So, you've fought your way up the latter of the galaxy and are now in line to purchase your first ship that can hold more than a family of four, congratulations.
But what are you going to do with it once you get it?
Are you going to be doomed frantically run back and forth between bridge stations trying to control every system on the ship?
Are you going to be forced to fly along side your shiny new capital ship, looking longingly at that captains suite you had all picked out?
Well I believe you shouldn't have to put up with any of these things. You just purchased a capital ship, you should darn well be able to hire a bunch of drunks from the local bar to run it for you!
Ha, but seriously why is it that every space game that even lets you fly capital ships treat them like up-scaled fighters? It makes no logical sense and makes you feel like your trying to park a garbage truck in a compact parking space. These ships are not small things and would normally require several crewmen to operate everything properly.
I propose a system in which you take the nice comfy captains chair for your own and purchase your very own copy of "Delegation for dummies". Simply put, this puts you in the role of the captain of a capital ship, with all the perks (like not having to fly the ship yourself) and responsibilities that entails.
So you go to a local drinking establishment and chain a bunch of bums to your bridge stations. This is the first step to having your powerful shiny new capital ship be more than just a multimillion dollar paperweight.
This transforms the game from a first person space fighter sim (Gag, too many of these!) into something never before seen in the genre. The game takes on a Rpg like feel as you command your ship, deciding on what maneuvers to use, how many ships to assign to different tasks, and overall not flying a fighter. You would most likely have several bridge officers (made up of the nicest looking drunks you found.) and they are going to be what actually operates most of the systems on your ship.
You have a tactical officer in charge of making people you don't like go boom.
You have a comm officer in charge of relaying your orders to any fleet you may be with/ ordering space pizza.
And you have the helmsman in charge of steering the ship and not crashing into anything.
And as they win battles, complete training ect they get better at thier jobs, tactical officer gets better at killing things, comm officer relays orders faster and remembers you hate anchovies, and the helmsman stays sober behind the wheel for longer.
Oh but you don't just have bridge officers, oh no, you have an entire ship load of drunks you picked up to do your bidding. Since it would be far too tedious to keep track of their experience individually, you would have a general crew experience system. They would also level up as you win battles and would get better at the day to day running of your ship, improved repair rates, toilets stay clean, and there is a little mint on your pillow every night.
Ok, so your out battling your way through the heart of pirate territory and you stop to talk a look around. surprise surprise your entire crew has passed out from exhaustion and now your a sitting duck, good job. The crew readiness system is a system in which your crew perform better depending on how rested and stress free their lives are, and steadily perform worse and worse and you drag their lives through the mud, forcing them to stay away for days on end fighting through wave after wave of enemy attack. You raise their readiness by sending them on leave, taking them off active duty, or even just not forcing them into stressful situations for a while. This kind of system, while it does add more for the play to keep track of vastly improves immersion in your role as a capital ship captain.
So you manage to run away from the pirates and decide your crew needs to get whipped into shape. As your pulling out the flail you realize that beating them into shape yourself would take ages, so you do the next best thing, you schedule drills. Drills are a system in which, during a time when there is not expected to be any need to suddenly go into battle, you can hold training exercises for your crew. These are things like shooting practice, red alert drills, or flying through imaginary hoops. These simple activities, while tiring for your crew help improve your combat efficiency and make sure your in tip top fighting shape, when you decide to make another run at killing the pirate king.
This is the system I'm proposing and I hope you give it some thought.
Post
Mon Dec 10, 2012 9:33 am
#2
Re: Capital ship command and Crew experiance/readiness/drill
I wouldn't want to manually order every bridge officer on each of my 30 capital ships on and off duty all the time.
The whole point of the "delegation" you mentioned is to avoid micromanagement.
The only way I could see a "stamina" system work (if badly...) is globally per ship.
A ship on high alert (or in combat) is more effective but this drains the crew's stamina.
That still creates the same issue, though. If I have many ships on duty like patrols and blockade, I'd be very busy altering alert levels or pulling ships back to "rest".
It sounds good in theory but I wouldn't want to see it in a game.
Maye in some real life OCS course software...
The whole point of the "delegation" you mentioned is to avoid micromanagement.
The only way I could see a "stamina" system work (if badly...) is globally per ship.
A ship on high alert (or in combat) is more effective but this drains the crew's stamina.
That still creates the same issue, though. If I have many ships on duty like patrols and blockade, I'd be very busy altering alert levels or pulling ships back to "rest".
It sounds good in theory but I wouldn't want to see it in a game.
