Jump to content
bastanold

Ships and the crew required

Recommended Posts

I want examples and fact from your imagination and theory, not just overall words.

You say, engineering role, damn what is it? What player need to do? Or shields? Power management, damn are you from medival, special role for that? Communication? What you mean at all?

 

That what I mean! You list just a empty words (everyone understand it as imagination allows), but 0 samples how it can works even in theory (by special crew member role).

 

Don't take me wrong, I don't saying everything must be 1 players easy controlable. But I want understand what is "crew-control" in your imagination, what and how players need to do.

 

Personally, I'm for multi-crew, but not as requirement. If player great in multitasking, game must allow control even huge ship by one player. It must be hard, it must be stressful, but it must be possible. If player can't control everything by him/her-self, then multi-crew is an answer.

 

Thanks,

Archonious

If the game is to have any semblance of balance and fair play then no the game most NOT allow it. Doesn't matter if its hard or stressful if one person can do it then anyone can do it and there will be guides up 5 seconds after launch then everyone can do it. So gratz you just completely removed the need for socialization and teamwork in an MMO. We'll all be soloing capitol ships and not other constructs will even have a purpose.

 

Bottom line the bigger more powerful the ship, the more complex yes absolutely it NEEDs to be crewed by multiples of players.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Lethys

This list looks as "Skills" list and bonuses, not as player role - "What player need to do". And once again, why it can not be done by 1 player if he/she good enough in multi-task management?

 

@Pang_Dread

Why is the game limited to one ship? Why there could not be fleet of other players ships? Why MMO can not be in fleet range, not boring "Sit and manage energy and miss all fun" (as from example above).

If to speak about skills and multi-tasking. Play StarCraft2 vs Koreans and do the same as they do in 5 seconds after launch.

 

P.S: "We'll all be soloing capitol ships...". Let's remove "capitOl", since it will be EXTRA expensive (maybe will take months of hard farm of resources to build and months to build) for everyone, and take just a ship. So you say - people want and will enjoy more to play on their own ship, not serve (run sub-systems, while somebody controls the ship) on somebodies else one? So why do you force other people to do that? What will happens if there would be not enough volunteers to serve (don't expect there would be millions players. I don't say it will never happens, but don't expect)?

 

Thanks,

Archonious

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Lethys

This list looks as "Skills" list and bonuses, not as player role - "What player need to do". And once again, why it can not be done by 1 player if he/she good enough in multi-task management?

 

@Pang_Dread

Why is the game limited to one ship? Why there could not be fleet of other players ships? Why MMO can not be in fleet range, not boring "Sit and manage energy and miss all fun" (as from example above).

If to speak about skills and multi-tasking. Play StarCraft2 vs Koreans and do the same as they do in 5 seconds after launch.

 

P.S: "We'll all be soloing capitol ships...". Let's remove "capitOl", since it will be EXTRA expensive (maybe will take months of hard farm of resources to build and months to build) for everyone, and take just a ship. So you say - people want and will enjoy more to play on their own ship, not serve (run sub-systems, while somebody controls the ship) on somebodies else one? So why do you force other people to do that? What will happens if there would be not enough volunteers to serve (don't expect there would be millions players. I don't say it will never happens, but don't expect)?

 

Thanks,

Archonious

Read the whole post and you got your gameplay ideas.

 

Who said there won't be smaller ships? Who said every ship has to have multicrew?

Only your Assumption here.

 

So players don't want to play a supporter type - fair enough. They don't have to. But then they won't experience a multicrew ship.

 

Your idea of doing the same alone is just bad, op, against a MMO and utterly boring for team play. I won't comment further on that

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Think the language barrier is perhaps hindering his understanding of the issue.

 

Its simple: you have small ships, medium, large ships. If the large ships are the most complex, most powerful in the game and oh by the way you can solo play one by yourself, that does several things all of which are bad for an MMO. It reduces the need to socialize and work as a team and it removes the need and purpose of those other ships once you build a large one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Think the language barrier is perhaps hindering his understanding of the issue.

