Tritium, Jumpgates, Planets and trading.

[Triptych]

1. Allow carriers to dock close to stations and allow Tritium, or anything else for that matter, to be purchased remotely and transferred straight into carrier cargo - or in the case of Tritium, if requested, into the depot. Using your cutter to go back and forth, 720 units at a time, is just tedious.

2. Jumpgates, to open up the galaxy. I might see it differently if, having travelled 25,000 light-years, there was something worth the effort at the end; but there isn't. So open it up to players for their own purposes. You could have two kinds: (a) player owned; different prices for different distances - with 50,000 light-year ranges being very expensive indeed - the rub being that the player has to fly in the normal way to both locations in order to drop the gates: and (b) NPC jumpgates, either human owned (Sol to Colonia for instance), or alien - leading to who-knows-where. All should be big enough to accommodate carriers.

3. Player-owned planets or systems. Allow us to buy our own systems/planets and permit-lock them. The player who first discovered it would get a cut of the price. Exploration would become more popular, and buyers would have their very own system which - given (2) above - they could jump to in a moment. 2 & 3 together would provide a welcome credit sink. Not a lot of use in piling up credits if you've nothing to spend it all on.

4. Inter-player trading. Players should be able to trade anything that can be acquired, be they ships, ship components (including weapons), Guardian artefacts, Thargoid stuff, commodities or materials. Or planets if (3) were implemented. This would put new energy into the game. Players love trading amongst each other.

5. Alien NPCs. We already have "human" npcs in the bubble: now extend it to alien counterparts outside of it. There's no need to create an entire storyline and/or civilisation, just characters who are a little different and who may, or may not, be hostile. The hostile ones might be of greater or lesser danger depending on what's to be found in that system.

6. Medal tables. Medals for distance travelled. Medals for minerals mined. Medals for npcs killed and others for players killed. A medal for going around the galaxy clockwise and another for going anti-clockwise. Also over and under or under and over. The possibilities are almost endless.

7. Carrier personnel. GET RID OF THEM!! I'm tired of (a) having to pay a rental for something I'm supposed to own and (b) being treated like a guest on same.

That'll do for now..............

 

[Frankymole]

I think FDev specifically ruled out Jump Gates for gameplay reasons. Except on Raxxla, of course.

 

[DemiserofD]

1. Allow

If players could park that close to stations, the very first thing that would happen is that all stations would have a carrier parked right next to them, and then nobody can park there.

2. Jumpgates

What makes distant things valuable is the fact that they are distant. If Colonia could be reached instantaneously, it would not be worth visiting.

3. Player-owned planets or systems. Allow us to buy our own systems/planets and permit-lock them

All that would happen is that all the close systems would get a permit lock, becoming very annoying or other players.

4. Inter-player trading.

Fortunately, this is coming with update 11.

5

There are already Guardian Sentinels and thargoids, which fits the letter of your request.

6. Medal tables

These are called decals, and you get them for getting Elite ranks and such.

7. Carrier personnel. GET RID OF THEM!! I'm tired

Even if you got rid of the NPC's, there is no chance in raxxla of f Dev taking away the upkeep cost. Get over it.

I'm tired too.

 

[Triptych]

I think FDev specifically ruled out Jump Gates for gameplay reasons. Except on Raxxla, of course.

They ruled out player-owned bases too.......then we got carriers.

 

[Cmdr John Lyn]

I would like SYSCON faraway jump devices to make a comeback.

I would also like to have a fleet carrier that also has no npcs but rather mantained by achilles robots or a new skimmer type or parked at a dock for a repair contract.

I think it would be better if tritium could be scooped from certain cooler star classes or gas giants in addition to icy asteroids.

I don't want player controlled worlds, but owned underground hideouts and unresgistered facilities that require access codes and power regulators to enter and make sections operational could be cool. Especially if they served a narrative purpose.