Maye in some real life OCS course software...
There is no "I" in Tea. That would be gross.
Post
Mon Dec 10, 2012 11:55 am
#3
Re: Capital ship command and Crew experiance/readiness/drill
Geez. You make that sound so enticing that I'd probably never both with anything larger than a corvette class ship. I'm a simply soul. I like to see the number on my in-game account rise, and I like to make things go boom, the bigger the better. I do not like playing "the sims" with my spaceship, let alone micromanage the crews combat readiness.
I (as a player) like being in control of my ship. Be it through the RTS interface or by the joys of directly inputting the commands. As such, I'd like the controls to be as clean, quick and responsive as possible - after all, I want to fight the local military, NOT the bloody controls.
Besides, not all cap ships are navy combat vessels. There's bulk freighters and asteroid mining ships as well, and those might indeed be crewed by the second-worst scum of the universe. I mean, you don't need to go to a fancy-pants academy to operate an ore grinder and monitor a blast furnace.
Also, the AI is supposed to be smart enough to do things even without the player calling shots or being around. I'd say we exploit that for a smooth experience and watch them do their stuff, instead of having to babysit them.
I (as a player) like being in control of my ship. Be it through the RTS interface or by the joys of directly inputting the commands. As such, I'd like the controls to be as clean, quick and responsive as possible - after all, I want to fight the local military, NOT the bloody controls.
Besides, not all cap ships are navy combat vessels. There's bulk freighters and asteroid mining ships as well, and those might indeed be crewed by the second-worst scum of the universe. I mean, you don't need to go to a fancy-pants academy to operate an ore grinder and monitor a blast furnace.
Also, the AI is supposed to be smart enough to do things even without the player calling shots or being around. I'd say we exploit that for a smooth experience and watch them do their stuff, instead of having to babysit them.
Hardenberg was my name
And Terra was my nation
Deep space is my dwelling place
The stars my destination
And Terra was my nation
Deep space is my dwelling place
The stars my destination
Post
Mon Dec 10, 2012 12:26 pm
#4
Re: Capital ship command and Crew experiance/readiness/drill
I definitely agree that capital ships should not operate like scaled up fighters. At the same time, you shouldn't have to micromanage every capital ship in the fleet. I would say a cool option would be to treat your flagship on a more micromanaged level, where you can have individual batteries targeting specific ships, distribute power to shields or weapons or engines, maybe even shields in specific parts of the ship, but than your other capital ships would just need orders like "take out that ship" or "go over there", and they would handle themselves. Or you can toggle an autopilot and control everything from the flagship without really worrying about what the flagship is doing. Of course, the AI would have to be able to handle this.
Post
Mon Dec 10, 2012 1:26 pm
#5
Re: Capital ship command and Crew experiance/readiness/drill
You wouldn't have to micro manage your whole fleet, those ships are captained by someone else after all.
The micro management would be limited to just your own ship.
Micro management is such a dirty word that spawns automatic negative emotions, and yeah it is annoying when its pointless.
But the point of the systems Ive laid out is to actually make it feel like your in charge of someone without having frivolous interior spaces.
Through these few game mechanics you don't have to see people running back and forth through your giant capitals ships halls to feel like they are there.
My main gripe about capital ships in these kind of games is (besides when they treat them like up-sized fighters) is that it feels like your the only person on board. It gets kind of lonely in space and maybe having these systems gives you other things to do when your off exploring deep uncharted space.
The micro management would be limited to just your own ship.
Micro management is such a dirty word that spawns automatic negative emotions, and yeah it is annoying when its pointless.
But the point of the systems Ive laid out is to actually make it feel like your in charge of someone without having frivolous interior spaces.
Through these few game mechanics you don't have to see people running back and forth through your giant capitals ships halls to feel like they are there.
My main gripe about capital ships in these kind of games is (besides when they treat them like up-sized fighters) is that it feels like your the only person on board. It gets kind of lonely in space and maybe having these systems gives you other things to do when your off exploring deep uncharted space.
Post
Mon Dec 10, 2012 1:57 pm
#6
Re: Capital ship command and Crew experiance/readiness/drill
I'm absolutely not against having crew - meaningful crew.
But what would they do?
Steering? I have yet to be impressed by the flying skills of an AI autopilot - no matter which game.
Shooting? I'm not sure if that will be a game feature. From what we've seen so far, all targeting of all the ship's guns is done manually by the player.
Sensors, ECM? Impossible to tell what will be in the game.
