General Missions to damage FC

Because the ship can be completely destroyed if it stays in the game.

I'm not suggesting we blow up the FC completely, but only partially damage it. So that the man who owns the FC knows that if he left it in enemy territory, it will cost him, not to leave it anywhere he wants.
The FC is always in game, 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, systems can change factions, other groups can invade systems, ganker groups can just fly around attacking FC's whenever they want, you can't defend a FC 24 hours a day.
 

Robert Maynard

Volunteer Moderator
Because the ship can be completely destroyed if it stays in the game.
Ships - which only ever exist in one instance in the game, certainly. Carriers, which are pan-modal and persistent and may exist in multiple instances simultaneously, not so much.
I'm not suggesting we blow up the FC completely, but only partially damage it. So that the man who owns the FC knows that if he left it in enemy territory, it will cost him, not to leave it anywhere he wants.
Which gives the player (who may be attached to a player group) no reasonable means of defending the Carrier from attack - as Carriers are persistent and pan-modal - and players can't play 24/365, and even if they did there's no guarantee that the attacker would attack in Open on the same platform.
 
The FC is always in game, 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, systems can change factions, other groups can invade systems, ganker groups can just fly around attacking FC's whenever they want, you can't defend a FC 24 hours a day.
I wrote above, but I couldn't see the translation.

I can't? So what ? I'll pay 1-5 million from above for the repairs, provided that my FC was attacked by people. I already pay 25 meters a week, ALWAYS.
 
Which gives the player (who may be attached to a player group) no reasonable means of defending the Carrier from attack - as Carriers are persistent and pan-modal - and players can't play 24/365, and even if they did there's no guarantee that the attacker would attack in Open on the same platform.
Now you pay 25 million a week always. In case of destruction, 5-10 million will be added only when you fix it. Even if you haven't played for a year, 25x12 + 10.
But if it is destroyed in the first week it will just burn with services off for a year.

P.S. I`ve always been written before and I`ll repeat their words: nobody makes anyone buy FC.
 
Last edited:
That depends. FCs have excellent guns.

The variables for an FC would be:

-tritium

-stored goods

FCs should be hackable, so you can steal cargo, meaning its a risk to keep an FC so close to a public place. It might make FCs disperse more, or make them more of an asset to keep an eye on for squadrons.
Keep an eye on what though? Even if a squadron had 24/7 watch over an FC, the concept that someone could still steal goods, damage it or do anything to the FC from cross-platform or any of the variety of ways to get an alternate instance in which to operate with impunity is insanity.
 
Keep an eye on what though? Even if a squadron had 24/7 watch over an FC, the concept that someone could still steal goods, damage it or do anything to the FC from cross-platform or any of the variety of ways to get an alternate instance in which to operate with impunity is insanity.
And having a non-destroying ship in the Dangerous Elite is what is it called ?

I'll say it again. You can't kill the FC. Just a little damage and that's all, it can be considered just a small increase in maintenance costs and no more.
 

Robert Maynard

Volunteer Moderator
Now you pay 25 million a week always.
.... or as little as 5M Cr./week, depending on available services.
In case of destruction, 5-10 million will be added only when you fix it. Even if you haven't played for a year, 25x12 + 10.
But if it is destroyed in the first week it will just burn with services off for a year.
The salt mountain from players complaining about their Carrier services being repeatedly disabled or theft from their Carrier by players that they can't see or defend against would be of epic proportions.

Which reminds me of UA bombing - which some players obviously relished being able to use unopposed - and which Frontier removed from the game the morning after they announced it was being removed.

When Carriers were discussed, it was pointed out by respondents what the likely consequences of permitting players to damage Carriers would be if they were both pan-modal and persistent. It appears that Frontier may have already come to that conclusion, given the persistent pan-modal and indestructible / undamagable implementation of Carriers.
 
Last edited:
Incurring losses to players who aren't necessarily playing at the time might be "fun" for some players - I doubt that very many would find it "fun" to find that their Carrier kept being attacked by other players, in any game mode, "for reasons".
As long as I can do missions to steal people's stored mats or damage the ships that they have in a station too. It's only fair after all.
 
