Remove UPKEEP, but make carriers destructible

[Just Paul]

I'm not sure, but I think if a carrier was full of T9s filled with cargo, they would all have to belong to different players. (In a normal Shipyard you can only get one shipload of cargo in, no matter how many ships you have there). Will it be much quicker for the carrier to jump to a system and all those T9s to unload, than it would have been for all the T9s to fly there straight?

Alternatively, if the carrier is full of cargo itself, will loading it, jumping it and unloading it be much quicker than the same number of T9s just trucking?

I think the carrier ways might actually take just as long, in which case there's no net effect on the BGS.

The problem is you can set your own price on the carrier. So you could sell something to yourself for an inflated price and then sell it to a station at a loss, resulting in neg inf for the controlling faction. If you do it right you yourself only have a small loss or even a profit if you get cargo from out of system.
Same for pos trade inf. Buy stuff, sell it to your carrier, set buy price low, buy it again from your carrier, and then sell it to the station at a big profit.
Instead of 10 trade runs you just need 2 from your carrier and as you filled it up with cargo you just need to run between your carrier and the station the following days until it's time to fill up again. It's even more viable now with the shorter jump times.

The station only uses the buy from carrier/sell to station difference to calculate the inf gains/loss for the bgs.

The hydrogen bomb: jump your carrier close to station, buy hydrogen or any other commodity from station, sell it to carrier, buy it from carrier at max price, sell it back to station for "big loss" = tank inf for controlling faction.

 

[gorankar]

I'm not sure, but I think if a carrier was full of T9s filled with cargo, they would all have to belong to different players. (In a normal Shipyard you can only get one shipload of cargo in, no matter how many ships you have there). Will it be much quicker for the carrier to jump to a system and all those T9s to unload, than it would have been for all the T9s to fly there straight?

Alternatively, if the carrier is full of cargo itself, will loading it, jumping it and unloading it be much quicker than the same number of T9s just trucking?

I think the carrier ways might actually take just as long, in which case there's no net effect on the BGS.

The bomb effect is when a group uses one. Yeah, you would still need a group to flip a station then system, but the FC makes it easier. FC is loaded with as many of the groups haulers as they can fit, the cargo bay is full. The FC gets set to squad or friends only and the owner changes the sell price to depending on the effect they are going for, and then they start their mass cargo bombing from a few Ls away from the targeted station. It would be a lot more efficient than even two or one hop trades routes that make a profit. Not saying it can't be fought off without a group having their own stocked up FC on standby, but not having one would give the attacking group an advantage and an early head start. Removing cargo carrying from affecting the BGS is one fix, but, I don't kknow how that would really work.

The problem with this is that big groups can now overrun smaller groups easily. Scanning does nothing unless you could prevent the carrier to offload it's cargo. What it's hauling doesn't really matter for selling at a loss. I can bet smaller groups are already thinking on ways how to counter multiple carriers dumping cargo in their system. That mechanic needs a good overhaul to not leave a big mess.

If the carriers are not destructible make them at least retreatable.

I could go with having a mechanic for forcing one out of the system.

 

[Brrokk]

The problem is you can set your own price on the carrier. So you could sell something to yourself for an inflated price and then sell it to a station at a loss, resulting in neg inf for the controlling faction. If you do it right you yourself only have a small loss or even a profit if you get cargo from out of system.
Same for pos trade inf. Buy stuff, sell it to your carrier, set buy price low, buy it again from your carrier, and then sell it to the station at a big profit.
Instead of 10 trade runs you just need 2 from your carrier and as you filled it up with cargo you just need to run between your carrier and the station the following days until it's time to fill up again. It's even more viable now with the shorter jump times.

The station only uses the buy from carrier/sell to station difference to calculate the inf gains/loss for the bgs.

The hydrogen bomb: jump your carrier close to station, buy hydrogen or any other commodity from station, sell it to carrier, buy it from carrier at max price, sell it back to station for "big loss" = tank inf for controlling faction.

Yikes.

 

[gorankar]

Yeah, this whole thing about FC not being able to influence the BGS is, well, I am just not seeing it. Fdev will have to show us how they intend to reduce or eliminate a FC's ability to affect the BGS. Otherwise, a mechanic to drive ships from the system will be needed. I suppose they can send waves of ATR to attack non allied ships taking off or approaching a FC giving the controlling faction grief. PvP ships would have no issue dealing with that, and would prolly enjoy it, but cargo ships would, even gank resistant ones, but a handful of Ls in SC would make interdiction difficult. I think it's going to be more than just a bit of a mess at first.