 

Its simple: you have small ships, medium, large ships. If the large ships are the most complex, most powerful in the game and oh by the way you can solo play one by yourself, that does several things all of which are bad for an MMO. It reduces the need to socialize and work as a team and it removes the need and purpose of those other ships once you build a large one.

Don't see any problem, if it is very hard to control everything. Most important it is possible. You will be "f*ked up" by requirements to have all personal everytime, when you need to do something. Do see any single reason to have this OVERCOMPEXITY at all.

You still didn't answer the questions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't see any problem, if it is very hard to control everything. Most important it is possible. You will be "f*ked up" by requirements to have all personal everytime, when you need to do something. Do see any single reason to have this OVERCOMPEXITY at all.

You still didn't answer the questions.

I answered them. Welcome to a sandbox MMO where you can't do everything alone and you have to wait for others - as already said: you can control a large vessel alone and don't get a team. But that would reduce the effectiveness of the ship by a great deal, otherwise it would not be balanced. If a solo player can have the skills for such a feat then good luck attacking my base - that would just be too op

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I answered them. Welcome to a sandbox MMO where you can't do everything alone and you have to wait for others - as already said: you can control a large vessel alone and don't get a team. But that would reduce the effectiveness of the ship by a great deal, otherwise it would not be balanced. If a solo player can have the skills for such a feat then good luck attacking my base - that would just be too op

If somebody have better skills, reaction and overall do better than multicrew, it is not a reason to ban that. Too OP is if everyone easy can do that only. Can you switch and control 10-20 turrets in few seconds? Somebody can. Can you monitor main systems, control ship and see what's going on around the ship? Somebody can. Can you do it all in proper and logical way? But somebody can. And these who "Can" must be rarity, skillful, master-class players. And not ingame learned skills, but what and how they do as players (player skills).

And still didn't see any proper role example except control the turret (which will have lock-on system). As example, 10ppl on ship. 1 control ship, 2-3 control turrets, what others need to do? Pay and watch in monitor 99% of time?

 

Thanks,

Archonious

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If somebody have better skills, reaction and overall do better than multicrew, it is not a reason to ban that. Too OP is if everyone easy can do that only. Can you switch and control 10-20 turrets in few seconds? Somebody can. Can you monitor main systems, control ship and see what's going on around the ship? Somebody can. Can you do it all in proper and logical way? But somebody can. And these who "Can" must be rarity, skillful, master-class players. And not ingame learned skills, but what and how they do as players (player skills).

And still didn't see any proper role example except control the turret (which will have lock-on system). As example, 10ppl on ship. 1 control ship, 2-3 control turrets, what others need to do? Pay and watch in monitor 99% of time?

 

Thanks,

Archonious

 

I gave you examples already (for the part why people shouldn't be allowed to do that and what possible other roles of a ship look like) - not going to rewrite them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't see any problem, if it is very hard to control everything. Most important it is possible. You will be "f*ked up" by requirements to have all personal everytime, when you need to do something. Do see any single reason to have this OVERCOMPEXITY at all.

You still didn't answer the questions.

If you don't have a group, then you fly a smaller ship or be severely gimped flying a larger one.

 

But yeah if can't understand why its bad to allow players to solo things that are meant to be group based, then not much else to say really.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you don't have a group, then you fly a smaller ship or be severely gimped flying a larger one.

 

But yeah if can't understand why its bad to allow players to solo things that are meant to be group based, then not much else to say really.

Similar can be said about player skills. If your hand grow from the ass, then yes, you need 100500 players even on small ship.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sooooo...I think a small to mid sized ship that could be crewed by 3-5 people would work best. Ideally you could 1-man it just to cruise around but to get the full use out of the ship a crew would be needed. 3-5 crew members may not to be too much to ask during low population times and I think could cover all the basic stations of a ship. Plus its not too harsh on resources and being small would keep the scary encounters to a minimum (unless that's your thing)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the answer as to "why can't a single-seater dreadnaught can't be built" is simple, that reason being computational power.