And having a non-destroying ship in the Dangerous Elite is what is it called ?

I'll say it again. You can't kill the FC. Just a little damage and that's all, it can be considered just a small increase in maintenance costs and no more.
Did I say destroy it anywhere? Damaging it, stealing goods, sneezing at it. It's an untenable design.
 
the station can't jump every 15 minutes.
Well, it actually can jump every 20 minutes.
It was supposed to jump every 2 hours, but an incredible breakthrough was achieved before official Carrier Launch day and this timer shrunk to 20 minutes.
Amazing, isn't it?

Not to mention that a Carrier is persistent in all modes and all platforms. A ship is not persistent at all
For example last nite XB was totally borked while PC was rather ok. So i used my PC commander to ferry some cargo from my XB carrier while my XB commander was getting all sorts of colored snakes

So ship you say? Nope.
It's a station for all intents and purposes
 
Well, it actually can jump every 20 minutes.
It was supposed to jump every 2 hours, but an incredible breakthrough was achieved before official Carrier Launch day and this timer shrunk to 20 minutes.
Amazing, isn't it?

Not to mention that a Carrier is persistent in all modes and all platforms. A ship is not persistent at all
For example last nite XB was totally borked while PC was rather ok. So i used my PC commander to ferry some cargo from my XB carrier while my XB commander was getting all sorts of colored snakes

So ship you say? Nope.
It's a station for all intents and purposes
I'm sorry, but until I make sure he moves at least once a day, I can't consider him that way.

Why didn't you make a jump accumulation (every 20 minutes it would have lengthened the jump by 500 years while you have fuel) and then jumped right away completely, I don't know.

But if you'll excuse me, this conversation is not quite on the subject anymore and it's better to return to the subject.

Thank you.
 
Terrible idea for a multiplayer game. Far too many people get kicks out of ruining other's experiences. And that's because it's fun to do so and always will be
 
Still unpatched Cheats around - hence it doesn't work.

Players would see their Carriers disabled over and over again and being entirely unable to do anything about it.
 

rootsrat

Volunteer Moderator
Add missions to destroy turrets and various FC damage to disable all kinds of services.

The owner of the FC can always dock with his own FC and repair it.
(if I'm not mistaken, you can do it remotely through the FC menu.)
Having spent more credits on repairs.

If the FC is in a safe system and you are loyal to the fraction in the system then you will get more protection ships flying around and it is difficult to damage the FC.
Bad idea IMO. The people who just want to see the world burn would be able to indefinitely keep your FC damaged and you would be 100% grounded as a 5 billion Cr FC owner. They could do it in Solo, which effectively renders ANY counteraction impossible. (Unlike the BGS for example, where you can counter with BGS activity). Unless they could never damage the drive? So you can jump away and escape (but then they can just follow you so...).

No, definitely a bad idea for the game. It would only lead to more division, salt and toxicity in the community.

To be constructive: I would rather they enhanced the megaship missions. Steal specific cargo from its cargo hold for example.

::EDIT::

Your example of burning stations isn't the greatest one. Have you seen how many are still damaged an nobody cares (apart from OpIDA). Besides, if in addition to Tritium hauling you want me to haul bazillion of materials to fix my carrier, because you fancied damaging it 100000 times in a row, I think I'll pass.

I've organised the event to fix Obsidian Orbital when it was damaged. NEVER AGAIN, worst grind ever.
 
Last edited:
Keep an eye on what though? Even if a squadron had 24/7 watch over an FC, the concept that someone could still steal goods, damage it or do anything to the FC from cross-platform or any of the variety of ways to get an alternate instance in which to operate with impunity is insanity.
You have a heavily armed platform, closely guarded by NPC security in a location of your choosing. In my version you'd have beacons that you can switch on or off so unless someone stumbles on your carrier it would be invisible, like a secret base.

What FCs would become then is mobile treasure chests that have to be used sparingly rather than an armed warehouse.

If I remember right in my own thread fuel then becomes the limiter, and that you don't have giant invincible boxes ready to rip the BGS to shreds and there is nothing you can do about it. By making FCs vulnerable you add a force that makes people think before cramming them into a system like locusts.
 
Top Bottom