Each person getting their own ship. Yes.

Effect

One thing I was concerned about when I first heard the game was how ships were going to be handled. I'm glad that each player will be commanding their own ship. It's going to be a bit weird though to a degree but I think this was the only logical way this type of game could have been pulled off. Same with Star Wars Galaxies in that everyone was able to get their own ship. Still reading up on Star Trek Online but being a trek fan and being a fan of City of Heroes/Villains (though I don't play anymore but it was well done) I have faith Cryptic will do a decent job.

I wonder though what ships people will be able to start off with and what happens if it's destroyed.

Anyone know?

Narshe

Em.. small ship, no clue what it would be. It is 20 years after Nemesis, so expect all new designs. Maybe captain of a sporty new runabout?

They said Death penalty won't be anything severe. assume they were talking about destroyed ships too. Don't expect any EVE harshness

Ekibiogami

I got a felling its gana play as Eve With CoX away missions. Hope im wrong but Im sure i wont be

Unknown

They are going to have to go above and beyond what the previous layout of the game was to get people into it. Personal ships and guild ships are a necessity.

TheHorror

There is nothing wrong with giving people their own ships.  I would have preferred an option to allow people to serve under another captain though and get recommendations or reprimands on their record.  It would appeal to the roleplaying crowd while still allowing everyone to get a ship (people without good recommendations should still be able to get a ship, it would just look bad on their record as an officer).

Dracus

I can concede in letting every player entitled to a ship; however for large ships, I think those should be manned by player crews (just a bridge crew is good enough).  This keeps the number of big ships limited and that dream of, "Someday I'll be a Captain of a large multi-player ship."

Thus player captains of such ships would most likely have leadership qualities and skills.

Infalible

Allowing everyone to command thier own ship is a simple solution to an otherwise complex problem. I think it is the wisest choice.

As to multiplayer crews, Cryptic have already stated that there will be Fleet Starbases that players will be able to create for the guilds. These will be player driven bases that are constructed from resouces amassed by the Fleet. There is your multiplayer right there.

Cryptic have put in place some elements to make sure that each player ship is pretty unique. Firstly, they have stated that you will be able to modify your ship depending on your needs. So, for example, if your ships is a "tank" then you will obviously use mods that increase your armour and shield power. Then you have healer ship, which will obviously have mods that allow you to repair other ships in combat. This is all specualtion of course but it seems the most obvious way to use mods for a practical purpose. You may well have 20 Sovereigns flying around but they will all look different and have differnet strengths and weaknesses.

Secondly, they've already stated there will be multiple choices of ship class for each level of ship. So, there will be a wide variety of similar level ships that look and act completely different. For example, you may well need speed so you go with the Venture Class Scout ship or you may want a little less speed and a bit more bulk so you go with a slightly different class.

There are always going to be systems in place to make sure that players can't just pick the ship they've always wanted. The great thing is this: Cryptic can always make it so that you have to construct the very top ships by amassing resources that take time to amass. That way, everyone earns their keep. If you are a hardcore player, you'll get it sooner than the casuals but they will still be able to get the best ships eventually.

singsofdeath

There is a huge problem with ships that would need to be manned by multiple Players. Well, actually, it's a lot of small problems, but it is sort of interwoven. Let me explain:

 

First of all, a player ship with a crew of multiple players, would still need a captain. So we'd have a command structure. This, in turn would have to be enforced in game-mechanics somehow. For example, only the captain can order an attack. Or...only the captain can set the course, etc etc. So, what happens if the captain (of all people) is not there? Would the position just sort of...jump around? And who would fill the place left by the one replacing him? Sure, some guilds might manage that by themselves, but it would essentially limit starships to large guilds. (I admit, having the largest Starships run like that, something like a "Raid" so to speak" may be feasable, but...well, that's cryptics choice).

 

Next, you have the problem of actually commanding and accepting commands in a Trek World. What do you do when a player doesn't obey the command of a senior officer(player) on the ship? Drag him to court? Do you think players would like that sort of system? Accepting authority from another player is something that comes hard to the majority of the gaming crowd (except for said large and well-organized guilds) and even with the large ones, you have to wonder if they'd be willing to take orders as is supposed to happen on a Starship.

