While it has been in game for a very long time, with the new load/unload feature it lost some of its convinience, mainly due to the fact having to dock in a capitol to do so (what can be annoying sometimes), and the time it takes to swap ships, and also having to dock to use the ship for anything else to unload the ships.
While currently I am not suggesting it to get a fix, as it wouldnt be helpful (this is why I wrote to general), i am asking from the community, what do you think?

Should it be fixed somehow, without making it overcomplicated. Simply increasing cargo hold sizes can do the trick, so you can haul the same amount of stuff as before with overstuffing (900 cu in goli, 1300 cu in a dent, with an XC docked 800 and 1200 cu usable cargo space respectively).

If gets fixed, should there be a way to restrict the scannability of capship cargo holds, so its harder to know whats inside (with a scanner blocker or something), and if not, why?

Or left in as an illogical, but useful quirk in game, in the future as well?

I think overstuffing should be fixed. You shouldn't be able to carry more than 800cu in a Trident or 600 cu in a Goliath. I don't understand why after all this time they haven't fixed this bug.

Yes...

Capship need to get hit with the nerf bat in practically every department.

Great *suggestion*. Now that we’ve all finished our hauling it’s all good to need this. +1

People are welcome to debate opinions, but those who read my posts already know it's going to be fixed. I've said so, several times.

The only reason why it ever existed was to reasonably guarantee that the player had some way of docking with their own capship, given they didn't have a remote-jettison system, and we had no way of "handling" the jettison of a ship-object.

I don't understand why after all this time they haven't fixed this bug.

Because it isn't a Bug. A bug is an unintentional and usually unexpected ramification of a design oversight or code-flaw.

This was a completely-known and less-than-ideal workaround to the fundamental fragility of Capship and Inventory systems, particularly when dealing with a lot of complex corner cases, transitions between "Player" and "NPC" control, inventory handoff and other challenges.

This is the kind of stuff that happened because I jammed Capships into the game, at player-request, long before they were "ready", and then tried to hack things along to continue improving them, because I didn't have the "man-year" needed to re-write all the systems involved.

Not A Bug.

Inevitable, but you lose 100 cu from that like instantly if you dock an XC to unload.
But a healty cargo space increase wouldnt make a big difference, as my intention is to haul the ssme amount of stuff as with overstuffing.
Thats it.
T
Lets try to find a healthy compromise instead arguing over this endlessly.

Capship cargo limit just needs to be a hard limit again, no docking if there's too much junk in your capship.

No need for a compromise, even at 500cu of effective total space the goliath is still much... much faster than an XC at hauling.

The only thing that could be considered is the fact this makes capships less capable of hauling ships but since the margins there are practically non-existant and no one does it for credits afaik. The only groups that will be inconvenienced by this change are the serco/itani/pirates that use capships to move nation specific ships into grey. Even with this "nerf" they'll still do it faster than setting home and /exploding EC's once you've moved a ship.

As far as I'm concerned there's no debate to be had here.

My point is who will want to haul less stuff without than with overstuffing?
I move large amounts of cargo from one place to another, what would take twice or three times as long with current cargo holds

Capital ships are capital ships after all. We spend months making them not just to get some hauler what is just a slightly better but waay slower XC. They are multipurpose ships after all.

Arent they?

Just a cargo hold increase would not make them any more or less overpowered, and I mean... whats wrong with transporting ships after all, in a ship what is basically a freighter? Everyone does it, not just pirates. Because no one wants to waste time flying back every time they die somewhere.
Just would remove the hassle of overstuffing, what is not just illogical, but inconvinient as well.
Thats it.

quick fix no headache make the capacity of goliath able to store 4 behemoths, make the dent capacity able to store 6 behemoths, no more over stuffing.

or fix it and give some justice to new comers
1) convert all existing caphips back to raw material,
2) reduce credits, non capships, equipments, and raw material storage amount with 5/6, 3/4, or 8/10 (leaving at least one sample) depending on what the pilot possesses 1 goli / 1 dent / both goli and dent.