Control Units are either Screens or Cockpits. If the Devs do the EVE trick, a Control Unit will be operating on a certain Computational Power (CPU), meaning it can be linked up to a certain maximum of 3D mesh elements at a time.. which makes sense.

Now, add some Powergrid limitations with certain Control Units operating within certain Wattage and we got ourselfs a pretty good reason why you can't build a super-sized star-fighter, with a cockpit on it and fly solo. - aside from the fact you are shit out of lck if something gets blown to bits and you need repairs as you fight. The arguement could be made for an ammo-to-repair-unit mechanism like EVE's ancillary repair units, but the point is, you would need people to reload said repair units... and you are flying a shp and fighting, you don't got time to reload the repair units as well.

Further than that, the Engines and other Elements can be operating in a certain Voltage, which means they can only be linked to certain capacitors, which require people to be there to regulae the input in them. 

So yeah, a small frigate could indeed operate in a limited crew of 5, similar to a battle tank and such a ship design could be used for police forces in-game or for people who want to fly with friends only, who could adapt to a bigger size I guess.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As example, 10ppl on ship. 1 control ship, 2-3 control turrets, what others need to do? Pay and watch in monitor 99% of time?

 

Thanks,

Archonious

Interesting discussion.

 

10 is a small ships complement, but lets assume automation effeciencies means we can do away with crew and have officer/c-class roles.

 

Edit: RL/in game descriptions added.

 

1: Captain - makes decisions. Probably owns the ship.

2: Pilot - flies the ship around. Preferably well.

3: Navigator - monitors all radar, sets courses, does mappy stuff.

4: Signals (Comms) - monitors enemy comms, jamming, ecw, does friendly comms

5: Gunner 1 - pew pew

6: Gunner 2 - pew pew

6: Engineer/Mechanic - repairs / tuning

7: Quartermaster - cargo, decks inc moving things from A to B. Tractor beams

8: Weapons - reloads, flushing (overheat), torps etc

9: XO/Watch - watching everything, filtering key info to Cap.

10: Marine - pew pew in person, offensive/defensive.

 

All specialists in that perform a critical role rather then they are experts. In fact you probably will struggle with less than that because sharing roles gets risky.

 

And yes, if they are lucky, 99% of most crews job is watching screens. But you want them there for those 1% of the time - battle ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting discussion.

 

10 is a small ships complement, but lets assume automation effeciencies means we can do away with crew and have officer/c-class roles.

 

Edit: RL/in game descriptions added.

 

1: Captain - makes decisions. Probably owns the ship.

2: Pilot - flies the ship around. Preferably well.

3: Navigator - monitors all radar, sets courses, does mappy stuff.

4: Signals (Comms) - monitors enemy comms, jamming, ecw, does friendly comms

5: Gunner 1 - pew pew

6: Gunner 2 - pew pew

6: Engineer/Mechanic - repairs / tuning

7: Quartermaster - cargo, decks inc moving things from A to B. Tractor beams

8: Weapons - reloads, flushing (overheat), torps etc

9: XO/Watch - watching everything, filtering key info to Cap.

10: Marine - pew pew in person, offensive/defensive.

 

All specialists in that perform a critical role rather then they are experts. In fact you probably will struggle with less than that because sharing roles gets risky.

 

And yes, if they are lucky, 99% of most crews job is watching screens. But you want them there for those 1% of the time - battle ;)

That is the best reply. Good examples, I like it, not just overall words. Thanks.

 

"99% of most crews job is watching screens". So the question is this. If 1 or maybe 2 persons can quickly switch and well control all these systems, why it need to be not allowed? Of course, this will require great players skills and resistance to stress, multitasking, and fresh head while under the pressure. This is a way to the progress of players skills (not account in-game skills). Isn't that "Hard to master"?

