Should Larger Ships Require Multiple Players?

[Ripper]

I've played several WWII flight sims with multiplayer planes. What I've found is very few people wanted to fill the role of a gunner on B-17s. Everyone wants to be the pilot.

 

I dont see this changing in DU, unless the player is forced into a role they really dont want to play. If NQ decides to go this direction with the game, they will be fighting human nature.

[Zamarus]

I've played several WWII flight sims with multiplayer planes. What I've found is very few people wanted to fill the role of a gunner on B-17s. Everyone wants to be the pilot.

 

I dont see this changing in DU, unless the player is forced into a role they really dont want to play. If NQ decides to go this direction with the game, they will be fighting human nature.

Disagree heavily there. The reason why everyone is a pilot in those games is because it's the strongest and most entertaining role and you are not required to do anything else to make it work. If you played games that actually requires people acting like a crew like Guns of Icarus you will see that the gunner role is not at all less popular, especially if you are playing as a team with people you know as opposed to playing with random people every match.

 

Personally i would actually prefer being a gunner than a pilot and i don't care what you say. NQ forcing people to be gunners isn't fighting human nature. You just have your bias from playing a certain limited type of game not really with a pre made crew and thus you are stuck with the illusion that EVERYONE and their mother wants to be the pilot.

[Anaximander]

I've played several WWII flight sims with multiplayer planes. What I've found is very few people wanted to fill the role of a gunner on B-17s. Everyone wants to be the pilot.

 

I dont see this changing in DU, unless the player is forced into a role they really dont want to play. If NQ decides to go this direction with the game, they will be fighting human nature.

You assume people will PUG into a battleship crew. Your Multipalyer Planes games, are not MMOs. They are session shooters. A good example for a relevance to DU, is Planetside 2. People there play dedicated Galaxy pilots (planes you parachute out of) and Sunderer drivers (mobile respawn staion). Those are dedicated roles, and organised groups of players have dedicated gunners.

 

Just because you want to be a pilot and only a pilot, doesn't mean it represents everyone. With the same logic, NQ should shut the game down from this point, sicne nobody is gonna do :

 

1) Space Station management

2) Hired gun / guard duty

3) Banking and spreadsheets

4) Organisation HR department (yes, it exists in EVE)

5) Quartermastering / Resource management.

6) Patroling.

 

All the above require people to pull off - or you think NQ will provide you with spreadsheets? What? You don't want to do spreadsheets for the org? Don't bitch if the guy doing it gets a DAC every week for his efforts. What? You don't want to be a gunner? Guess what,the boot is all yours and another guy who wants to be a gunner is now gunnering.

 

The game is about playing as the redshirt if you are new or do not want to take the risk / responsibility of owning a battleship. Nobody will give you expensive hardware without proving yourself.

 

Also, your "human nature" is a sad example. It's more like "I don't want to play a healer in an MMO" but then you suck up to healers and cry cause you can't get a dungeon done because of your "Human Nature" which is more akin to "Highschool Quarterback" than "human nature".

 

 

It's a team game. Learn to be a team player, or enjoy being the bottom-feeder. If you say "I am a pacifist, I don't want to PvP at all" and the enemy is at the gate and every last man counts for the fight, you are a bottom feeder and everyone will know it.

 

DU is not a session shooter. Stop comparing it to one.

[Ripper]

There's a lot to my analogy that went over your heads.

 

How did these flight sims man those B-17s?

 

They created "auto-gunners", that would work when people weren't manning those guns. This allowed for single player B-17s AND multiplayer B-17s.

 

Imagine that...

 

Both playing styles.. And YES! Multiplayer B-17s were more effective than single player.

 

The different here is that I dont want to force people into a specific playing style, while other people here do.

[Zamarus]

There's a lot to my analogy that went over your heads.

 

How did these flight sims man those B-17s?

 

They created "auto-gunners", that would work when people weren't manning those guns. This allowed for single player B-17s AND multiplayer B-17s.

 

Imagine that...

 

Both playing styles.. And YES! Multiplayer B-17s were more effective than single player.

 

The different here is that I dont want to force people into a specific playing style, while other people here do.