 

Next, you'd limit the gameplay. Star Trek is a whole lot about Space exploration, isn't it? So, if Starships were only available to multiple people, you could not do very much when you are alone (or, let#s say, just 3 people). Having a ship to every player (with likely a NPC crew), allows you to keep that aspect in the game at all times.

 

Well, those are just my points of view. But I think Cryptic can make this work just fine if people give it a chance instead of bashing it straight from the start. But then again, bashing games is the current Sport, isn#t it? XD

Dracus

One the items to know about, is how ships are earned or how their combat values are determined, hopefully not by levels; otherwise this turns into similar problems with Pirates of the Burning Seas (which I assume Cryptic has reviewed).  In that, only the big ships will win the fights.  Granted that makes since, Battleships beat Destroyers; unless Destroyers sneak in to launch torpedoes (WW2 tactics).  Hopefully there could be some balance, based on tactics that is... 

I'm not going to go in to the debate of Tanks, Healers, Nukers, etc...  Some one else can.

Multiplayer ships do have more problems to solve, due to having more than one person.  Multiplayer ships can perform worse than a single player ship if the crew does not work as a team and with a good leader.  But a strong team and leader in one ship should be able to command the field of battle.

jayce

let me get this right....

"we have lost starboard shields"

"intruders on deck 9."

**captain leaves the bridge**

who's running the ship now? and heavens forbid the captain gets injured in the fire-fight. although this is not a deal breaker for me, it does feel like a lot will be missing without being able to converse with your fellow live players in the ready room.

Snipan

Of course everyone need to have the option to command their own ship. How would it otherwise work? Being stuck on a planet waiting for someone who have earned a ship to come by and pick you up as his/her crew? Or should you be a crew member on a ship commanded by a NPC captain? Not sure here how everyone think it should work actually. It is not like Star Wars with dogfight kind of space battles. Star Trek is all about big ships, and someone need to be captain on board. Don´t confuse the military rank "Captain" with the civil term "Captain", which only mean that you are the boss (over your NPC crew). Even if they should have the option with multi player operational ships, you would still need the option to be the captain over a NPC crew, in case that you don´t find other players to team up with.

bverji

Originally posted by singsofdeath


There is a huge problem with ships that would need to be manned by multiple Players. Well, actually, it's a lot of small problems, but it is sort of interwoven. Let me explain:
 
First of all, a player ship with a crew of multiple players, would still need a captain. So we'd have a command structure. This, in turn would have to be enforced in game-mechanics somehow. For example, only the captain can order an attack. Or...only the captain can set the course, etc etc. So, what happens if the captain (of all people) is not there? Would the position just sort of...jump around? And who would fill the place left by the one replacing him? Sure, some guilds might manage that by themselves, but it would essentially limit starships to large guilds. (I admit, having the largest Starships run like that, something like a "Raid" so to speak" may be feasable, but...well, that's cryptics choice).
 That's not how command structure works. A ship doesn't just fall apart and fail to function because a captain is off ship/ off duty/incapacitated. The guild leader would be the commanding officer of the ship (reguardless of his actual rank). When he isn't around the game defaults to others in the command structure that have degrees of control over the ship appointed by the CO and the First officer. But essentiall the "ships" isn't what Star Trek is about. Most missions would be done on/off ship that has no actual effect on the ship anyway.
Next, you have the problem of actually commanding and accepting commands in a Trek World. What do you do when a player doesn't obey the command of a senior officer(player) on the ship? Drag him to court? Do you think players would like that sort of system? Accepting authority from another player is something that comes hard to the majority of the gaming crowd (except for said large and well-organized guilds) and even with the large ones, you have to wonder if they'd be willing to take orders as is supposed to happen on a Starship.
 This is true about any guild. If people are causing waves you have the same ability as any other guild in any other game. If someone isn;t functing within the guide lines of the guild you talk to them about it and if an understanding can't be arranged you remove them from the guild. 
Next, you'd limit the gameplay. Star Trek is a whole lot about Space exploration, isn't it? So, if Starships were only available to multiple people, you could not do very much when you are alone (or, let#s say, just 3 people). Having a ship to every player (with likely a NPC crew), allows you to keep that aspect in the game at all times.
 Star trek is actually about stories. Exploration is a way to diversify those stories. In an MMO stories are told through the use of missions. There is no reason that not being a CO of your own ship shouldn't allow for a diverse array of mission options.
Well, those are just my points of view. But I think Cryptic can make this work just fine if people give it a chance instead of bashing it straight from the start. But then again, bashing games is the current Sport, isn#t it? XD
Some people like a concept and others don't. That's going to be true about any game. It's easy to write off those who complain as doing so for sport, but really mostly the MMO's for the last year (if not 2) have been under welming.