 

Thanks,

Archonious

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That is the best reply. Good examples, I like it, not just overall words. Thanks.

 

"99% of most crews job is watching screens". So the question is this. If 1 or maybe 2 persons can quickly switch and well control all these systems, why it need to be not allowed? Of course, this will require great players skills and resistance to stress, multitasking, and fresh head while under the pressure. This is a way to the progress of players skills (not account in-game skills). Isn't that "Hard to master"?

 

Thanks,

Archonious

 

Is he even serious? He expects to be able to be in 15 places at once? This is some tenacious lone-wolf mentality.

 

"I can't behave or communicate or socialise, thus I want to be able to handle a 25 km ship that would take 100 people to crew on my own".

 

Can someone from NQ explains to Archonious why he won't be flying a Titan solo??

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's hilarious how my examples make no sense to archonius mind and anonymous' reply had somewhat similar examples in it and they make sense to him.

 

The prejudiced bias is strong in this one

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's hilarious how my examples make no sense to archonius mind and anonymous' reply had somewhat similar examples in it and they make sense to him.

 

The prejudiced bias is strong in this one

Yeah, guy's a lost cause. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's hilarious how my examples make no sense to archonius mind and anonymous' reply had somewhat similar examples in it and they make sense to him.

 

The prejudiced bias is strong in this one

His examples (exactly!) shows what players need to do, not "Navigator has a 3D view". Clear and simple answer, without extra "thinking and conjecturing" what this mean.

I do not look at the situation as "Captain" or whatever else who control everything, I try to see what you want to offer to players on board (those service stuff). Because saying "IT SHOULD BE MULTI ONLY" = force somebody to do that. And if it fully boring and not gives any fun, why players need to do that?

 

But the main thing is - "And yes, if they are lucky, 99% of most crews job is watching screens. But you want them there for those 1% of the time - battle ;)"

And this is the main problem! It could be cool to manage some systems 1-2 times, but doing this crap day after day.

 

The game must give fun not routine work. Most of the things in the list is routine. Yes, these things could look very awesome in theory and dreams, but doing them day after day (to be good in that role) will be fully not enjoyable very soon. Or you think that somebody come back home from the 8hrs routine work in office (or any other) and will enjoy another few hours of routine gameplay?

Saying "YOU MUST HAVE MULTICREW" you forcing somebody to do the routine.

Saying "YOU MAY HAVE MULTICREW or IMPROVE AND PRACTISE YOUR SKILLS" gives the option to have a crew or work hard to do as more as possible.

In the end:

-Hardcore players have unlimited target to improve their multitasking and personal skills (Can fully and easy control full ship? Let's add something new)

-Basic or Casual players can try to find crew for up to every single turret and system (Don't want to do something? Hire somebody to do that)

-Well skilled players can learn how to run few systems at the same time (You like activity 1, 2 and 3, but 4th is too much for you? Hire someone to fill this gap)

 

Will 1-2 players control the same ship better than 10 players, this is a question of skill and practice. "Hard to Master" - isn't that on of the main messages from Developers?

 

Thanks,

Archonious

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Automated systems only can do a specific amount of tasks per second. this means that it will be impossible to control a complex ship alone (efffectivness aside, the code won't be fast enough to control all the objects and parts). In my opinion you really should need a big crew for a big ship. If you destroy the bridge of a starship, it should still be able to work, for example. That would cause a change in war strategies because it makes more sense to attack the main engine or other parts. (modular destruction has already been confirmed, as far as i know)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

His examples (exactly!) shows what players need to do, not "Navigator has a 3D view". Clear and simple answer, without extra "thinking and conjecturing" what this mean.

I do not look at the situation as "Captain" or whatever else who control everything, I try to see what you want to offer to players on board (those service stuff). Because saying "IT SHOULD BE MULTI ONLY" = force somebody to do that. And if it fully boring and not gives any fun, why players need to do that?