Why are you trying to force single players being able to do EVERYTHING on their own? Just wondering why you are so stubborn about wanting that. I mean you do realize NQ has said many times that one player shouldn't be able to do everything on their own. This game is going to revolve around groups of people working together and you should know that. Why do you HAVE to change that?

[Anaximander]

There's a lot to my analogy that went over your heads.

 

How did these flight sims man those B-17s?

 

They created "auto-gunners", that would work when people weren't manning those guns. This allowed for single player B-17s AND multiplayer B-17s.

 

Imagine that...

 

Both playing styles.. And YES! Multiplayer B-17s were more effective than single player.

 

The different here is that I dont want to force people into a specific playing style, while other people here do.

Thing is a Battleship is not a B-17. And not even a frigate is not on the size of small size of a B-17 in comparison.

 

You won't force anyone to be a gunner. The moment you say "I don't want to do gunnery" and people need a gunner, you wil lbe thoroughly ignored in favor of the next one. And it's an MMO, again, NOT a session shooter. The B-17 autoturrets idea works in those games, cause of the fact you join a session shooter for a round or two, cause you only got time for a session or two.

 

And your example still falls flat on its face, cause you assume everyone is a Highschool Quarterback like you, so "Gunenry is for nerds, real mucho men only pilot" or "healers (repairs / engineers) are for [insert Homosexual Remark Here], real men only play rouge" Yes I assume you are the person mispelling the class they play in WoW or w/e MMO has rogues, you assume everyone is a Highschool Quarterback with your "Human Nature" view, so I will annoint you a Rouge Player, who thinks healers are for nerds and wussies.

 

What? Should NQ also add automated repairs because those games have automated repairs as well?

 

The only craft you'll pilot if you are not a team player, is a starfighter, and that's on your own, cause if you can't take the job of a gunner, in a ship you don't fly, having only to coordinate fire with a team of gunners, I can't see you being a part of a group of pilots, in a swarm, going after turrets on a large ship. No with your Highschool Quarterback thinking.

 

I did say though your idea on gimbaling turrets to control multiple ones COULD work, just requiring a lot of specialised training - wihch is what the game is going for as JC has said so many times. And in that sense, YOU COULD fly a jacked-up starfighter behemoth with multiple guns, that you fire as you pilot it. And that is BALANCED as of default CPU limitation on Control Units to control the turrets depending on their CPU needs to operate.

 

Why a jacked-up starfighter? Cause a starfighter is a single-seater craft. A ship - like a Line-of-Battle Ship, commonly referred to as Battleship IS MEANT TO HAVE MULTIPLE PEOPLE ON IT BY DEFAULT. You don't go solo into battle. Battleshisp are meant to be the equivalent of trench warfare in space.

 

 

 

And on another note many people who came from EVE into DU, want to do all the different jobs ASIDE from piloting. Many of them do them already in EVE. There are many who come from other games, but EVE is the closest thing to DU's PvP en masse experience on the market.

 

And please, do not refer to the whole species of Humans as selfish, egocentric Highschool Quarterbacks. I am a prime example of your "Human Nature" example falling short, cause I am an egotrip of incredible proportions and I am willing to go after a medic/support gameplay for ground combat and / or on a ship as engineer or "Dr. Bones" mme machine. 

 

"Damn it Cybrex, I am Twerkmotor not a doctor"

 

Either your view of humanity is totally warped, or I am 46+2. And me being 46+2 is a nightmare fuel.

[Ripper]

Why are you trying to force single players being able to do EVERYTHING on their own?

Giving people the option to play single or multiplayer is "forcing" them.

 

For the reader who is intelligent enough to stay out of this discussion, how does this comment help Zamarus' argument?

[Ripper]

This thread is about the pro's and con's of playing multiplayer.

 

However, much like certain political groups you're shouted down, if you express an alternative viewpoint.

[Zamarus]

Giving people the option to play single vs multiplayer is "forcing" them.

 

For the reader who is intelligent enough to stay out of this discussion, how does this comment help Zamarus' argument?