 

[Triptych]

If players could park that close to stations, the very first thing that would happen is that all stations would have a carrier parked right next to them, and then nobody can park there.

What makes distant things valuable is the fact that they are distant. If Colonia could be reached instantaneously, it would not be worth visiting.

All that would happen is that all the close systems would get a permit lock, becoming very annoying or other players.

Fortunately, this is coming with update 11.

There are already Guardian Sentinels and thargoids, which fits the letter of your request.

These are called decals, and you get them for getting Elite ranks and such.

Even if you got rid of the NPC's, there is no chance in raxxla of f Dev taking away the upkeep cost. Get over it.

I'm tired too.

1. A radius of just 1 light-second from a station would give a volume of approx. 27,000,000,000,000,000 cubic miles. Cut that in half to take account of the planet on one side, then allow 10 cubic miles per craft. That would allow 1,350,000,000,000,000 carriers. Space is BIG, really, really BIG.

2. But the distant things aren't valuable, they're just the same as close things. They're just further away and take longer to get there: which is very much to the point. Bear in mind please that jumpgates would reduce travelling times, but not numbers. There would still be that stupendous and unimaginable 400,000,000,000 system galaxy. Which brings me to......

3. ..............There are 400,000,000,000 star systems. If a million players locked a million systems that would still be only 0.00025 of the galaxy. And any players upset by that minuscule amount would be far outweighed by the very happy players who would now own their own system.

4. On the scale I suggested? Surely not.

5. No it doesn't: not by a long, long, several trillion cubic light-year way

6. No they're not. And this is so plain I wonder why you say otherwise....................

7. How would you know? Do they keep you informed? And that still wouldn't resolve the issue of being treated like a guest in my own (?) carrier.

I'm frequently reminded of the whole Player-Owned Base issue. There were those who railed against the idea, saying it could never happen and that if it did we'd be sorry because we'd all get rabies, or something. Then Frontier introduced carriers, which are essentially mobile POBs, and it all went quiet. Now, judging by the amount of carriers you see, almost everyone either has one or is trying to get one.

How tired do you feel now? Have the last word. You certainly want it, and I've responded to my own satisfaction, though I know it'll never be to yours......until it all happens.

 

[DemiserofD]

1. A radius of just 1 light-second from a station would give a volume of approx. 27,000,000,000,000,000 cubic miles. Cut that in half to take account of the planet on one side, then allow 10 cubic miles per craft. That would allow 1,350,000,000,000,000 carriers. Space is BIG, really, really BIG.

Not the problem. There is an ideal distance from a station; too close and it takes too long to fly manually, but you're too close to enter supercruise and then exit before passing the station. Too far and it's no different from now, where you can get as close as a few megameters away. If you want tritium loading to be improved, the FC would need to be within the same instance as the station, and you couldn't have more than one or two of those before experiencing lag out the wazoo.

2. But the distant things aren't valuable, they're just the same as close things. They're just further away and take longer to get there: which is very much to the point. Bear in mind please that jumpgates would reduce travelling times, but not numbers. There would still be that stupendous and unimaginable 400,000,000,000 system galaxy. Which brings me to......

Credit value is irrelevant. It's gameplay/experience value that's important. For that, what matters is the effort required to achieve an objective. If you could jump to Beagle Point, whose only perk is being the furthest away system, then players would just come up with a NEW point that's the furthest away from both points, and so on.

5. No it doesn't: not by a long, long, several trillion cubic light-year way

Okay.

6. No they're not. And this is so plain I wonder why you say otherwise....................

You want a display of reward graphics for achieving objectives ingame, which is the literal description of what decals are.

7. How would you know? Do they keep you informed? And that still wouldn't resolve the issue of being treated like a guest in my own (?) carrier.

I've been here since fleet carriers were introduced, seen ten thousand complaints about it, and every dev response(IE, none). It ain't happening. Feel free to ignore me and die on this pointless hill, I'm just telling you it's pointless. Besides, FCs are already cheap AF to keep. The fact people continue to complain about them constantly amazes me when I can afford to keep mine for 25 years.