 

But the main thing is - "And yes, if they are lucky, 99% of most crews job is watching screens. But you want them there for those 1% of the time - battle ;)"

And this is the main problem! It could be cool to manage some systems 1-2 times, but doing this crap day after day.

 

The game must give fun not routine work. Most of the things in the list is routine. Yes, these things could look very awesome in theory and dreams, but doing them day after day (to be good in that role) will be fully not enjoyable very soon. Or you think that somebody come back home from the 8hrs routine work in office (or any other) and will enjoy another few hours of routine gameplay?

Saying "YOU MUST HAVE MULTICREW" you forcing somebody to do the routine.

Saying "YOU MAY HAVE MULTICREW or IMPROVE AND PRACTISE YOUR SKILLS" gives the option to have a crew or work hard to do as more as possible.

In the end:

-Hardcore players have unlimited target to improve their multitasking and personal skills (Can fully and easy control full ship? Let's add something new)

-Basic or Casual players can try to find crew for up to every single turret and system (Don't want to do something? Hire somebody to do that)

-Well skilled players can learn how to run few systems at the same time (You like activity 1, 2 and 3, but 4th is too much for you? Hire someone to fill this gap)

 

Will 1-2 players control the same ship better than 10 players, this is a question of skill and practice. "Hard to Master" - isn't that on of the main messages from Developers?

 

Thanks,

Archonious

 

Again, read the WHOLE sentence: "the navigator has a 3rd person vied (zoom/rotateable) so he can see whats going on on the battlefield)"

And then think about the words involved: NAVIGATOR - SEE WHAT'S GOING ON -> conclusion: he can talk to the driver to give him intel about the surroundings (are there asteroids, from where are enemies approaching, where can you hide, where are other points of interest,...)

 

If you can't see the fun in people having different roles and doing different stuff on the ship while many other people will coordinate all that stuff and give the captain only the most relevant infos - then we can stop now.

I see your point there with routine, and that should be avoided. BUT managing a crew itself and doing different tasks as we already discussed and explained won't be boring imho. Balance is always an issue and you're only able to balance something to be more fun if you implement it in the first place.

 

You only seem to think about this topic in terms of ships - I ,AGAIN, mind you of the many other areas of DU where your logic would just break this game. I tell you just one:

Playergroup sets up a base for their market. I come along with my mate and we just steamroll them with our totally, completly, extreme, op, hardcore skills in maneuvering our SINGLE SHIP. In which universe is it fair, that 2 players kill everything a 20 man corp has? They can't even defend it properly, because for two people it's ALWAYS easier to communicate and split their roles so that they know what to do. With multicrew it's harder to do and to get people to know their role, because someone will never pay attention. Plus, I and my mate have similar playtimes and since we're only two, we can get our super-long-extreme-battleship out every night to kill and rampage the planet - while others (though more players!) can't do shit against it, because it needs time to coordinate people. 

 

So the solution is easy:

- Play with your mate, no one said it wasn't possible - but then that battleship has WAY reduced firepower

- Play with a multicrew because then: you have all the same problems in setting up a fierce group for yourself. Hardskills (the one from the player itself, not the softskills the character has) come here into play because if you're good at running this crew, then you will certainly outmatch the same ship with a different crew. 

 

Oh and I'm not here for wording everything out for you and you are supposed to use your brain and not expect others to do all the thinking for you. It doesn't hurt if you think about the post before you answer it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Again, read the WHOLE sentence: "the navigator has a 3rd person vied (zoom/rotateable) so he can see whats going on on the battlefield)"

And then think about the words involved: NAVIGATOR - SEE WHAT'S GOING ON -> conclusion: he can talk to the driver to give him intel about the surroundings (are there asteroids, from where are enemies approaching, where can you hide, where are other points of interest,...)

 

If you can't see the fun in people having different roles and doing different stuff on the ship while many other people will coordinate all that stuff and give the captain only the most relevant infos - then we can stop now.