Imma gonna go buy stock in Oville Redenbacher, cuz the popcorn usage is gonna be off da charts.

 

[Jmanis]

Biggest problem is you'd have defenders of an fc on one instance, attackers in another, and ssuddenly the defenders see the FC pop without a shot being fired.

Never going to happen.

 

[Madrax573]

Since its being end game content, and Frontier really wants it to mean something, let it really mean something then.

Remove upkeep, make them 1 billion a peace, keep the guns, but remove the not-destructible flag.
Let pilots clean up the 'sleeping' carriers.

Anyone game?

OH HELL YEAH!!!

I can hear the crying all ready

 

[CoyoteXStarrk]

Biggest problem is you'd have defenders of an fc on one instance, attackers in another, and ssuddenly the defenders see the FC pop without a shot being fired.

Never going to happen.

No the biggest problem would be the roving gangs of griefers and trolls that would inevitably arise for no other reason than to ruin the fun of other players. And they would go from Fleet carrier to fleet carrier raising hell. Or even just camp a single fleet carrier which would prevent the owner from actually being able to go out and make the money to afford his upkeep because he would be too busy defending his fleet carrier from trolls. Making Fleet carriers destructible would just exacerbate the problem the game already has with griefers.



And that's not even mentioning the fact that solo players would have no idea that their Fleet Carrier would be under attack because they would be an instance all by themselves meanwhile in another instance their Fleet Carrier is under attack.

 

[SpongeJim]

This is actually a reasonable suggestion if not for the fact that FDev decided:

1. To make FC's individually owned
2. Forced it to be multi-mode and always on.

Now for all the immediate naysayers and haters, take a deeeeep breath, and use your imagination... I know you have to be good at it because you play Elite Dangerous...

Ok, now imagine FC's are squadron-only. Now imagine FC's are only allowed in Open. Wait, wait, before you start screaming - their stated purpose (and one of the core reasons they're forced to be multi-mode and always-on) is because they want people to be forced to interact with other players. This is actually the best way, and you know I'm right - Open is where interaction is meant to be. Now we're getting somewhere! Now, imagine these things are destructible. Highly self-defended, but destructible. Now, imagine the REAL LIFE FACTION BATTLES that emerge... real life players plotting... infiltrating... facing off in pre-determined, winner-take all battles. Now THIS is what MULTIPLAYER is supposed to be.

If you still think you HAVE TO be able to play with a carrier in non-Open, fine - offer a different type of Fleet Carrier that cannot be destroyed BUT... cannot compete with the BGS and cannot be used in Open. I have no problem with that, go nuts on your private Fleet Carrier that nobody else needs to care about or ever see.

Now, I know the white knights will come in screaming "go play EVE online if that's the game you want!" All I'll say to that is, there's a reason this and this and this are worldwide news, considered seminal moments in video game history... and the Salome event is at best footnote for a minority of Elite players, at worst a sad joke and indictment of the idea of this game being "multiplayer" at all.

It's a shame E: D will never produce the former, because it could if FDev (and the players) had any courage to explore it.

 

[Morbad]

Remove fleet carriers and make upkeep destructible.

 

[SpongeJim]

Remove fleet carriers and make upkeep grind destructible.

FTFY

 

[Chaparral]

I have a compromise.

Once a fleet carrier has gone into receivership, other players can salvage the modules off of it for profit.

The ship remains as a derelict, and stays in the game.

The owning player can sell it off on another player's Fleet Carrier to other players, the proceeds first paying off debt, or it goes on an auction block to other players.

 

[gorankar]

I can not see a reasonable way to make FC unable to influence the BGS. Cargo movement is cargo movement. It's even worse because the FC owner can control the purchase price in their own market to insure their group is always selling at a price that buffs or damages the stations controlling faction.
I am not at all interested in making them destructible, I doubt Fdev is either. However, a method to force them from a system must exist across all platforms and modes, and some balanced method to prevent them from being driven from a system across all platforms and modes needs to exist. I think this is going to be a tall order. I think this is going to end in salt. As if that was ever a doubt.

 

[SpongeJim]

The ship remains as a derelict, and stays in the game.

The owning player can sell it off on another player's Fleet Carrier to other players, the proceeds first paying off debt, or it goes on an auction block to other players.

I actually like this idea, but coupled with my own above.

Imagine, some epic battle happened in the game... and there is a relic there as a monument. Or, if FDev says they really just can't have derelicts floating around - make it a tourist beacon. Oooo imagine player created/driven tourist beacons based on memorable emergent events? Jeezus E: D starts to sound like fun!

