Squadron-Only carriers would have killed squadrons straight out of the gate.

If Frontier had made Fleet Carriers Squadron-Only, everyone would have ditched their squadrons to create their own so that they could get a carrier of their own. We'd end up with way fewer large population squadrons, and a bajillion one-person squads.

I hear you saying, "But Goooost, if they limited the carriers to squadrons of 10+ people, people would actually start banding together more, not less!" Well... Sort of. I had already talked to my own friends about starting the "Carrier Pigeons" in the same vein as the Fuel Rats and the Hull Seals to temporarily join squadrons to get them to the required size before leaving. (I had already started sketching out the design, a silhouette of saluting pigeons on the deck of a modern aircraft carrier.) If I didn't do it, someone else would. This is a proven concept from back when facebook had the game 'Mafia Wars' and users would group up with temporary friend requests (which would stay in the mafia even after removing the actual friend).

What frontier did instead was genius. They let everyone have their own carrier, BUT they have to pick a role. So now if you want a support ship of every type, you have to join a squadron and have other players choose those roles. This is also a proven strategy for encouraging squads in FPS games like battlefield; Sure you can go solo as a medic, but if you have a support in your squad you will never run out of ammo, and if you have a scout you can spot your enemies, etc etc. It creates a culture of reliance where you're better off in a group. Your squadrons will now have the benefit of having multiple carriers, with different roles and functions, in different systems you're invested in. If you have a really large squadron you get more carriers in it! How is this not obvious to the naysayers? You will have more reason to communicate with each other to get these various roles filled, and you wont have to rely on a potentially absent squadron leader to move the bloody things around. Everyone will have an opportunity to experience the ownership aspect other than the most popular veteran players, and there wont be any reason to ditch your current squads to do it. In fact, going forward I would suggest Frontier never create any gameplay aspect that's primarily reserved for squadron leaders, as this will inevitably dissolve the groups.

Also, we have to consider the games that Elite is competing with now and in the future. EVE, Star Citizen, No Man's Sky, and soon even Kerbal Space Program 2, all offer the private ownership of truly massive ships in a multiplayer environment. Do you think someone is going to come over to Elite Dangerous from one of those games if the only way to get the biggest ship is to not only have lots of friends, but also be the alpha of the group? It's Elite, not Elitist.

But that's what you're all begging for- Nerfed Carriers. You don't want to own one yourself, you just want everyone in your squad to squabble over them only for the leader to just do his own thing with it anyway. He says they're really fun and that you should build your own squadron and try one. If ya'll keep yelling about it before we even hear the details, we might end up with another ship transfer times fiasco. Did you know Frontier was going to give us instant transfer before people complained about it? 3 years later, how do you guys like waiting over an hour for your ships? Do you, like me, shut off the game after transferring? Because that's the reason Frontier was going to make it instant at first, admitting that it was gamey but that uninterrupted gameplay was more important to the health of the server population. So please, stop asking for things to be worse, start asking for things to be better. Because unfortunately, sometimes Frontier actually listens to you schmucks.

In summary, Solo Carriers mostly benefit Open Play. Solo players will be limited to single roles and wont have anyone to share it with. This was strategic, just as the extra pip encourages players to open their ships to multicrew, the specific roles and limit one carrier per player encourage squadding up. Frontier put a lot of thought into this feature and I'm confident that if you give it a chance you will love it.
And if Squadrons had been done in what I'd consider a logical way so people could have simply have joined multiple Squadrons? How would that have panned out?

ie: Consider if when creating a Squadron it had to have a "role" (eg: Powerplay, Faction, Antixeno, Mining, Exploration, Trading), and you could join only one Power/Faction Squadron, but and say upto five other ones (eg: Antixeno, Mining).

Now I'm not for or against Squadron or solo CMDR FCs, as we have little/no information yet. Just pointing out some alternatives to the direction FD have gone in.
 
Immmmmmmuuuuuurrrrrsssssion

Its actually not my choice. I chose to do a certain activity, not to sit and wait for my ship to arrive before I can engineer it or whatever else I had planned. As I said I log out and sometimes don't come back for days. I thought the idea for Fdev was player engagement not player leaving the game.
Ere, that is your choice. Neither the game nor FDev force you to log off. That is 100% on you. If you can't think of something to do with the varied amount of things available to you when you call your ship, then the issue is with yourself.
 
I actually find the prices fine. It makes me think if its worth transfering my ship, going to get it myself or make do with what I have. You make it cheap and its an automatically better to transfer, the same if it was made instant. I like that fact I need to stop and think about what I want to do.
Time is the real currency we have. Even credits just take time to farm. I like to keep it simple.
 
Time is the real currency we have. Even credits just take time to farm. I like to keep it simple.
Not too sure what time has to do with it. Credits I get by just playing the game. Easy to come by especially these day, whether thats through mining, combat, trading or exploration, cash and loads of it is just readily available, but you haven't played in months/years have you, so you wouldn't know.

WIth the way cash is so available I would be fine if it was made more expensive. The money our commanders make keeps going up with each update while the cost of transfers is not, therefore it is getting cheaper all the time.

When I come back from DW2 I will likely be a billionaire. I may restart my commander as I don't like being that rich. I find it to be the opposite of what the game should be about.
 
Not too sure what time has to do with it. Credits I get by just playing the game. Easy to come by especially these day, whether thats through mining, combat, trading or exploration, cash and loads of it is just readily available, but you haven't played in months/years have you, so you wouldn't know.

WIth the way cash is so available I would be fine if it was made more expensive. The money our commanders make keeps going up with each update while the cost of transfers is not, therefore it is getting cheaper all the time.