Well, maybe hydroponics. Watching an NPC gardener water the flowers on the bridge. =)
What could be "done" by crew members really depends on how the game will work. If there are automated turrets, those would be a logical choice for being controlled by "gunners" but the target priorities and general smarts of turret scripts are highly debatable.
Battlecruiser 3000 modeled all the officers, marines, engineers, having them run around in an abstract ship interior.
On the menu you could see them travel through corridors, to the galley to have a snack, to their quarters to sleep, to medbay, to the bridge...
What it meant in game terms is that you had to wait until person X was at his post until you could do the next click and get on with things. Then you'd send the still tired fella back to bed.
When I'm playing a game I can really do without watching people sleep - or watching grass grow.
Downtime is a feature from MMOs where it it used to increase the time that the player requires to reach max level and go through all the game content - or more importantly, the time the player spends paying the monthly subscription.
In a single player game downtime serves no purpose. It does not entertain the player.
But what would they do?
Steering? I have yet to be impressed by the flying skills of an AI autopilot - no matter which game.
Shooting? I'm not sure if that will be a game feature. From what we've seen so far, all targeting of all the ship's guns is done manually by the player.
Sensors, ECM? Impossible to tell what will be in the game.
Well, maybe hydroponics. Watching an NPC gardener water the flowers on the bridge. =)
What could be "done" by crew members really depends on how the game will work. If there are automated turrets, those would be a logical choice for being controlled by "gunners" but the target priorities and general smarts of turret scripts are highly debatable.
Battlecruiser 3000 modeled all the officers, marines, engineers, having them run around in an abstract ship interior.
On the menu you could see them travel through corridors, to the galley to have a snack, to their quarters to sleep, to medbay, to the bridge...
What it meant in game terms is that you had to wait until person X was at his post until you could do the next click and get on with things. Then you'd send the still tired fella back to bed.
When I'm playing a game I can really do without watching people sleep - or watching grass grow.
Downtime is a feature from MMOs where it it used to increase the time that the player requires to reach max level and go through all the game content - or more importantly, the time the player spends paying the monthly subscription.
In a single player game downtime serves no purpose. It does not entertain the player.
There is no "I" in Tea. That would be gross.
Post
Mon Dec 10, 2012 7:06 pm
#7
Early Spring - 1055: Well, I made it to Boatmurdered, and my initial impressions can be set forth in three words: What. The. F*ck.
Re: Capital ship command and Crew experiance/readiness/drill
...Was I the only one who immediately thought of Farmville: LImit Theory edition?Gazz wrote: Well, maybe hydroponics. Watching an NPC gardener water the flowers on the bridge. =)
Early Spring - 1055: Well, I made it to Boatmurdered, and my initial impressions can be set forth in three words: What. The. F*ck.
Post
Mon Dec 10, 2012 9:22 pm
#8
now if I could get that same feeling as i had when playing STBC id probably never play any other game. because LT would have combined the best elements from 2 of my favorite games growing up. (homeworld and STBC) and then added on a lot more to it. and for everyone out there who could care less about micromanaging (or even macromanaging) your crew ignore them and pilot the ship yourself. as for commanding other ships enter into the tactical overlay and play the more rts style or talk to the comm officer and relay your commands to the captains from there and watch the ai fleet move out.
Re: Capital ship command and Crew experiance/readiness/drill
i Disagree, Star Trek: Bridge Commander is a space combat simulation video game, published by Activision and Totally Games in 2002, based in the Star Trek universe. and Its done exactly what you describe quite well. you sit in the captains chair and tell crew men what to do. get into a fight? speak to the tactical officer tell him to disable or destroy the ship and he will pilot the ship and fire the weapons until the ships ether disabled or destroyed. want to talk to fleet command or hail that cargo ship ? comms officer is the person to talk to ask for the person or ship and a hails sent. want to check up on power levels and repair status engineering is the man to talk with...you see where im going with this, you dident have to do anything it was all carried out by the crew and you watched as they did the things themselves. now you could take over a station if you wanted to. (personally i think im better at combat flying and power resource management than they are but thats besides the point).Radon18 wrote:This transforms the game from a first person space fighter sim (Gag, too many of these!) into something never before seen in the genre.
now if I could get that same feeling as i had when playing STBC id probably never play any other game. because LT would have combined the best elements from 2 of my favorite games growing up. (homeworld and STBC) and then added on a lot more to it. and for everyone out there who could care less about micromanaging (or even macromanaging) your crew ignore them and pilot the ship yourself. as for commanding other ships enter into the tactical overlay and play the more rts style or talk to the comm officer and relay your commands to the captains from there and watch the ai fleet move out.