 Reguardless cryptic has made their choice. i think the choice is going to limit the game to 300k users (after the orginal influx of players), and think a guild focused game could double that. But that's my opinion and obviously has more valdity to me then you/others.  Cryptic has proven to have the ability to make solid games and this title should have many happy players reguardless if it comes near it's potential.

themilton

 dangit bverji! I usually type in orange! 

 

Originally posted by bverji

Originally posted by singsofdeath


There is a huge problem with ships that would need to be manned by multiple Players. Well, actually, it's a lot of small problems, but it is sort of interwoven. Let me explain:
 
First of all, a player ship with a crew of multiple players, would still need a captain. So we'd have a command structure. This, in turn would have to be enforced in game-mechanics somehow. For example, only the captain can order an attack. Or...only the captain can set the course, etc etc. So, what happens if the captain (of all people) is not there? Would the position just sort of...jump around? And who would fill the place left by the one replacing him? Sure, some guilds might manage that by themselves, but it would essentially limit starships to large guilds. (I admit, having the largest Starships run like that, something like a "Raid" so to speak" may be feasable, but...well, that's cryptics choice).
 That's not how command structure works. A ship doesn't just fall apart and fail to function because a captain is off ship/ off duty/incapacitated. The guild leader would be the commanding officer of the ship (reguardless of his actual rank). When he isn't around the game defaults to others in the command structure that have degrees of control over the ship appointed by the CO and the First officer. But essentiall the "ships" isn't what Star Trek is about. Most missions would be done on/off ship that has no actual effect on the ship anyway.
In CoX, if the team leader (captain in this case) is the person who starts the team and recruits the other members. If the original leader leaves, "command" is automatically transferred to the first member recruited. Why couldn't something like this be implemented? Maybe set up a warning so that if you don't want to take over command, you could decline taking the conn. Also, on a CoX team, the leader can promote another team member and give up leadership. This could also be implemented so that people who want to play a non-captain role can recruit but aren't forced to be captain.
Besides, think back to the shows and how often you see crew jumping into something other than their primary role. I watched an episode of DS9 last night where Doctor Bashir took the helm of the Defiant because the redshirt died. I think Picard and Janeway have taken the helm at times because they either just plain wanted to or because they felt it was their responsibility in that specific situation. Just because you're not in the center chair doesn't mean you're not in command.
Next, you have the problem of actually commanding and accepting commands in a Trek World. What do you do when a player doesn't obey the command of a senior officer(player) on the ship? Drag him to court? Do you think players would like that sort of system? Accepting authority from another player is something that comes hard to the majority of the gaming crowd (except for said large and well-organized guilds) and even with the large ones, you have to wonder if they'd be willing to take orders as is supposed to happen on a Starship.
 This is true about any guild. If people are causing waves you have the same ability as any other guild in any other game. If someone isn;t functing within the guide lines of the guild you talk to them about it and if an understanding can't be arranged you remove them from the guild. 
Pretty much every online team game I've played, whether RPG, FPS, or whatever, would let you boot annoying/under-performing teammates. Most PvP games have some sort ranking system. A person with a boot or two on his record shouldn't have much to fear, but if you're constantly getting booted, the problem probably isn't with everyone else. And if it's a technical issue, you probably shouldn't be trying to play that game.
Next, you'd limit the gameplay. Star Trek is a whole lot about Space exploration, isn't it? So, if Starships were only available to multiple people, you could not do very much when you are alone (or, let#s say, just 3 people). Having a ship to every player (with likely a NPC crew), allows you to keep that aspect in the game at all times.
 Star Trek is actually about stories. Exploration is a way to diversify those stories. In an MMO stories are told through the use of missions. There is no reason that not being a CO of your own ship shouldn't allow for a diverse array of mission options.
A story with a single character is basically a human Rube-Goldberg device. While I support NPC crews (I admit, sometimes I like to solo), I also support the option of PC crews for those times when I feel like playing as part of a team. I do NOT support a full-time PC crew requirement. Occasionally, it's fine, but that's one thing that would definitely make me not play this game, no matter how much of a Star Trek lover I am.

