With Jump Ranges for ships nearing 400ly, carriers need a buff (video evidence)

[Iron Body]

Which will automatically make those systems a very, very less interesting than now, right? So, why it is a time for that to happen exactly now, and not in few years? When, for example introduced a new, exploring-type Carrier or dozens other nice gameplay-based ways could be provided.

No. Having visited every reachable HIP star in the galaxy, it would be nice to finish the HIP project off with those that are currently just out of reach.

Admittedly there are HIP stars thousands of ly outside the galaxy which are always going to be unreachable. But then they are in the wrong place anyway.

 

[Freyar]

They just need to go further and give players the option to turn off A) the visibility of all carriers on the navigation panel but one's own, and B), the visibility of carrier PoIs through the ship's canopy.

This, but still showing bookmarked and owned carriers.

 

[anShpan]

Not necessarily. What's interesting about a system that can't be visited at all?

Those can be visited with proper development of gameplay, as in un-quoted part of initial post.

 

[anShpan]

No. Having visited every reachable HIP star in the galaxy, it would be nice to finish the HIP project off with those that are currently just out of reach.

Just to clear possible misunderstanding. I'm not against reaching unreachable, I just insist on developing proper tools for proper purpose instead of just enlarging increasing jump range for every existing FC of singular type. By other words: should be another type of FC-type vessel targeted for exploration, possibly another for hauling, command-center, etc.

 

[Agony_Aunt]

We've already all seen that happen though. When Frontier announced Carriers at Lavecon 17, it was with Squadrons in mind. The upkeep and the logistics of maintaining them meant the original plan was for them to be corp asset, and used as such Then the vocal minority complained, complained, and complained some more, to a point where Fdev gave in and made them become just the next big ship everyone and their dog could afford and maintain.

You could phrase it that way.

Alternately it could be written they were considering having them as squadron assets, but after listening to feedback from the community they decided that allowing anyone to have a fleet carrier was the better idea, and went with it.

A much more positive spin on the same events.

Thanks FD, especially from those of us who are in small squadrons or solo players.

 

[Ohanka]

I don’t even get this thread. People say they don’t like travelling & exploring and prefer bubble stuff, but then demand higher jump ranges. Why? The bubble is like 200 ly across in any given direction, you can cross it in most ships without even needing to refuel, and if you can’t you only need to make a couple of stops.

Exploring isn’t about trampling oft-trod paths of other commanders, it’s about discovering & charting new systems.

Leave carriers as they are imo.

 

[SergMx]

Yes, the attempted comparison with FCs in ED is absurd.

I can sympathise with the clutter issue, but that's a problem that could be solved with better UI implementation, something that FD has already partly addressed by collapsing FCs together on the system map. They just need to go further and give players the option to turn off A) the visibility of all carriers on the navigation panel but one's own, and B), the visibility of carrier PoIs through the ship's canopy.

Carriers have been a thing since 2021, therefore it's entirely on FDev to come up with an actual solution to issues like escape pods and rare goods. They should know by now how players interact with the game that they're collecting so much telemetry about!



Not necessarily. What's interesting about a system that can't be visited at all?

Read what it says next. It is proposed to introduce other FCs that will jump further.
I don't know whether to cry or laugh.

 

[SergMx]

Between Frontier catering to the never satisfied demands of the “I want it NOW!” crowd, the proliferation of profoundly bad “common forum wisdom,” and of course all the “one weird trick” guides, new players tend to skip through the early, learning phase of the game, and get tossed, entirely unprepared, into the deep end of the proverbial pool.

I'm sorry, I don't know what you're talking about.
You're writing about SCO? The ships behind the ARX? HGs full of g5 material? I could go on for a long time.

 

[SergMx]

Well, that, and the game has some rather serious pitfalls which the “I want it NOW!” mindset is particularly vulnerable to.

It’s the kind of mindset that looks at SCO, and thinks that because it requires skill to master, it has very little utility in everyday gameplay. It’s the kind of mindset that’ll that’ll triple their travel times, and triple their number of interdictions, so they can pay attention to Netflix, rather than the game. It’s the kind of mindset that’ll use Inara to plan their trade routes for them, unable to recognize the better money making opportunities between point A to B.

And it’s the kind of mindset that’ll spend seven times the credits, or use fifty times the materials, to gain a very small advantage.

Am I understanding you correctly? Is this an abstruse personalization to deflect from the topic?

 

[Montague]

All I've learned from this thread is that I'm playing the game wrong. Why?