 

[Cmdr Eratosthenes]

Lol best of luck with that in your Mamba...

 

[Sylow]

And FC kill squads would have heal beams, LR engineering keeping them for ever even getting fired on the the FC itself, and humans which have proven adept at easily dealing with the simplistic AI of this game.

Long range and healing beams? In my eyes, that'd not even be necessary. If FCs would be destructible, even a mediocre pilot like me could take them down easily. With what I already learned in Wing Commander, decades ago. And it would even be easier here than in that game.

For the few not knowing how we destroyed capital ships in Wing Commander: you boosted behind the ship, through it's defensive fire. Placed yourself right behind that ship, where its turrets had a blind spot, stayed there and kept firing till it blew up. Now looking at the details:

• FCs won't shoot at you, unless you already attacked it. So if you are not an complete moron and already shoot from a distance, you can just easily fly there and get into position.
• In Wing Commander the things were sprites and in effect a box. Fleet Carriers actually have geometry.
• In Wing Commander you had to -guess- how the ship moved, due to the low quality of the sprites. In ED you can easily see how it moves. But you don't even need to, because:
• Fleet Carriers in ED actually have geometry. With spots where you can squeeze in and stay and no turret ever can reach you.
• Additionally, some of these spots even provide good cover from other ships.

So really, all it would take to destroy a fleet carrier is to go to solo, leisurely fly around it, park in one of the blind spots, which also provides plenty of cover from any potential escort and keep firing till it blows up. And there's really only a few "cures" for that:

• Invisible walls around big parts of the ship, so you can't exploit its geometry. Would be funny at least.
• Turrets placed inside all those spots. We'd win a reward for the spaceship with the most ridiculous turret mounts, for sure.
• Carriers shooting at every commander but the owner. That kind of defeats the whole "can be placed for business" idea, though.
• Carriers have a "blacklist" of people to shoot at. Think about it for a moment, what a can of worms that is. Enjoy.
• The carrier having so strong shield and/or hull regeneration that you can't destroy it that way. But then, that's just another flavor of indestructible, not worth the effort.

And only after that it's even worth pondering the crazy stuff from engineers.

Give carriers weapons with 10km range, a big pool of hit points and with a 60 million rebuy, yes it's a sting for the owner, but whoever attacks it is going on to see far bigger losses. Put it far enough from a prison ship system and attacking one will be an absolute pain. Nobody is saying it should be easy.

Give it 100 km range and make any hit by them insta-kill. As long as it'll not be surrounded by invisible walls, will be the same shape as it currently is and won't be transformed into a globe with turrets around it, it won't make any difference.

 

[Gutser]

Challenging pew pew gameplay/enviroment from Frontier?

You are asking in the wrong neighbourhood.

The Carrier Update mark the point when I lost my last hope in FD. Especially with this pseudo confident guy in the Carrier interview on the left. They produce just a static picture with some menus in the last years and he is like, "pay your soul for it, we did it right".

 

[xaisis]

How is it possible that one forum can come up with so many terrible ideas in one week?

Fdev: "hold my beer"

 

[Fiend_69]

Since its being end game content, and Frontier really wants it to mean something, let it really mean something then.

Remove upkeep, make them 1 billion a peace, keep the guns, but remove the not-destructible flag.
Let pilots clean up the 'sleeping' carriers.

Anyone game?

You know what, I'm going to be that guy and say it, I love the idea, I actually thought FCs would be destructible when I first heard they are getting introduced, make it not something that would hang around when ur offline, this way you're aware when it's getting attacked, give it customizible guns for self protection, hell even escort drones, make it very hard to kill, like other space games, you know, that would force some actual team play into this community on both sides of the equation.

 

[Staarlord]

Since its being end game content, and Frontier really wants it to mean something, let it really mean something then.

Remove upkeep, make them 1 billion a peace, keep the guns, but remove the not-destructible flag.
Let pilots clean up the 'sleeping' carriers.

Anyone game?

Keep upkeep, change consequence to not keeping up (e.g. crew disbands, commodity/ ship stock is lost, services are offlin etc.), remove decommissioning, let players decide if they even want them online in the first place. Pollution problem solved. With as many players as there are in Solo? The overpopulation of carriers will be significantly less.

 

[KosmicRoller]

Since its being end game content, and Frontier really wants it to mean something, let it really mean something then.

Remove upkeep, make them 1 billion a peace, keep the guns, but remove the not-destructible flag.
Let pilots clean up the 'sleeping' carriers.

Anyone game?

This is the dumbest thing I've ever heard