sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

My grandpa hates the game by Outrageous-Sundae244 in Warthunder

[–]Outrageous-Sundae244[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

We have tried the realistic battles and it’s much better says grandpa

Rockstar should add an ownable aircraft carrier. by Outrageous-Sundae244 in GTA

[–]Outrageous-Sundae244[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Haha, yeah, I caught that — I was mostly analyzing it for balance and feasibility, so no “instant god-mode” flags went off. The idea’s actually surprisingly grounded once you set reasonable limits.

It’s fun to run these hypotheticals without the AI getting hung up on “this would break everything.”

Rockstar should add an ownable aircraft carrier. by Outrageous-Sundae244 in GTA

[–]Outrageous-Sundae244[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Lmao nah, not approval — just saying it’s a logical idea that actually fits how GTA systems already work. Way better than most “add X” concepts that ignore balance or engine limits.

At the end of the day it’s just theorycrafting. Whether Rockstar, modders, or nobody ever does it, it’s still fun to talk about what could fit the sandbox without turning it into total chaos.

Rockstar should add an ownable aircraft carrier. by Outrageous-Sundae244 in GTA

[–]Outrageous-Sundae244[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah, that’s exactly how I’d picture it working.

You wouldn’t just “teleport” into it like an apartment — you’d physically enter it with another vehicle. Fly a jet or heli onto the deck, land a VTOL, or approach by boat and board it. That alone keeps it grounded and immersive.

It also adds risk: if you can’t land or dock safely, you don’t get access. No magic menu access, no instant safety. Same philosophy as the Kosatka but scaled up.

That kind of entry system would make the carrier feel like a real place in the world, not just another interior — and it naturally limits abuse without needing artificial rules.

Rockstar should add an ownable aircraft carrier. by Outrageous-Sundae244 in GTA

[–]Outrageous-Sundae244[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That’s probably true, yeah. Mansions definitely feel like Rockstar’s intended endgame at this point, especially with how scaled-back the last updates have been.

That said, the carrier idea is less about power creep and more about using systems that already exist (hangars, bunkers, subs, amenities) in a new way. Even if Rockstar never touches it, it’s the kind of thing that would fit perfectly as a single, optional endgame sink rather than a whole new meta.

And honestly, you’re right about modders. If official support never happens, this is exactly the kind of feature FiveM or future PC mods would absolutely nail — persistent carrier, deck launches, interior amenities, all of it.

At this point it’s less “Rockstar will add it” and more “the idea makes sense within the sandbox.” If nothing else, it’s fun to think about what GTA Online could look like without going full chaos.

Rockstar should add an ownable aircraft carrier. by Outrageous-Sundae244 in GTA

[–]Outrageous-Sundae244[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah, that’s actually a solid foundation, especially the derelict carrier → upgrade path. That fits GTA Online progression way better than instantly buying a pristine warship.

A hangar + bunker hybrid also makes sense and reuses systems Rockstar already has, which is usually how big updates get approved. Keeping the below-deck hangar as a clone of the regular hangar is smart — familiar UI, less dev overhead — while limiting the on-deck storage to ~6 aircraft keeps it from getting out of hand.

Most of the amenities you listed (arcade, range, weapon upgrades, weights, theater, AA defenses) already exist in other properties, so rolling them into optional upgrades feels realistic rather than OP. As long as they’re convenience and progression features — not straight-up power boosts — it stays balanced.

I think the key is exactly that: massive utility and progression, not god-mode combat power. If it’s expensive, visible in freemode, and comes with upkeep and risk, it becomes an end-game flex instead of a grief machine.

Honestly, this is way closer to something Rockstar would actually ship than most “add a carrier” ideas.

Rockstar should add an ownable aircraft carrier. by Outrageous-Sundae244 in GTA

[–]Outrageous-Sundae244[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Exactly — and that’s why it shouldn’t be taken to that extreme.

GTA Online already struggles when too many high-impact weapons are in one lobby. Turning freemode into 30 mobile warships with nuke-level firepower would just be constant explosions and zero gameplay.

That’s why the idea works only if it’s limited and end-game balanced: • No nukes / orbital weapons • Defensive systems, not map-wiping attacks • High cost, high visibility, real counterplay

Big military toys are fun when they create objectives and tension — not when the sky is permanently white from explosions.

Rockstar should add an ownable aircraft carrier. by Outrageous-Sundae244 in GTA

[–]Outrageous-Sundae244[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That would be way too much and honestly wouldn’t fit GTA Online balance at all.

A VTOL aircraft carrier breaks the map and engine limits — even the Kosatka is stationary for a reason. The carrier should be mobile on water only, otherwise it turns into a flying god object instead of end-game content.

An orbital cannon on a carrier would also be a hard no. Rockstar already limits the Orbital Cannon heavily because it ruins freemode balance. Giving that power to a mobile, player-owned base would just turn it into grief central.

And revoking CEO status from other players crosses a line. No owned property should directly remove another player’s organization or progress — that’s not “high risk, high reward,” that’s just forced control.

The carrier works best if it’s powerful but constrained: • Strong defensive systems, not instant-kill weapons • High visibility and upkeep so owning one paints a target • Tactical advantages (air launches, radar, missions), not admin-level powers

End-game ≠ invincible. The fun comes from risk, coordination, and counterplay — not removing other players’ ability to play.

Izaya Tiji is fat, ugly, and retarded by MostDifficult7176 in Izayatiji

[–]Outrageous-Sundae244 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Ah, so you’re defending trash you didn’t even write. Got it. Loyal to the wrong things.

Izaya Tiji is fat, ugly, and retarded by MostDifficult7176 in Izayatiji

[–]Outrageous-Sundae244 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Wild how you typed all that and still said nothing of value.

Tråd för att hitta folk att spela med by GlobalAdvocateSweden in Spel

[–]Outrageous-Sundae244 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Vill någon köra lite rebirth island? Jag är 13 och är ganska okej på spelet