Because I appreciate all the ways the game has expanded in the nearly 10 years I've been playing, even if I don't take advantage of all those new additions. I appreciate efforts to reduce what many consider to be tedious gameplay, which apparently makes me part of the "I want it now crowd." I like new ships with improved capabilities.

I love fleet carriers. While I don't feel the need for expanded carrier jump ranges, 500 light years is an arbitrary limit, so I don't mind if FD decides it needs to be altered.

I'm having more fun in game now than ever before. Change can be fun. Change is inevitable. Change stops when the game is dead.

If I'm playing the game wrong, I don't want to be right.

 

[SergMx]

Exploring isn’t about trampling oft-trod paths of other commanders, it’s about discovering & charting new systems.

I wonder if I can make it any clearer. The further the FC jumps, the fewer systems the Commander will open.

 

[SergMx]

I'm having more fun in game now than ever before. Change can be fun. Change is inevitable. Change stops when the game is dead.

I also can't understand why it's hard for others to understand !
Maybe they just want the game to not evolve and die?

 

[Ohanka]

I wonder if I can make it any clearer. The further the FC jumps, the fewer systems the Commander will open.

No it’s even less clear now.

The whole point of exploring is to go to and chart systems, maybe find some weird mollusc or gross plant.

 

[CMDR MERANGO]

isn't that a design issue tho. it shouldn't be for the gamer to have to worry about what locations may break the game if parked there.
if FD don't have the will or the ability to fix the game lagging out of there are fleet carriers and a lot of players at a location then they need to dissallow parking them in or around systems when a CG is on and if that means an auto forced jump away then so be it (tho so as not to be mean I would make it a freebie without taking fuel)

And be system locked for 96 hours.

 

[anShpan]

I also can't understand why it's hard for others to understand !
Maybe they just want the game to not evolve and die?

Would you please stop those naive manipulation and stick to a topic at least somehow?
All we want is to keep ED running as long as possible and to be interesting and involving as it is now. Unfortunately that is hardly possible without adequate opposition to excessively loud whines vocals whatarewewant? freedom jump range! whendowewantit: now!
Again, current FC jump range is fine. Are you saing that if it will not be increased now game will die? Please elaborate how exactly die or at least how that death is related to jump range of your FC.

 

[Vedmo]

I also can't understand why it's hard for others to understand !
Maybe they just want the game to not evolve and die?

I can only assume your are willfully ignoring the several well thought out answers to your repeated claims of not being able to understand, but I'm a slow learner, so one more time. They do not have the same opinion as you on what makes a good game, so they don't want to see the game go in a direction that makes it something other than what they like. You do not have the same opinion as them on what makes a good game, so you like to see it go in a direction that makes it something you like, it works either way you look at it! This does not make anyone a good person or bad person, or mean anyone is playing the game wright or wrong, or that strict adherence to any desire will directly translate into boom or bust for Frontier Developments. It simply means people are expressing varied opinions on aspects of a video game they all play on the forum made for the discussion of the video game.

 

[Diostar50]

I can only assume your are willfully ignoring the several well thought out answers to your repeated claims of not being able to understand, but I'm a slow learner, so one more time.

Its simple, they have no answer to the excellent points being made in the dozens of posts opposing the OP's suggestion, so they ignore them and spam instead.

 

[[VR] Mad Mike]

I've always been unable to understand, in proposals like this, the people who speak out against it.
What's the point?
If you don't like jumping to 1000 years, jump to 500, it's your choice. If you don't like using FC, don't use it.
What is the point of people speaking out against such proposals?

in which case make ships indestructible and if players want to blow up they can voluntarily self destruct.............. perhaps I am being obtuse however imo unless it's a pure sandbox (in which case I have no interest personally) then games have rules and those rules are what make the game.

it's the same reason why if I play minecraft or Lego Fortnite I only ever play in survival mode.
IF FD choose to tweak carrier jump ranges that is up to them but imo there needs to be limits

 

[Ralph Vargr]

And it’s the kind of mindset that’ll spend seven times the credits, or use fifty times the materials, to gain a very small advantage.

Greetings from the US military.

 

[Iron Body]

Just to clear possible misunderstanding. I'm not against reaching unreachable, I just insist on developing proper tools for proper purpose instead of just enlarging increasing jump range for every existing FC of singular type. By other words: should be another type of FC-type vessel targeted for exploration, possibly another for hauling, command-center, etc.

The proper tool that would suit me fine is the ability for the FC to jump to a set of coordinates, whether a system is there or not. Then the jump range can stay as it is and we can jump way outside the current bounds of the galaxy,