^^^ decent first idea if maybe a little too liberal, but implement the second and watch the existing playerbase of vets evaporate even faster than ever... Never in a game has taking major assets and accumulations away from existing player ever gone over well with the community...

Hard limits are fine. The Goli is a freighter, but the paper thin shields and manu time to build one hardly justify equaling only 2 XCs for hauling if a hard cap is implemented (because you will only ever be able to haul 400cu if you plan to xfer to a regular station unless you use alt accounts). Besides, you have a community of player captains that have grown used to overstuffing to the point of common practice. That being the major flaw with impatient players wanting caps before they were ready.

The big problem is if they dont want people to leave in frustration when the fix is implemented perhaps a compromise over the originally intended 600cu Goli and 800cu Dent hard caps might want to be rethought, because like it or not the game and status quo has evolved. Adding a dedicated owner dock port not based on volume that cannot be used for raw cargo space (if thats even possible) in addition to the hard 600/800cu would alleviate locking an owner out, still allow guests to dock as long as there is available space, and still force a captain to balance 600cu (ot 800cu) of storage.

Also of note all the nerf proponents are ofc not traders/miners so that'll never be settled between the PVP vs Trader community. Therefore a discussion thread like this almost always end in a fight with no winner.

Anyway my 2 credits, fwiw. Happy flying!

equaling only 2 XC

You are never obligated to fly with ships in your cap ship. You can use all 600cu of space in a goli if you fly without ships. Which is 3xcs. Or 800 cu in a dent, which is 4xcs. Have a friend unload for you. Have another friend load for you. You'll end up being more efficient.

Besides, you have a community of player captains that have grown used to overstuffing to the point of common practice.

People having "gotten used to" a gimmicky semi-exploit that was obviously not the intended goal, even if we couldn't implement a better workaround for an extended period of time, is not really a rationale to increase cargo capacity.

Now, VO is always in flux and lots of things are open to change, over time, including capship stats. But, anyone wanting to Suggest an increase to the cargo capacity of capships should not use historical clown-car / bag-of-holding rationales as their thesis.

You are never obligated to fly with ships in your cap ship. You can use all 600cu of space in a goli if you fly without ships. Which is 3xcs. Or 800 cu in a dent, which is 4xcs. Have a friend unload for you. Have another friend load for you. You'll end up being more efficient.

The only thing what is wrong with this is that most players are flying solo. As not everyone multibox like crazy, like me for example, and I am not willing to do so. And we are lacking players to do so, neiter I trust anyone.

Lets find a compromise guys, and not always come up with "ask others for help", but also discuss what we can do for solo pilots.
Even though its a multiplayer game, solo freelancers exist as well.
Lets try not to tear each others legs out one by one, on an endless argument.

What about... lets say... increasing the cargo hold capacity of the goliath to lets say... 900cu? 800 usable with an XC docked. Maybe 1100 on a trident. 1000 usable with a docked XC.
Or damn be it 800cu in goli, 1000cu in dent, 700cu and 900cu usable with only one XC docked.
Cmon guys, discuss this here, so we can put together a suggestion and lets end the argument on overstuffing all together.

Maybe leave it as it is right now until more types of capships gets added into the game. Everyone got a different number in their mind what they think is fair cargo capacity. This is something which incarnate did say it will get fixed years ago, he will have to decide what's a fair number and we will have to adapt & move on.

But "Hun Predator" did create a valid point, not everyone can open 10+ accounts on their pc & have their alt accounts/friends help load/unload cargo for them. Some players fly only 1 account and do things solo.

Speaking of using multiple clients, i do agree it is a bit unfair especially when you know someone is using multiple accounts and sitting everywhere on map same time to spot , shoot , harass players who only use 1 account.

The people who're doing that is basically mis-using the f2p feature on pc & incarnate said himself

Running multiple concurrent clients is not something we explicitly or intentionally support, so this isn't a "bug", per-se. But, we'll take a look when we can.