 

You refuse to see the point. The point isn't giving players an option to play single vs multiplayer. That they can already do. What you are asking for is single player getting a bunch of compensations for tasks that requires a crew to do. Such as auto-gunners. That is taking away limitations that were originally put there to promote players cooperating in larger teams, and i am disagreeing with your ideas.

[Zamarus]

This thread is about the pro's and con's of playing multiplayer.

 

However, much like certain political groups you're shouted down, if you express an alternative viewpoint.

I agree with the purpose of it but nobody is shouting you down. People are throwing their counter-arguments your way. If you can't deal with a debate then don't start one.

[Ripper]

Compensation?

 

Poor argument. I could give 10 million DAC in exchange for a single resource.

[Ripper]

Your point is based upon some preconceived notion on how things work. How will you respond when the final product doesn't look like your presuppositions?

[Zamarus]

My point is based on NQ's own statements. You? Also why did you take a single word out of context to attack it? 

[Ripper]

Here's a quote from your original post.

 

Overall, the difference seems to be the degree to which we want to force people into playing as a group. Thoughts?

It's quite obvious which keyword we should be focusing on.

 

You want to "force" people to behave a certain way.

 

I don't.

 

As far as what JC said, he also said construct vs construct combat wasnt completely developed, and was subject to change.

 

I'm open to whatever NovaQuark produces.

[Zamarus]

Here's a quote from your original post.

 

It's quite obvious which keyword we should be focusing on.

 

You want to "force" people to behave a certain way.

 

I don't.

I don't agree. So lets agree to disagree.

[mrjacobean]

Your point is based upon some preconceived notion on how things work. How will you respond IF the final product doesn't look like your presuppositions?

No need to deal in absolutes here (you Sith), because it could be different from what you envision it  

[Anaximander]

Your point is based upon some preconceived notion on how things work. How will you respond when the final product doesn't look like your presuppositions?

The only person here that's not accepting the vision of the game is you in this discussion. You are advocating for Singleplayer things in an MMO.. You advocate for Session Shooter elements in an MMO.

 

If you can't socialise with people, you'll have to stick to a starfighter and go do whatever you wanna do. Battleships are meant for organisations of many players, as cities are meant for organisations of many players as well. What? Should NQ add NPCs in the game? Cause you got to ACCEPT, there's no NPC in the game ( and no, the market bots for the initial introduction of money in the game are not NPCs, they are not Characters, they are bots). And by extend, no NPC turrets.

 

You want stuff delivered to a market? Hire a hauler that has an actual crew to take care of the delivery. You can't expect to have equal access to gameplays as a group of people does. Your suggestion on automation violates the very core feature of the game - its MMO part. Your session shooter muiltiplayer games are NOT MMOs. 

 

And this thread is not about Pros and Cons. Read the title. It reads "should large ships require multiple players?"

 

And the answer is yes. Yes they do. Otherwise the game is gonna be the same micromanagement clsuterfuck like EVE is, and micromanagement is the key reason EVE has 50000 playerbase but 500000 accounts. If you have automated turrets, you leave the door wide open for multiboxing. With a multicrew ship, multiboxing becoms impossible. What? You think JC doesn't know what drives new people away from EVE? It's the micromanagement of 50 different things at once in combat. And JC has the chance to do what the EVE devs wanted to do a long time now but are bogged down by the 10+ years veterans who don't want change but whine for change all the time.

 

He can make DU what EVE could have been, wih the added freedom of the voxel building part that allows even creative people into the fold who don't want to be pilots (but I forgot, you are a Highschool Quarterback, I  bet you think builders should be suckerpunched, right? )

 

If you can't socialise and build on interactions with other people, Sandbox MMOs are not for you.

[Ripper]

I think one of the big differences between our points is how we view the game.

 

Several of you have admittedly a great depth in playing Eve, and view it from that perspective.

 

I'm viewing the game from more of a Minecraft/Starmade perspective. I'm seeing it from what I can build with the base elements and LUA functions.

 

The LUA devblog provides an example of a combat script. Has anyone bothered to look at it and think about the implications?