If I've rambled and gone off topic im sorry but i tend to be long winded as you might notice if you stumble across my other post XD. thanks for reading.
Post
Tue Dec 11, 2012 3:48 am
#9
Re: Capital ship command and Crew experiance/readiness/drill
IT is kind of like the Bridge Commander game in theory. The only real difference (in my mind anyway) is that your always controlling your ship via the RTS interface and always in third person. (unless you wanted to take over manually)
and forgive me for forgetting the Battle cruiser series, they had a similar system that was also very good at making you feel like you were in charge of people. (without having to watch them ever second.)
The horrible down side to those games is that both graphically and game-play wise they have more in common with Atari's Asteroids and Microsoft excel than any game of the period should have. And they kind of forgot that a game needs to at least be a little bit fun....
So yeah its basically a combination of Bridge Commander and the Battle cruiser series, streamlined and ultra simplified with RPG elements.
Imagine Bridge commander, if instead of having to tell your tactical officer something, you ordered your ship to attack via the RTS interface and it calculated against your tactical officers stats for accuracy. So you never actually have to sit and watch your crewmen doing their job. Your focusing on the entire situation and planning, while the orders you gave are being carried out.
And the crew fatigue/ drills system is not a core part of it, they are just ways to make the whole experience feel more immersive.
and forgive me for forgetting the Battle cruiser series, they had a similar system that was also very good at making you feel like you were in charge of people. (without having to watch them ever second.)
The horrible down side to those games is that both graphically and game-play wise they have more in common with Atari's Asteroids and Microsoft excel than any game of the period should have. And they kind of forgot that a game needs to at least be a little bit fun....
So yeah its basically a combination of Bridge Commander and the Battle cruiser series, streamlined and ultra simplified with RPG elements.
Imagine Bridge commander, if instead of having to tell your tactical officer something, you ordered your ship to attack via the RTS interface and it calculated against your tactical officers stats for accuracy. So you never actually have to sit and watch your crewmen doing their job. Your focusing on the entire situation and planning, while the orders you gave are being carried out.
And the crew fatigue/ drills system is not a core part of it, they are just ways to make the whole experience feel more immersive.
Post
Tue Dec 11, 2012 4:52 am
#10
Re: Capital ship command and Crew experiance/readiness/drill
The problem with systems of great fiddly-ness... which are then streamlined to be usable with reasonable effort...is that you may just as well skip the whole thing and get the same result. =P
Instead, you could do it GalCiv / X3 style.
The ship has a skill / experience level and gets better at doing ship stuff.
The XP level of persons is never even tracked outside ships because after hiring, you can only transfer persons to other ships - even if it's just some shuttle / space bus.
Let's say your ship has a nominal crew of 7. You currently have 6 and the ship's XP is 57.
You hire one replacement (0 XP) at a nearby station and your new ship XP level is 48.8.
( 6 * 57 + 1 * 0 ) / 7 = 48.8
If you transfer someone to another of your ships, the XP level on the 2nd ship is adjusted accordingly.
It's a very generic approach but you can have the roleplaying value of a "ship with a crack crew" as well as losses in battle and replacements - without any of the Sims-like micromanagement.
Of course this is the extreme example with zero per-person tracking. Tossing more stats at the feature is easy enough.
Instead, you could do it GalCiv / X3 style.
The ship has a skill / experience level and gets better at doing ship stuff.
The XP level of persons is never even tracked outside ships because after hiring, you can only transfer persons to other ships - even if it's just some shuttle / space bus.
Let's say your ship has a nominal crew of 7. You currently have 6 and the ship's XP is 57.
You hire one replacement (0 XP) at a nearby station and your new ship XP level is 48.8.
( 6 * 57 + 1 * 0 ) / 7 = 48.8
If you transfer someone to another of your ships, the XP level on the 2nd ship is adjusted accordingly.
It's a very generic approach but you can have the roleplaying value of a "ship with a crack crew" as well as losses in battle and replacements - without any of the Sims-like micromanagement.
Of course this is the extreme example with zero per-person tracking. Tossing more stats at the feature is easy enough.
There is no "I" in Tea. That would be gross.
Post
Tue Dec 11, 2012 11:02 am
#11
Re: Capital ship command and Crew experiance/readiness/drill
Food for thought...
What would the "crew level/quality" actually influence?