I'm frequently reminded of the whole Player-Owned Base issue. There were those who railed against the idea, saying it could never happen and that if it did we'd be sorry because we'd all get rabies, or something. Then Frontier introduced carriers, which are essentially mobile POBs, and it all went quiet. Now, judging by the amount of carriers you see, almost everyone either has one or is trying to get one.

And we didn't get Player-Owned Bases, which still would be useless, we got fleet carriers, which are primarily used to carry our ships.

4. On the scale I suggested? Surely not.

Take what you can get, mate. If you won't be happy until you get everything you want, then you'll never be happy playing this game.

 

[Frankymole]

They ruled out player-owned bases too.......then we got carriers.

So what is your point? They have some features in common, but not many.

 

[varonica]

1. A radius of just 1 light-second from a station would give a volume of approx. 27,000,000,000,000,000 cubic miles. Cut that in half to take account of the planet on one side, then allow 10 cubic miles per craft. That would allow 1,350,000,000,000,000 carriers. Space is BIG, really, really BIG.

You mean apart from the hard limit to the number of Fleet Carriers that can be in a system, which we know is well below the hundreds.

 

[Triptych]

You mean apart from the hard limit to the number of Fleet Carriers that can be in a system, which we know is well below the

Goodness me yes. I expect that, if you can't get in to a system now, then you wouldn't be able to get into a system afterwards either. Kind of solves any problems about overcrowding doesn't it.

 

[Florenus]

2. Jumpgates, to open up the galaxy. I might see it differently if, having travelled 25,000 light-years, there was something worth the effort at the end; but there isn't. So open it up to players for their own purposes. You could have two kinds: (a) player owned; different prices for different distances - with 50,000 light-year ranges being very expensive indeed - the rub being that the player has to fly in the normal way to both locations in order to drop the gates: and (b) NPC jumpgates, either human owned (Sol to Colonia for instance), or alien - leading to who-knows-where. All should be big enough to accommodate carriers.

3. Player-owned planets or systems. Allow us to buy our own systems/planets and permit-lock them. The player who first discovered it would get a cut of the price. Exploration would become more popular, and buyers would have their very own system which - given (2) above - they could jump to in a moment. 2 & 3 together would provide a welcome credit sink. Not a lot of use in piling up credits if you've nothing to spend it all on.

No and No.
I'm absolutely against it. Especially insta-travel.
I don't like permit locked systems at all, but giving players the power to permit lock something is even worse idea.

 

[TiberiusDuval]

No to insta travel, no to player owned systems with permit locks.

 

[Wheeltalk]

1. A radius of just 1 light-second from a station would give a volume of approx. 27,000,000,000,000,000 cubic miles. Cut that in half to take account of the planet on one side, then allow 10 cubic miles per craft. That would allow 1,350,000,000,000,000 carriers. Space is BIG, really, really BIG.

And then, every system that has a tritium-selling spaceport would suddenly be overbooked for carrier traffic. The game's not designed to handle more than 64 carriers in any system at any given time, and as of now there's still no time limit for carriers to sit in a certain system so if a carrier owner goes away from the game, they're sitting there hogging space. The former issue isn't changing; the latter would need to. In another post on this forum, I suggested that they could start enforcing 30 day limits on parked carriers once there are more than 15 carriers in a system - but I have no idea if FDev's read or considered that yet.

2. But the distant things aren't valuable, they're just the same as close things. They're just further away and take longer to get there: which is very much to the point. Bear in mind please that jumpgates would reduce travelling times, but not numbers. There would still be that stupendous and unimaginable 400,000,000,000 system galaxy. Which brings me to......

Take it from somebody who played Tachyon for years, the jump gates are a lot less rewarding. Star-jumping can get tedious at times, but you'll have enough chances to explore the odd planet, or enough need to maneuver your way out of getting pulled into an exclusion zone. Brown dwarves especially, they look beautiful but they will rip you out of cruise if you're not careful, and the challenge to that is fun.