Maybe incarnate should start charging 10$ per account again, so if someone is flying 10-20 accounts they should pay 100-200$ (Premium subscription) for it which i think is good for the game.

That is another whole topic btw and just like overstuffing everyone is going to have different views on that too. Anyways for now i'm happy with whatever incarnate decide and just like everyone i thrown my 2 cents in on the topic.

Running multiple concurrent clients is not something we explicitly or intentionally support, so this isn't a "bug", per-se. But, we'll take a look when we can.

So, I was responding to a question on Bugs about the stability of running more than one game client, on the same PC, at the same time. That has nothing to do with any administrative policy about "multi-boxing" (which also implies more than one box), it was just a comment about the design criteria of the game client. Running several clients at the same time was not a design-goal for it, so it certainly has some stability / functionality challenges.

Speaking of using multiple clients, i do agree it is a bit unfair..

Pandoram, YOU periodically run more than one concurrent client and account at the same time. The majority of people who frequently run multiple clients have multiple subbed accounts. So, again, this is pretty hypocritical of you to be someone who multiboxes, and then claim that multiboxing is bad. You can't comment on who is F2P and who is not, you don't know.

That is another whole topic btw..

Yes, it really is a different topic. Let's not change the subject to that.

(Thread-muted Pandoram; deleted his additional rationalizations for why it's okay for him to run multiple networked spybots, but not other people, plus a bunch of exaggerated rumor-mill soapbox bullshit that is uninformed and completely off-topic).

Back to the subject at hand..

Like I said before, it's entirely possible that fluctuations in ship configuration may change down the road. I do not currently see a reason to alter the cargo capacity of Goliaths.

Nowdays there is not much reason to inrease the cargo hold capacity of capships .
But in the future, when new manufacturable ships come in, it could be helpful.

But in the future, when new manufacturable ships come in, it could be helpful.

Generally, we don't have more types and variations of capships yet, because there isn't enough for them to do.

If we have more need for more configurations, with varying tradeoffs on carrying-capacity and defensive capabilities and so on, then we'll be more likely to add more variants.

Broader usage of the Latos Economy is one area where increased capacity might become more meaningful. The same could be true of a more extensive remote-mining opportunities in a hostile, expanded universe, etc.

I never considered "over-stuffing" to be an issue really. However, you should be able to make a capship not accept a ship larger than will fit and that won't cause an "unable to dock bug or break".. it is reasonable that a capship captain should know that if he left his fully loaded capship in a 150cu vessel, he will only be able to put a 150cu vessel in the same space when he returns.

On that note, it is also reasonable that a capship have a different mode of storage for cargo items and launchable ships. There should be a difference between a "cargo bay" and a "docking bay". I would consider making this distinction a reality in a potential resolution to the over-stuffing anomaly.

For instance a goliath might have:
docking space: 2 ships
cargo space: 300cu

so a captain could dock 2 XCs that are loaded with cargo if they wish (400cu), and they would also have 300cu of additional cargo space. If you couple this with the ability to move items from capship cargo bay into the cargo bay of a docked ship and vise versa then you have a more proper functionality for capships.(capships can dock a given number of ships rather than cu)

Additionally you could make it possible to store a ship "as cargo" but only if the ship is in a "disassembled" state. Subsequently pilots who don't have proper training via faction standing or license, can't reassemble them. We can call these "kits" and that would add an interesting and safe dynamic to the game. You could then jettison a "UDV kit" which could be picked up by an Itani pilot but not used by him/her. It allows for international player assistance without the risk of cross national ship usage. It also allows for the possiblity of "ship sales" as a trade occupation, without the risk of violating nationality advantages/disadvantages.

On that note, it is also reasonable that a capship have a different mode of storage for cargo items and launchable ships.

I seem to distinctly recall someone (you?) posting this idea to Suggestions, where I thought I already shot it down. I'm not going to search right now. But, in case it wasn't made clear enough before..

We are not going to have separate / distinct cargo and hangar areas. We're interested in trade-offs here. Store ships, AND / OR store: transport goods, mined-minerals, etc. Choose your particular usage of space.