I'm not really sure if they add that much to the game. If you let the crew influence aspects of the ship's performance with are already keyed to other upgradeable components, you kind of defeat the purpose of adding those components in the first place.
i.E.: I buy my first battleship, fit it with the finest components money can buy and then crew it with green crew (well, that's how they usually start out...) only to find out that its combat performance is beyond abysmal, because:
The shields don't regenerate fast enough, repairs are slow as molasses, the turrets can't hit the broad side of a moon and the speed/maneuverability of the vessel brings the term "pregnant whale" to mind, along with the fact that half the crew runs off at the next port of call because rookie morale is low by default.
That's not fun. Actually, that's kind of the opposite of it.
And if I can just buy better crew ("On sale! Seasoned Xenobulaxian Engeneering crews! Get yours today!), then it's merely another upgrade component for the ship and shouldn't get the RPG stat increase treatment - my guns don't get better the more I shoot with them, and yet they cost the same type of currency as the rest of the upgrades. From a balance point of view, it makes no sense. Advancement could be acceptable if crew was a "running cost", i.E. if you have to pay them in regular intervals, but with that model, all your crew will end up at the "level cap" pretty fast.
Which also brings up the question of the base competence level. Players in general have a low tolerance for underperforming equipment, and the crew is no different. Just how big should the difference between two identical ships be, if one was to be crewed by the greenest of recruits and one with the choicest of pros? How would both ships perform in comparison to a ship of the next larger size class with "average" crew? How about ships that are actually too small to have crew, like fighters and drones?
Balancing all of that is a can of worms, and I'm not really sure if the results would be worth the hassle.
What would the "crew level/quality" actually influence?
I'm not really sure if they add that much to the game. If you let the crew influence aspects of the ship's performance with are already keyed to other upgradeable components, you kind of defeat the purpose of adding those components in the first place.
i.E.: I buy my first battleship, fit it with the finest components money can buy and then crew it with green crew (well, that's how they usually start out...) only to find out that its combat performance is beyond abysmal, because:
The shields don't regenerate fast enough, repairs are slow as molasses, the turrets can't hit the broad side of a moon and the speed/maneuverability of the vessel brings the term "pregnant whale" to mind, along with the fact that half the crew runs off at the next port of call because rookie morale is low by default.
That's not fun. Actually, that's kind of the opposite of it.
And if I can just buy better crew ("On sale! Seasoned Xenobulaxian Engeneering crews! Get yours today!), then it's merely another upgrade component for the ship and shouldn't get the RPG stat increase treatment - my guns don't get better the more I shoot with them, and yet they cost the same type of currency as the rest of the upgrades. From a balance point of view, it makes no sense. Advancement could be acceptable if crew was a "running cost", i.E. if you have to pay them in regular intervals, but with that model, all your crew will end up at the "level cap" pretty fast.
Which also brings up the question of the base competence level. Players in general have a low tolerance for underperforming equipment, and the crew is no different. Just how big should the difference between two identical ships be, if one was to be crewed by the greenest of recruits and one with the choicest of pros? How would both ships perform in comparison to a ship of the next larger size class with "average" crew? How about ships that are actually too small to have crew, like fighters and drones?
Balancing all of that is a can of worms, and I'm not really sure if the results would be worth the hassle.
Hardenberg was my name
And Terra was my nation
Deep space is my dwelling place
The stars my destination
And Terra was my nation
Deep space is my dwelling place
The stars my destination
Post
Tue Dec 11, 2012 11:08 am
#12
Re: Capital ship command and Crew experiance/readiness/drill
Yeah i kind of liked the way they did things in Galciv
On an unrelated note i hope that the Devs stay far away from the horrible system the X series used to control your NPC ships. It was worse than driving nails through your palms and ultimately made having NPC ships in the first place pointless.
On an unrelated note i hope that the Devs stay far away from the horrible system the X series used to control your NPC ships. It was worse than driving nails through your palms and ultimately made having NPC ships in the first place pointless.
Post
Tue Dec 11, 2012 11:43 am
#13
The differences are the role playing angle and that the ship with an experienced crew is not instantly replaceable.
Of course, it must not be possible to buy an experienced crew right off the bat. Then it would really just be another installed upgrade.
A nice bonus and worth preserving experienced crews but not game-killingly overpowered.
Beyond that we have not the faintest clue as to the ship classes (if any) or sizes in the game.
You can't do that and end up with a useable UI.
