Transferring Tritium from cargo to tank...

[Stonelaughter]

I have 7000t of tritium on my carrier, in the cargo. I have a nearly empty tank. In order to move the tritium from the carrier's cargo to the carrier's tank, I will have to change ships to my Imperial Cutter (or my Type 10, either's good); fill the ship with tritium, and then "Donate" it to the carrier.

What madness is this?! Last I checked, both the cargo bay and the fuel tank are INSIDE THE CARRIER. What's wrong with creating a method in-game of directly feeding the tank with tritium from the cargo hold? Or - let's get really funky here considering it's the 34th fricking CENTURY - let me allocate a certain amount of the cargo-hold-tritium as travel fuel, and HAVE IT AUTOMATICALLY MOVE TO THE TANK AS IT'S NEEDED?!

IMMERSION, GUYS - IMMERSION!!!

 

[Brimston]

Old request, should have been added from start, will probably be added with next DLC?

 

[Greasetrap42]

Agreed. Fueling the carrier is a functionally basic task that should work properly.

One of these crew should be able to handle the task when I'm not around.

 

[ruifo]

+1
Fully agree.

 

[MDHansen]

I've never said before that FD can't possible play their own game. Basically because many of them do play the game.
Wich just makes this even more insane. Not even a single dev/cm/programmer/intern/cafeterialady/janitor at FD has slipped a note on to the roundtable and said this is completely out of whack.

 

[varonica]

I am guessing that essentially they want to stop people running their ships as bus and taxi services while the player may be tens of thousands of light years away doing combat/exploration and other stuff. They don't want FC's running around doing entirely independent activities from players who own them, so there is always some personal player intervention required in managing a FC.

 

[Greasetrap42]

.... so there is always some personal player intervention required in managing a FC.

Ya, I thought about that too. And I can accept that. But then the logical thing is to have some features that player needs to be present on the carrier for... that works as a normal rational person would expect it to work! Transferring tritium from fleet carrier cargo to your ship back to the fleet carrier is just weird.

Sometimes I wonder if Braben has a nephew that works at FD and nobody wants to say anything bad about the stuff he does.

 

[Cmdr. Numa]

Halfbaked features creating tedium are a trademark of ED.

 

[Dillon Fallon]

Bridge officer and Tritium depot coordinator had a lovers tiff and aren't speaking to each other at the moment?

 

[Factabulous]

It's called a Fleet Carrier - it's for carrying you and your Fleet. Not for sending it out on its own so it needs to look after itself. If they'd wanted that they could have just skipped adding the Depot and gone for the simpler solution.

So .. it was designed that way, deal with it. Or scream like a child in allcaps I guess

 

[Northpin]

What madness is this?! Last I checked, both the cargo bay and the fuel tank are INSIDE THE CARRIER.

Well, a Fuel truck has a very small fuel tank compared to the big cistern on its trail... and is completely disconnected from it too
Madness!

I other news, as been posted already, they designed it like that on purpose, so you have to fly your carrier to destination instead of it being completely autonomous

 

[rootsrat]

I have 7000t of tritium on my carrier, in the cargo. I have a nearly empty tank. In order to move the tritium from the carrier's cargo to the carrier's tank, I will have to change ships to my Imperial Cutter (or my Type 10, either's good); fill the ship with tritium, and then "Donate" it to the carrier.

What madness is this?! Last I checked, both the cargo bay and the fuel tank are INSIDE THE CARRIER. What's wrong with creating a method in-game of directly feeding the tank with tritium from the cargo hold? Or - let's get really funky here considering it's the 34th fricking CENTURY - let me allocate a certain amount of the cargo-hold-tritium as travel fuel, and HAVE IT AUTOMATICALLY MOVE TO THE TANK AS IT'S NEEDED?!

IMMERSION, GUYS - IMMERSION!!!

Word! Extremely annoying and frankly it should be a no-brainer when designing the functionality. I can't imainge why it was not added, especially after Fleet Carriers release was delayed to get it right.

 

[Stonelaughter]

I'm not trying to fly my FC autonomously; I live on it. I just want immersion breaking idiotic design decisions to stop happening and I don't think it's too much to ask.

 

[Greasetrap42]

Well, a Fuel truck has a very small fuel tank compared to the big cistern on its trail... and is completely disconnected from it too
Madness!