 

wardog250

I can see having a group on the surface being important.  In space it would simply be a disadvantage.  Someone flying solo could run circles around a ship with a player crew.  If they were to find ways to balance that out, they would limit solo flying to small ships; but, that still presents a problem, are you going to be shuttling around a group to every planet you need to land on? 

It would be convienent to have a crew already on board to do away missions with.  Otherwise the solo player will be at a disadvantage, unless you want to see fleets of solo ships flying all around the galaxy.

By them declaring that you can fly a ship solo, I think they are emplying that as a backup option in case you find yourself crew less while on a mission in space.  There is a reason why no one touched Star Trek Online for such a long time; because it presents too many problems.

One thing is for certain, if this game is ever released it will be far from any ordinary MMORPG.  It will require excessive teamwork, making the player base limited to those who are willing to deal with the curve, like you see in EVE.

drarkanex

I still think "Guilds" should operate one ship.  Each guild member has duties to perform on the ship, missions to accomplish, etc.  Away teams could be instances for further missions and exploration.  Just a thought.  I'm sure its been stated before.

Solo players could be smaller class ships, frigates, cruisers, etc.

Faxxer

Originally posted by wardog250


I can see having a group on the surface being important.  In space it would simply be a disadvantage.  Someone flying solo could run circles around a ship with a player crew.  If they were to find ways to balance that out, they would limit solo flying to small ships; but, that still presents a problem, are you going to be shuttling around a group to every planet you need to land on? 
It would be convienent to have a crew already on board to do away missions with.  Otherwise the solo player will be at a disadvantage, unless you want to see fleets of solo ships flying all around the galaxy.
By them declaring that you can fly a ship solo, I think they are emplying that as a backup option in case you find yourself crew less while on a mission in space.  There is a reason why no one touched Star Trek Online for such a long time; because it presents too many problems.
One thing is for certain, if this game is ever released it will be far from any ordinary MMORPG.  It will require excessive teamwork, making the player base limited to those who are willing to deal with the curve, like you see in EVE.

 

I like all the posts in this...at least we're all wanting a solution that makes everyone happy...

 

but on the line "Because it presents too many problems."  <<  here's my thoughts on this whole thing....

We're talking about STAR TREK.  Cryptic can take the time, money, and man-power it needs to solve EVERY problem for this MMO and they'll still make their money back. (If it's a game worthy of the name star trek)  I'd be very upset, even angry about it if they took the cheap and easy "cashing in" way out....I'm ready to pounce on them if they do to be honest llol.

I for one hope to GOD that this mmo is unlike any other mmo cause the ONLY mmo that USED to be unlike any other mmo was pre cu SWG and now IT'S like every other mmo too!  (did that make sense? lol)

faxx

Toadmonkey

Skype talk: Lets meet at Blah Blah to resolve the next mission. With everyone in agreement 5 ships warp there to start their orbit around the planet. Purpose: dropping off supplies. Wait make that 49 ships......others are already in orbit........with bays full of supplies. Cough cough.

I like to see how Cryptic handles a pile up of ships to one planet- or a space station. From what I heard there will be only one server. I could see deep space 9 having 3374 ships piled up around the station (without a special event). “Galaxy warming” might be Al’s next project.

Toadmonkey

As far as the crew on the ship (depending on our rank)....I could see a Guild Wars setting.  

Special NPCs  that we control and deck out with goodies.  Anyone have any info on NPC we can control?