The AI for executing those order was also... I guess I could talk for a long time about all the details that were wrong with it but it wouldn't help this topic in any way. =P
Re: Capital ship command and Crew experiance/readiness/drill
There is nothing that "crew" does that can't be done by some sort of upgraded gizmo.Hardenberg wrote:What would the "crew level/quality" actually influence?
I'm not really sure if they add that much to the game. If you let the crew influence aspects of the ship's performance with are already keyed to other upgradeable components, you kind of defeat the purpose of adding those components in the first place.
The differences are the role playing angle and that the ship with an experienced crew is not instantly replaceable.
Of course, it must not be possible to buy an experienced crew right off the bat. Then it would really just be another installed upgrade.
I'm guessing 80 - 85%. These are sailors on a star ship, not a bunch of monkeys you dragged out of the woods.Which also brings up the question of the base competence level.
A nice bonus and worth preserving experienced crews but not game-killingly overpowered.
Where's the fun if it's easy?How would both ships perform in comparison to a ship of the next larger size class with "average" crew? How about ships that are actually too small to have crew, like fighters and drones?
Beyond that we have not the faintest clue as to the ship classes (if any) or sizes in the game.
Can't say that I have tried the nails thing but yah - that game had issues. Mostly that it was designed as a one-ship-game and then menus to give orders to other ships were tacked on. And on. And on. And on...Radon18 wrote:i hope that the Devs stay far away from the horrible system the X series used to control your NPC ships. It was worse than driving nails through your palms
You can't do that and end up with a useable UI.
The AI for executing those order was also... I guess I could talk for a long time about all the details that were wrong with it but it wouldn't help this topic in any way. =P
There is no "I" in Tea. That would be gross.
Post
Tue Dec 11, 2012 8:35 pm
#14
Re: Capital ship command and Crew experiance/readiness/drill
the ai in this game are more advanced than anything ive seen even tried in other games. so it would stand to reason that even a green crew (and honestly who would have an entire war ship manned by green recruits? there would be a few vets showing the new guys the way to do things) would avance in prefomance as they familiarized themselves with the ship and standard jobs. do crews essintaly become disposable equipment to you? well thats a personal call each person would have to make, for me a crew that ive been running with would become very important for me to take care of and protect. heck look at star trek (or any number of equily famous series) the crew are typicly more interesting to watch than the story or situation they face. (for instance the famous 'its green' reference http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IIQcFUVCX_4 )
ive done it again ive begone to ramble... in short im in support of having a flexible and in-depth crew system that you can ether be as involved with or ignore as you see fit. i disagree with having to maintain a morals or drills or anything like that but mataining crew (food drink ship replacement parts ect) should factor in when considering adding 1-15 more ships to your expanding and growing fleet. no i dont want sims in space where i have to babysit each ship (the ai are far to advanced to require this any way) but keeping on good terms with your crew is important unless you dont mind playing Caesar in space.
ive done it again ive begone to ramble... in short im in support of having a flexible and in-depth crew system that you can ether be as involved with or ignore as you see fit. i disagree with having to maintain a morals or drills or anything like that but mataining crew (food drink ship replacement parts ect) should factor in when considering adding 1-15 more ships to your expanding and growing fleet. no i dont want sims in space where i have to babysit each ship (the ai are far to advanced to require this any way) but keeping on good terms with your crew is important unless you dont mind playing Caesar in space.
If I've rambled and gone off topic im sorry but i tend to be long winded as you might notice if you stumble across my other post XD. thanks for reading.
Post
Tue Dec 18, 2012 4:35 am
#15
Re: Capital ship command and Crew experiance/readiness/drill
Ultimately, I think this feature would add needless complication with a very limited reward. Limited being dependent on how much you value the worth of RPing being a captain of a crew that you have a tiny bit of influence over.
If you have no interest in that, then it becomes a tedious process of trying to train up/recruit your crew.
Then you also have the issue of the number of crew your ship needs? Josh has already stated that there won't be any kind of distinction/class between ships, except for maybe carriers. Though I imagine a 'ship mass to number of crew' ratio could be quite easily applied. I still think it's pointless.
If you have no interest in that, then it becomes a tedious process of trying to train up/recruit your crew.
Then you also have the issue of the number of crew your ship needs? Josh has already stated that there won't be any kind of distinction/class between ships, except for maybe carriers. Though I imagine a 'ship mass to number of crew' ratio could be quite easily applied. I still think it's pointless.
“The impact of space activities is nothing less than the galvanizing of hope and imagination for human life continuum into a future of infinite possibility.”