When I come back from DW2 I will likely be a billionaire. I may restart my commander as I don't like being that rich. I find it to be the opposite of what the game should be about.
I blame engineers for the credit inflation. They opened the floodgates because grinding both engineers and credits was just too much.
 
I blame engineers for the credit inflation. They opened the floodgates because grinding both engineers and credits was just too much.
Engineers has nothing to do with the credit inflation. You seem to have these major issues with the engineers which are just not true. You blame everything on them about the game, even when it is factually not true. But hey, you have your opinion no matter how factually wrong it is, as long as it makes you happy.

You sound like you are suffering from cognitive dissonance.
 
Last edited:
Engineers has nothing to do with the credit inflation. You seem to have these major issues with the engineers which are just not true. You blame everything on them about the game, even when it is factually not true. But hey, you have your opinion no matter how factually wrong it is, as long as it makes you happy.

You sound like you are suffering from cognitive dissonance.


When I realised MWO was completely the opposite game from what I was expecting and that hanging around the forums wouldn't get me anything I wanted, I just, like, stopped playing it.

When I realised that Champions Online had changed during an absence requiring me to relearn a system and respec all my doods, I figured I liked superheroes enough to bother.

When I realised that PowerPlay wasn't going anywhere but neither was the rest of the game, I continued with my Pretend Spaceman and just didn't bother with PP stuffs.




I just wanted to publicly share my personal stories of incredible willpower and bravery, in the hopes that they can inspire others to greatness.
 
Engineers has nothing to do with the credit inflation. You seem to have these major issues with the engineers which are just not true. You blame everything on them about the game, even when it is factually not true. But hey, you have your opinion no matter how factually wrong it is, as long as it makes you happy.

You sound like you are suffering from cognitive dissonance.
Sometimes I ask myself that, too, but then I groan when I just think about engineers - I guess there must be some grain of truth with my aversion. It came over night - just like the bullcrap engineered AI.
 
Sometimes I ask myself that, too, but then I groan when I just think about engineers - I guess there must be some grain of truth with my aversion. It came over night - just like the bullcrap engineered AI.
I don't know, but what I do know is that the stuff you come out with is currently factually incorrect. It may have been closer to reality when engineers first came out, but certainly isn't now.
 
You know how it is, the first impression is the one that counts. And it was atrocious.
Sometimes getting another look at things can be a good way to get over it all. These day we have remote engineering with your pinned blueprint, and most large stations you can do this, the Brokers are a major change which help a lot, and the fact that each material pick up now give you three and the engineers now give you a guaranteed upgrade in stead of the pot luck you had before.

It is very much changed and for me for the better.
 
Sometimes getting another look at things can be a good way to get over it all. These day we have remote engineering with your pinned blueprint, and most large stations you can do this, the Brokers are a major change which help a lot, and the fact that each material pick up now give you three and the engineers now give you a guaranteed upgrade in stead of the pot luck you had before.

It is very much changed and for me for the better.
I believe it changed for the better. But it'd take too much time to get into and I don't want to spend so much more.
 
There's different games exactly for that. Instant gratification, instant PewPew, instant action. Casual Games. ELITE Dangerous clearly doesn't fit that.
Not saying there's no room for finetuning (push service coming readily to mind or Eco, Standard and Premium Transfer Options for example), but it retained the fundamental Simulation approach with its consistent, logical and credible consequences.
Do you think it should also take at least an hour to unload cargo from ships? It would be more realistic that way, otherwise Elite wouldn't be consistent with its "simulation" approach. After all the only reason it's instantaneous is because of the instant gratification pew pew casual crowd, right?
 
Do you think it should also take at least an hour to unload cargo from ships? It would be more realistic that way, otherwise Elite wouldn't be consistent with its "simulation" approach. After all the only reason it's instantaneous is because of the instant gratification pew pew casual crowd, right?
I'd be careful suggesting that - even in jest - there are people in here who think paint jobs should be applied in real time, so I'm sure they'd be happy to watch their ship be loaded for hours at a time...
 

Deleted member 38366

D
Do you think it should also take at least an hour to unload cargo from ships? It would be more realistic that way, otherwise Elite wouldn't be consistent with its "simulation" approach. After all the only reason it's instantaneous is because of the instant gratification pew pew casual crowd, right?

I take it 'at least an hour' was tongue in cheek.

In lieu of (originally planned AFAIK) Cargo off- and on-loading mechanics w/ associated Animation, it wouldn't add anything to the game right now.
Most importantly, loading/unloading Cargo isn't a new feature and the existing one has been instant just like in the older ELITE titles from day 1.
In that case, "instant" is the default baseline and has been ever since.

With the standardized Cargo Canisters and fully automated loading of 3305a.d. even a T9 wouldn't remotely take an hour. A Minute or two at best.

On- and Off-loading a Carrier for example might (if Trade/Mining roles add Cargo capacity), then your scenario might become a real thing.
You can do the math how long it'll take to shuttle i.e. 10000 tons into a Station for sale.
We'll see in December.
 
Ere, that is your choice. Neither the game nor FDev force you to log off. That is 100% on you. If you can't think of something to do with the varied amount of things available to you when you call your ship, then the issue is with yourself.
Nope. Not true. My time is the most valuable resource and I will not have it wasted on sitting waiting for a ship to arrive before i can actually do a certain activity in game. I know I am not alone on this. Remember it was Fdev that said they "respect our time". This is a clear case that they don't. Transfer times must be removed or made optional. If you can't handle that a ship appeared instantly, then call your ship, go away for an hour and pretend that it wasn't instant.
 
Top Bottom