I see your point there with routine, and that should be avoided. BUT managing a crew itself and doing different tasks as we already discussed and explained won't be boring imho. Balance is always an issue and you're only able to balance something to be more fun if you implement it in the first place.

 

You only seem to think about this topic in terms of ships - I ,AGAIN, mind you of the many other areas of DU where your logic would just break this game. I tell you just one:

Playergroup sets up a base for their market. I come along with my mate and we just steamroll them with our totally, completly, extreme, op, hardcore skills in maneuvering our SINGLE SHIP. In which universe is it fair, that 2 players kill everything a 20 man corp has? They can't even defend it properly, because for two people it's ALWAYS easier to communicate and split their roles so that they know what to do. With multicrew it's harder to do and to get people to know their role, because someone will never pay attention. Plus, I and my mate have similar playtimes and since we're only two, we can get our super-long-extreme-battleship out every night to kill and rampage the planet - while others (though more players!) can't do shit against it, because it needs time to coordinate people. 

 

So the solution is easy:

- Play with your mate, no one said it wasn't possible - but then that battleship has WAY reduced firepower

- Play with a multicrew because then: you have all the same problems in setting up a fierce group for yourself. Hardskills (the one from the player itself, not the softskills the character has) come here into play because if you're good at running this crew, then you will certainly outmatch the same ship with a different crew. 

 

Oh and I'm not here for wording everything out for you and you are supposed to use your brain and not expect others to do all the thinking for you. It doesn't hurt if you think about the post before you answer it. 

Yeah, that is fine. If you and your mate very skillful, you can properly control all systems, do everything in time, then why you need extra crew? It looks like:

 

5+5 = 2+2+2+2+2

 

Where you and your mate doing very massive work - 2,5 times more/faster/better than every single member of the enemy crew (on the same ship for this example). P.S: Following this example, these 5 players can be same skillful as you two, but just because they are limited in "Control Navigation only" (one specific role), their value is lower.

Game need to allow you to do these "5 efficiency points". The game must not limit you to do "2 efficiency points" only! That is the main point.

 

About use your brain. Don't mess "use brain" and "be extra-sense and read ideas in your head". I told you about that in "Large Ship" example. How big is it, when the ship becomes Large? Same with roles, I have no idea what you think about them, so asked you direct question few times - "What player need to do?". Anonymous gave an answer on question, simple, clear, without any "guess what I mean". I find his answer informative overall. Nothing new for me personally, I don't see gameplay "look in the monitor for to talk" very fun. Why can't a pilot switch monitors and get all necessary info? Why can't a pilot coordinate everything? Maybe there is a reason in your head why it is impossible, but I'm not extra-sense, so I ask questions, not guess what you think.

 

I agree about possible repair or turret control, but what will be the game mechanic of "repairs and turrets fire systems" in the end? Turrets - Lock-On, so what will be the control? Find a target and lock it. Damage model under big question at all, since block destruction model requires massive server resources.

 

As I said many times, if 1 or 2 players can physically make a job of 10 players, this is not the reason to lower down their efficiency equal to anyone of these 10.

Somebody said before, doing everything will be easy (and everyone will control capitOl ships in 5 minutes after launch), so doing 1 role will be x10 easier (=VERY BORING).

 

I'm saying, that if there is a player who can show the efficiency of 10 average players, the game must allow him to use this efficiency.

 

Thanks,

Archonious

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, that is fine. If you and your mate very skillful, you can properly control all systems, do everything in time, then why you need extra crew? It looks like:

 

5+5 = 2+2+2+2+2

 

Where you and your mate doing very massive work - 2,5 times more/faster/better than every single member of the enemy crew (on the same ship for this example). P.S: Following this example, these 5 players can be same skillful as you two, but just because they are limited in "Control Navigation only" (one specific role), their value is lower.

Game need to allow you to do these "5 efficiency points". The game must not limit you to do "2 efficiency points" only! That is the main point.