Comparing the fuel storage to a modern day transport truck is incorrect. The tritium is stored as standard cargo units and there is no evidence there is a requirement for our ship to leave the hangar to "Donate" tritium fuel. It happens internally within the FC. Our ship must be docked to transfer OR donate tritium. We don't perform a refueling operation outside the FC, so why is a spaceship required?.


Speculation about external vehicle activities being required that we just don't see, etc. etc. could be applied. Maybe additional gameplay surounding refueling was intended. But that is not part of the game presented to us. We simply load/unload cargo in the hangar..

 

[Northpin]

Comparing the fuel storage to a modern day transport truck is incorrect.

You start with this

The tritium is stored as standard cargo

Then continue with this?

Where is the logic in the first phrase?
It's absolutely correct to compare it to a modern day transport truck.

Tritium is Cargo. Is stored on the carrier as Cargo. You need a ship to transfer tritium from cargo to the tritium depot.
Same for the fuel truck. The fuel is stored as cargo, separated from the fuel tank. You need rather large bucket to extract the fuel from the cistern and transfer it to the truck's fuel tank...

Now i wont really comment on this ship-tritium-transfer-procedure - it is what it is.
But i do acknowledge FDev didnt want us to have a potential 25000 tons of tritium in the Carriers fuel tank, allowing an unmanned carrier to perform a full round trip Bubble > Beagle Points.
Else they would have not implemented the Tritium Depot and/or didnt limit it to 1000t capacity.

 

[Florenus]

I other news, as been posted already, they designed it like that on purpose, so you have to fly your carrier to destination instead of it being completely autonomous

If they would add some fuctionality to the carrier that would require player imput, yet without the need to board ship and use it's cargo hold, it wouldn't make it completely autonomous, but it would make it more immersive for FC users and actually make use of FC interiors instead of discouraging leaving your ship in the first place.
Right now you have more control over your FC when sitting in your ship parked in hangar than in FC's captain's chair.

 

[Northpin]

If they would add some fuctionality to the carrier that would require player imput, yet without the need to board ship and use it's cargo hold, it wouldn't make it completely autonomous, but it would make it more immersive for FC users and actually make use of FC interiors instead of discouraging leaving your ship in the first place.
Right now you have more control over your FC when sitting in your ship parked in hangar than in FC's captain's chair.

That one of the inconsistencies introduced by Odyssey.

Before, the cmdr was the ship and the ship was the cmdr.
After Odyssey, the cmdr can do stuff on its own, but the cmdr-ship tether is still there (see active ship issue)
Same for this issue - carriers came in 2020, Odyssey in 2021, Carrier interiors in 2022.
Still Elite is a ship based game and while the commander has some independence, it is still tethered to the ship.

And they cannot really get rid of this tether unless they completely phase out Horizons and force everyone into buying and playing Odyssey, then redesign all these ship/commander interdependency

Edit: and this is one of the reasons i'm miffed at them.
They should have left Horizons as it was
And release EDO as a standaalone game in the same universe, not as an Elite DLC

 

[Greasetrap42]

It's absolutely correct to compare it to a modern day transport truck.

You don't use a car to transfer fuel from a transport truck's trailer tank to the cab's fuel tank. But if you really needed to you could rig-up a piping mechanisim for fuel transfer... maybe like they do on ships?

Large ships with multiple fuel tanks do not use external boats to transfer fuel from one section of the ship to another. And obviously they aren't going to dip in to cargo tanks they are transporting for customers (equivalent to missions).*

Edit: and another reason why your transport truck example doesn't make sense. Unless maybe you are Mad Max in a post apocalyptic world.

 

[varonica]

Ya, I thought about that too. And I can accept that. But then the logical thing is to have some features that player needs to be present on the carrier for...

If they would add some fuctionality to the carrier that would require player imput,

Then that's what we would be discussing now, "why do I have to be on the FC for X, or Y", anything FDEV put on the FC to require players to be on the FC regularly would be complained about, I've been on this forum long enough to know that!

 

[Northpin]

You don't use a car to transfer fuel from a transport truck's trailer tank to the cab's fuel tank. But if you really needed to you could rig-up a piping mechanisim for fuel transfer... maybe like they do on ships?

in the fuel truck analogy, the ship is the bucket you use to fill your tank from the cistern ( while hoping no one sees you doing that )

Large ships with multiple fuel tanks do not use external boats to transfer fuel from one section of the ship to another. And obviously they aren't going to dip in to cargo tanks they are transporting for customers (equivalent to missions).*

Large ships are not carriers
Carriers are not ships