Would Ship Storage Fees, make you care about the fate of a system?

embryo · Jun 4, 2015

I know ship storage fees have been mentioned before but I have been thinking about this idea for a while.

Ship storage fees could be associated with the well being of the system, depending on the socio/economic standing.
Power Play influence and Faction stability would change the fees up and down.
The fees increase in an exponential fashion with the numbers of ships stored. This would not penalise Cmdrs with ships dotted all over, but those of us that have a "Home" system "garage" with multiple ships would notice the savings. Maybe the ability to mave module storage if you have a main "home" system with multiple ship bays.

I would feel more attached to a system if this sort of thing was implemented and have a need to shape its fate.

Just an idea...

GunnerBill · Jun 4, 2015

Maybe not fees but what if ongoing conflict or takeover of the system or station could lead to your stored ship being impounded or requisitioned into service?

embryo · Jun 4, 2015

Thought that might be harsh on explorers and people that just wanna be free from ties and have no fixed abode.

EdzUp · Jun 4, 2015

In FFE you had mooring fees why not have that per ship?

Alex Brentnall · Jun 4, 2015

Yeah, you'd just end up with everyone moving their ships to the capitals:
Sol/Alioth/Achenar/Shinrata

would be almost 100% safe places.

Edit: (I would anyway)

Further edit: Talking purely about the ships being impounded/appropriated after wars and such

Pappy55uk · Jun 4, 2015

EdzUp said:
In FFE you had mooring fees why not have that per ship?

Yeah I kind of felt Docking Fees should of been in..

Coyote · Jun 4, 2015

EdzUp said:
In FFE you had mooring fees why not have that per ship?

Different issue, though. Like parking fees probably also don't make you care more about politics.

That said: why *should* I care about the fate of a system in the first place? There are millions of them.

GunnerBill · Jun 4, 2015

dc83 said:
As long as the fees are LOW. Remember that some players need to take long hiatuses from this game; the LAST thing we need is for these people to come back and find out they're penniless and all dozen-or-so of their ships have been impounded. Honestly, unless the fees are so low as to be insignificant, this idea will be extremely destructive to the player base.

Well yes that would totally suck.

It would either have to be done based on how often you play or not at all.

wenkman · Jun 4, 2015

i dislike everything that forces me to constantly log in and play, be it reputation decay or time based storage fee's.

i'm absolutely fine with one-time-storage fees paid on storage or retrieval (or both). i know that's lacking realism, but hey, it's a game.

Anuranium · Jun 4, 2015

Alex Brentnall said:
Yeah, you'd just end up with everyone moving their ships to the capitals:
Sol/Alioth/Achenar/Shinrata

would be almost 100% safe places.

Edit: (I would anyway)

Isn't that a good thing? Finally we would have the capital systems teeming with life. As there are close to no reason to stay in Alioth/Sol/Achenar since they are service economies/sightseeing places they seem rather... void of life. A couple of day's ago I went to Sol after a trip in the galactic core to sell off my data. There were no-one there (yes, open play).
I would at least expect to se some CMDR's buzzing around when entering the capital of a major faction.

TriumphANT · Jun 4, 2015

It's one of those areas that ED feels a bit 80s. Adding small, simple systems like storage costs (per day/week/month?) and stuff like module storage in a similar way, but adding installation/removal costs in Outfitting would make more sense than what's happening just now. Nothing too deep, just enough to make you feel a smile come on when you see:
Sell 1F Pulse Laser: 2,200Cr
Buy 1F Burst Laser: 4,400Cr
Size 1 weapon removal: 150Cr
Size 1 weapon installation: 450Cr
Bonus/discount for frequent station use: 8%
Total cost: 2400Cr
Just little things that add up to more of an "in the game" feeling.

bamber · Jun 4, 2015

embryo said:
I know ship storage fees have been mentioned before but I have been thinking about this idea for a while.

Ship storage fees could be associated with the well being of the system, depending on the socio/economic standing.
Power Play influence and Faction stability would change the fees up and down.
The fees increase in an exponential fashion with the numbers of ships stored. This would not penalise Cmdrs with ships dotted all over, but those of us that have a "Home" system "garage" with multiple ships would notice the savings. Maybe the ability to mave module storage if you have a main "home" system with multiple ship bays.

I would feel more attached to a system if this sort of thing was implemented and have a need to shape its fate.

Just an idea...

Looking at BETA my "home planet" isn't in a power play area so I would have no power play influence or faction satbility

Drelthar · Jun 4, 2015

just base it on time spent in game, that avoids the problem of people not playing, and coming back penniless.

Sendraks · Jun 4, 2015

embryo said:
Power Play influence and Faction stability would change the fees up and down.

Problem with this is that it goes against the FD policy of "play your own way" and Power Play won't effect players who have not signed up to be part of it.
I don't mind the proposal as something that could effect those involved in Power Play, but for anyone not involved it should have no consequence otherwise they can't "Play their own way." It'd be "play your own way, unless the actions of other players decide you can't."

Coyote · Jun 4, 2015

I still don't get it. So you want me to pay (game) money just because I don't feel like participating in this Powerplay stuff? It's a ' game! I shouldn't be forced or harrassed to play it.

"Sake-of-immersion" fees... if anybody is immersed by that, wow. In a universe, where a fine for a very, very minor infraction is equivalent to 20 kilos of Gold or a ton of grain.

yyy · Jun 4, 2015

In RL, if you put a boat into a mooring you have to pay for it. Big ships don't have moorings, they spend most of the time out in the oceans. The less time they spend docked the more profitable they are to their owner. However, there are a few factors here given current game mechanics:

- A player is a single player and cannot fly more than one ship.
- This would prevent players who choose a combination of different careers (e.g. 50% trader, 50% bounty hunter) from maintaining such a lifestyle since they would have to think about the ships they keep.
- This would also limit movement of a player since if they need to dispose of a ship it would take careful planning and that means most of a player's ships would have to be concentrated around star systems close to each other.
- One solution for a player would be for them to keep only one ship, but that would mean a lot of time is wasted looking for their next ship and associated modules.

I think free storage is the way forward for now given current game mechanics. One solution to the above problems would be to have a galactic ferry where a player's ships can be transported.

embryo · Jun 4, 2015

bamber said:
Looking at BETA my "home planet" isn't in a power play area so I would have no power play influence or faction satbility

The stability of its own minor factions would change the payment rate.

Rex Black · Jun 4, 2015

This is the ED Forum Version of 'Creeping Excellence'. Just adding totally unneeded crap for the sake of it. Please don't qoute.."yes but Irl parking/mooring fees, this is a Space Sim. 2 pages for this?..blimey.