Plus, jump gates would make long-distance passenger missions and cargo missions too easy, so you'd need to have a rule that no passengers and no mission-relevant cargo are allowed. And you'd miss out on an easy way to grind explorer rank - as a matter of fact, if they even had gates in the game, I'd only want them to be usable once you get Elite in explorer rank.

3. ..............There are 400,000,000,000 star systems. If a million players locked a million systems that would still be only 0.00025 of the galaxy. And any players upset by that minuscule amount would be far outweighed by the very happy players who would now own their own system.

I think the worry here isn't running out of systems, it's having so many near-bubble systems get claimed, that it suddenly becomes a pain to enter or exit the bubble through permited space. I doubt FDev ever gives us this feature, but if they do, they'll probably need to find a way to space out claimed systems, because if they get clustered then they become a wall that travelers get stuck on.

4. On the scale I suggested? Surely not.

Give it time for the update to release. You don't know how limited or unlimited it is - neither do I, neither does anyone outside of the company.

5. No it doesn't: not by a long, long, several trillion cubic light-year way

They'd need to change the entire lore of the game to fit other aliens. The thargoids were referenced in older Elite games, so they already fit the lore.

6. No they're not. And this is so plain I wonder why you say otherwise....................

I guess I'd like Steam achievements in the game? But if the developers are already loaded up with higher-priority work, I wouldn't ask them to drop their current tasks and work on this instead.

7. How would you know? Do they keep you informed? And that still wouldn't resolve the issue of being treated like a guest in my own (?) carrier.

IIRC the carrier beta actually had higher upkeep costs, but the testers complained and FDev already lowered the costs once for the production version of the game. Something tells me they're not going to re-discount what they already discounted. Massive ships with big enough facilities to service other ships and pilots, do cost money to run - regardless of whether they're staffed by human or by robot. I'd love to have a carrier without paying per week, but I just don't see them doing it, both for immersiveness reasons and for game mechanics reasons.

Maybe they could find a way to incorporate carriers into powerplays, and give you a way to have your preferred power, subsidize your carrier costs in exchange for the carrier serving them? I wouldn't mind that, but I doubt it's at the top of the team's priority list.

 

[varonica]

And then, every system that has a tritium-selling spaceport would suddenly be overbooked for carrier traffic. The game's not designed to handle more than 64 carriers in any system at any given time

64 is probably close for many systems, but yes it is a limited number, without FDEV specific confirmation I doubt we will ever know for sure, but it's certainly not anywhere near the hundreds, but for some systems may be more than 64.

 

[Agony_Aunt]

I don't think i've ever seen a list of suggestions that FD are less likely to implement than this one.

Well, except alien NPCs. We might get on-foot Thargoids to pew-pew against at some point.

 

[zikolach]

If players could park that close to stations, the very first thing that would happen is that all stations would have a carrier parked right next to them, and then nobody can park there.

What about paying a rent (hourly) for parking next to the station or outpost?

7. Carrier personnel. GET RID OF THEM!! I'm tired of (a) having to pay a rental for something I'm supposed to own and (b) being treated like a guest on same.

I'd like to see some sort of stylized FC interior, broken panels, dirt and rust everywhere and its owner with a mop trying to clean space around control panel.

 

[Frankymole]

What about paying a rent (hourly) for parking next to the station or outpost?

How about an amount of credits directly related to every port in the system (so, much higher for systems with multiple large stations, less for a system with a single minor outpost)?

 

[Kzak]

FDev has stated earlier that there will be no Steam achievements for Elite: Dangerous. Sadly.

 

[MDHansen]

Oh, this... these old horses eh

Carry on

 

[CMDR KCalo]

7. Carrier personnel. GET RID OF THEM!!

I'd be happy if they didn't all look like they were on meth. Can we get some drug testing in here!!