 

enemyAt(x,y,z)

setPower(45)

fire()

 

If I can plug in multiple elements (which we already know we can) whats to stop me from plugging in multiple weapons?

 

Our conflict here is that JC's quote doesn't exactly line up with the documented LUA script devblog.

[mrjacobean]

Our conflict here is that JC's quote doesn't exactly line up with the documented LUA script devblog.

Because the never should. The time between that quote and the devblog is large enough to warrant, or even force, there to be a difference. As always, use the latest data, but keep in mind the past design ideas for later.

[Ripper]

The "latest" version isn't always the most accurate. Especially when answering a question off the cuff, as in the livestream.

 

It would be nice if NQ could provide some clarification.

 

Hey NQ.. Please consider that a request. Maybe the clarification could be in your April update?

[Lethys]

There's a lot to my analogy that went over your heads.

 

How did these flight sims man those B-17s?

 

They created "auto-gunners", that would work when people weren't manning those guns. This allowed for single player B-17s AND multiplayer B-17s.

 

Imagine that...

 

Both playing styles.. And YES! Multiplayer B-17s were more effective than single player.

 

The different here is that I dont want to force people into a specific playing style, while other people here do.

So....those autogunners were weaker than a player? These were nerfed then? Why advocate for no nerfs in DU then? Don't you think they knew why those had to be weaker?

[Anaximander]

I think one of the big differences between our points is how we view the game.

 

Several of you have admittedly a great depth in playing Eve, and view it from that perspective.

 

I'm viewing the game from more of a Minecraft/Starmade perspective. I'm seeing it from what I can build with the base elements and LUA functions.

 

The LUA devblog provides an example of a combat script. Has anyone bothered to look at it and think about the implications?

 

enemyAt(x,y,z)

setPower(45)

fire()

 

If I can plug in multiple elements (which we already know we can) whats to stop me from plugging in multiple weapons?

 

Our conflict here is that JC's quote doesn't exactly line up with the documented LUA script devblog.

Dude, are you actively ignoring points or are you just skimming in keywords across a post?

 

Gimbaling and automation are not one and the same. Controlling multiple guns at once and having them being automated are not the same thing. That would require CPU limitations on Control Units to balance the maximum number of guns you operate at once.

 

Same reason for CPU limit is the reason I - PERSONALY - believe that's how the Battleships will need multicrew. A control Unit can do so much. A pilot needs access to multiple Propulsion and RCS. A gunner needs CPU to go into handling all the differnet guns. And that's something tying to the building gameplay, juggling CPU limitatiosn when designing a ship, wattage, powergrid lines, center of mass, propulsion. If a starfighter can have three guns on it and am issile launcher and you operate them all ACTIVELY, then it's balnced in my eyes. You put in the training, you fly a ship that can only fight what it faces. Having automation would mean "make fast ship, troll people with superfast ship and autopewpew".

 

Also, a solo ship will not be protected by boarding parties. Pretty much, one boarding party = you lost. You are solo, they are many.

 

And Miencraft is NOT an MMO. StarMade, again, NOT an MMO. Both of these games are meant to be played singleplayer with OPTIONAL multiplayer.

 

You won't be able to build ships on your own. You could BUY the different parts and do it, but you WON'T be able to do it on your own, at least, not at first.

 

 

To brign my final statement, I am all in for gimbaling of multiple guns, but not automation.

 

 

And the Lua Script exampe you provided, means "you got a nose gun on your starfighter, if the target goes into these locatiosn you designated, the gun will fire upon them". That's NOT automation, that's just scripting a macro.

 

It can also be used to show a message "Target out of Optimal Range" if the builder has put it there to make sure you don't waste ammo trying to hit someone your guns can't hit.

[Ripper]

Im actively ignoring you and Lethys.

 

 

And you know why. It's not because I can't debate my point with the two of you.

 

[mrjacobean]

You won't be able to build ships on your own. You could BUY the different parts and do it, but you WON'T be able to do it on your own, at least, not at first.

Well, you could, but not on the scale where this argument happens.

[Anaximander]

Well, you could, but not on the scale where this argument happens.

True, I bet nobody will be able to build ships on the Battleship scale solo.