rent paid

 

[SergMx]

As for fleet carriers abandoned, if the carrier has it's services suspended and 20 billion balance that's alot of years real time rent paid

Why is it necessary if a person won't play anymore? To prevent other players from putting their aircraft carrier in this system ?
Maybe to help them do it so that the 20 milliard will run out much faster ?

 

[Dragsham]

Find an anarchy system nearby. This has one big advantage. No police/feds. Camp there. That's what l do. Then if I'm "wanted" l can land on my carrier without the police shooting me

 

[GroG79]

If the idea is to generate more player trafic... Then this is a good idea. I suppose it is a bit nasty and most of the community will not like it

(Putting 20 billion or whatever many years in your carrier and stripping services is very sad... Oh well, each there own. First come first served)

 

[GroG79]

Why is it necessary if a person won't play anymore? To prevent other players from putting their aircraft carrier in this system ?
Maybe to help them do it so that the 20 milliard will run out much faster ?

Problem is that they need to log on to determine the 'not logged in' penalty

 

[SergMx]

Problem is that they need to log on to determine the 'not logged in' penalty

That's not the problem. Withdrawal as now is automatic, i.e. simply calculate the amount of money on the balance of the carrier and the current payment for the carrier together with the fine and if it does not cover all the costs, the aircraft carrier is scrapped.
I don't remember exactly how this mechanism is now, I think a warning letter is sent ...
The main idea of the idea that if you do not play the amount of payment grows exponentially, and not wait until the expiration of these 22 billion. There's too much garbage in the universe.

 

[aRJay]

That's not the problem. Withdrawal as now is automatic, i.e. simply calculate the amount of money on the balance of the carrier and the current payment for the carrier together with the fine and if it does not cover all the costs, the aircraft carrier is scrapped.
I don't remember exactly how this mechanism is now, I think a warning letter is sent ...
The main idea of the idea that if you do not play the amount of payment grows exponentially, and not wait until the expiration of these 22 billion. There's too much garbage in the universe.

Oh! Now I get it.

This seems to be fairly reasonable on the whole for abandoned FCs but some players are afflicted with Real Life issues so might not be able to play regularly. So I suggest some modifications.

• Get rid of the prompt ”payment” discount instead perhaps an extension for regulars before the penalties kick in.
• Penalties don’t start until after four weeks or more if you have earned extensions.
• Increasing the penalty with time shouldn’t be exponential that accelerates too fast.

 

[Factabulous]

Going to the game once a month I will be forced to pay 200%.

Thread title needs updating - this in called 'increasing' in English.

 

[SergMx]

Thread title needs updating - this in called 'increasing' in English.

There's no mistake about it, it's the downgrade for regular players.

 

[Greasetrap42]

The main idea of the idea that if you do not play the amount of payment grows exponentially, and not wait until the expiration of these 22 billion. There's too much garbage in the universe.

Players come-and-go between other games and life responsibilities. Taking a multi-month (or year) break from a game is normal. I don't have access to the stats, but I find it highly unlikely that +50% of the FC owning player base logged in March 2024. Forcing players to login weekly or monthly "or-else" is an excellent way to discourage players from returning. Or even wanting to play the game at all.

An automatic monthly payment... okay. Some don't like it, but its not too big deal and it was part of the FC arrangement upon purchase. Changing it to an exponentially growing payment designed to wipe out someone's 22 billion account... nope... that is not reasonable.

 

[Fixitman]

Most of the weekly payment is probably going to crew payroll. There's a big difference between billing and paying the crew on time.

Insufficient crew pay = abandoned carrier = decommission time.

 

[Greasetrap42]

If FDev didn't want players banking enough credits for +10 years of FC maintenance then they should have put a cap on the bank. But they didn't.

FDev knew many players had billions. They made it really easy to accumulate billions. There isn't anything to spend billions on. So obviously players have +10 years maint covered. Don't blame the players. And certainly don't penalize players for simply playing the game. Edit: Or choosing to come back after taking a break from the game. Who wants to come back to a game to find their stuff wiped out?

 

[Ameeleean2]

When I go in on Thursday I see a notification that the payment for the aircraft carrier has been withdrawn.
I suggest you do it as a billing statement. Going in on Thursday I pay this invoice in time and I am charged only 50% of the payment (all this is automatic, going into the game is a command to pay).
If I log in once every 2 weeks, the amount of payment will be 100%. But if I come in a period of more than 3 weeks, the penalty for late payment will be charged and the total amount of payment will be 150%.
Going to the game once a month I will be forced to pay 200%.

I think system works fine as it is now. I'm also against increased payment when You do not click Pay button in time as You have proposed. Reason is simple. There are many carriers parked far away from bubble and colonia, stocked up with enough creds to keep them there for several years. Sometimes I go far away to do some exploring and those carriers are real life savers sometimes (damaged hull without repair limpets for example).
I think You are more concerned about FCs in bubble but I can think of different solution for that. Imagine turning off/on transponder module (which would make it vanish from system map when in off mode) or cloaking module which when active will make carrier invisible for other players and also capable of jumping into system which require permit (as long as carrier owner has it).

 

[SlickPBW]

Thread title needs updating - this in called 'increasing' in English.

lol

 

[SergMx]

If FDev didn't want players banking enough credits for +10 years of FC maintenance then they should have put a cap on the bank. But they didn't.

FDev knew many players had billions. They made it really easy to accumulate billions. There isn't anything to spend billions on. So obviously players have +10 years maint covered. Don't blame the players. And certainly don't penalize players for simply playing the game. Edit: Or choosing to come back after taking a break from the game. Who wants to come back to a game to find their stuff wiped out?

The main reason for my proposal is that these aircraft carriers of people who have not played the game for a long time (not that they will return), interfere with me playing.
I don't know about you, but if I park my car in a crowded place, it will eventually be towed away.

Here above wrote that the game is not so difficult to earn credits, please, calculate the formula for how much you really need money (in place of 22 billion 200 milliard) earn and you can return to the game in 10 years. No restrictions !

 

[hurikhan77]

Oh! Now I get it.

This seems to be fairly reasonable on the whole for abandoned FCs but some players are afflicted with Real Life issues so might not be able to play regularly. So I suggest some modifications.

• Get rid of the prompt ”payment” discount instead perhaps an extension for regulars before the penalties kick in.
• Penalties don’t start until after four weeks or more if you have earned extensions.
• Increasing the penalty with time shouldn’t be exponential that accelerates too fast.

How about an increasing "parking fee"? If you don't move your carrier, add an amount X to the weekly costs... It should not kick in too early because carriers may be placed for operations in a system for - maybe - a month. Or maybe maybe create a weekly fee for each extra carrier per orbit. Or both.

In any case: It should not grow exponentially: That gets out of control very fast. I'd suggest it rather flattens out over time, so maybe your costs for long-time parking flat out at a maximum of 500% or something like that. So if you can effort it, you can let it sit there.

We should also take into account that there's a network of players who park carriers across the galaxy as a support network. Why should they get exponential penalties?

So maybe a combination of "carriers in orbit" and "parking time" could be used: If there's just one carrier in orbit, nothing happens. If a systems becomes crowded, weekly fees would increase for everyone in that system, by time and amount of carriers, up to some maximum.

 

[SergMx]

We should also take into account that there's a network of players who park carriers across the galaxy as a support network. Why should they get exponential penalties?

I'm aware of this, which is why the thread title sounds like a way to increase support by 2x. It's not that simple with these players, there are many of them and they have to support their carriers regularly, I don't know who coordinates them and there is a possibility that at one point we will lose a large number of these bases.