 

About use your brain. Don't mess "use brain" and "be extra-sense and read ideas in your head". I told you about that in "Large Ship" example. How big is it, when the ship becomes Large? Same with roles, I have no idea what you think about them, so asked you direct question few times - "What player need to do?". Anonymous gave an answer on question, simple, clear, without any "guess what I mean". I find his answer informative overall. Nothing new for me personally, I don't see gameplay "look in the monitor for to talk" very fun. Why can't a pilot switch monitors and get all necessary info? Why can't a pilot coordinate everything? Maybe there is a reason in your head why it is impossible, but I'm not extra-sense, so I ask questions, not guess what you think.

 

I agree about possible repair or turret control, but what will be the game mechanic of "repairs and turrets fire systems" in the end? Turrets - Lock-On, so what will be the control? Find a target and lock it. Damage model under big question at all, since block destruction model requires massive server resources.

 

As I said many times, if 1 or 2 players can physically make a job of 10 players, this is not the reason to lower down their efficiency equal to anyone of these 10.

Somebody said before, doing everything will be easy (and everyone will control capitOl ships in 5 minutes after launch), so doing 1 role will be x10 easier (=VERY BORING).

 

I'm saying, that if there is a player who can show the efficiency of 10 average players, the game must allow him to use this efficiency.

 

Thanks,

Archonious

 

Ok, if you feel like that this is fair - why not, we have opposing ideas of fairness then. 

 

No offense to anonymous here but:

me: the navigator has a 3rd person vied (zoom/rotateable) so he can see whats going on on the battlefield)

anon: 5: Gunner 1 - pew pew

and then you write: Anonymous gave an answer on question, simple, clear, without any "guess what I mean".

I have no idea why you feel that my answers lack explainations

 

I'll leave it at that, every viewpoint has been written. So no sense in discussing the whole thing again and again with no progress

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, that is fine. If you and your mate very skillful, you can properly control all systems, do everything in time, then why you need extra crew? It looks like:

 

5+5 = 2+2+2+2+2

 

Where you and your mate doing very massive work - 2,5 times more/faster/better than every single member of the enemy crew (on the same ship for this example). P.S: Following this example, these 5 players can be same skillful as you two, but just because they are limited in "Control Navigation only" (one specific role), their value is lower.

Game need to allow you to do these "5 efficiency points". The game must not limit you to do "2 efficiency points" only! That is the main point.

 

About use your brain. Don't mess "use brain" and "be extra-sense and read ideas in your head". I told you about that in "Large Ship" example. How big is it, when the ship becomes Large? Same with roles, I have no idea what you think about them, so asked you direct question few times - "What player need to do?". Anonymous gave an answer on question, simple, clear, without any "guess what I mean". I find his answer informative overall. Nothing new for me personally, I don't see gameplay "look in the monitor for to talk" very fun. Why can't a pilot switch monitors and get all necessary info? Why can't a pilot coordinate everything? Maybe there is a reason in your head why it is impossible, but I'm not extra-sense, so I ask questions, not guess what you think.

 

I agree about possible repair or turret control, but what will be the game mechanic of "repairs and turrets fire systems" in the end? Turrets - Lock-On, so what will be the control? Find a target and lock it. Damage model under big question at all, since block destruction model requires massive server resources.

 

As I said many times, if 1 or 2 players can physically make a job of 10 players, this is not the reason to lower down their efficiency equal to anyone of these 10.

Somebody said before, doing everything will be easy (and everyone will control capitOl ships in 5 minutes after launch), so doing 1 role will be x10 easier (=VERY BORING).

 

I'm saying, that if there is a player who can show the efficiency of 10 average players, the game must allow him to use this efficiency.

 

Thanks,

Archonious

Are his troll mathematics accurate? Cause someone confirm if 5 + 5 = 2 + 2 + 2 + 2 ?

 

Also, a crew is a force multiplier for a ship. You run a ship on 1 guy, it'll end up far less efficient than with a proper crew.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...