Well, if we couldn't have a sandbox Star Trek mmog, where one would start as a cadet at the Academy, train, start at a space station and perhaps go work at a starship and perhaps achieve captain's chair, I think what they've come up is good, even interesting.
Still, I can't stop thinking on the comparison: the bridge crew are the weapons of the captain-warrior - you train with each one and develop your skills on it. After that successful dungeon last night, he managed to get a green new crew member, which he'll equip on the new slot (station) and trade or sell his previous crew member.
Crew members grant buffs? What a magical thing! I wonder to whom will the captain-warrior turn to when his bridge crew worns out? A shore-leave on a quick warp to the planet "Re-pair IX"?
I shiver, thinking of raid nights so that everybody in the Fleet gets their purple items...
This is a good example of creating a game in your head that ignores how players actually behave. Hardcore guild players - or those disciplined enough to play as a team - might work, but the vast majority of players wouldn't. Pick up groups (PUGs) would be out entirely.
Here's how it would actually play out:
You are fired on by an enemy ship. The science officer screams, "54 degs!", accidentally transposing the '4' and the '5' when typing. The helmsman - who'd had the ship on autopilot and had gone off to get a drink because they weren't at the mission zone yet, does nothing and the ship takes some hits. The engineer is deploying repair crews but the power is dropping so he cuts power to the weapons because he wants shields up and hates random encounters and wants engines powered to get away.
The science officer determines that the lower aft center shields of the enemy ship are weakest and informs tactical. Tactical screams, "Eng need powre foton torpedoes!"
The helmsman comes back and finds everyone screaming at him. "OMG laaaaaggg!" he screams.
The engineer screams, "no eng to weapons, eng to shields, eng to engines - run away. mob gives lousy xp and drops"
Tactical screams, "i wanna fight - take 5 mins ez kill'
Helmsman is already turning the ship around because he just wants to get the mission xp and quit the ship because he's going out tonight (it's D&D night).
ZOOMMM....the helmsman sweeps under and behind the enemy and turns about. While he's doing this the tactical officer Engineer diverts all shield power to the topside shields (because you're going under the enemy ship). BOOM---KABOOM...everyone leans hard to the left for a few seconds everyone watches their ship fly under the under ship in a range of differing graphics quailty and system lag. But it's not as bad as it could have been because the science officer was debuffing their sensors accuracy and was also using a -dmg debuff.
The Engineer screams, "y u fly thru them? run away"
Tactical--"FITEFITEFITEFITEFIT n00bs FITEFITEFITEFITE" because he can't do anything else since Engineering has control over his weapon power.
Engineering--keeps all power in engines and shields so they can fly away with minimal damage.
Tactical screams, "u all sux <CENSORED> later loosers" and quits.
Science officer changes to Tactical position because firing guns is much better than applying debuffs.
Engineer screams, "cant do away mission on this map with only 3 palyers - needs 4 min"
Helmsman goes "omg wtf? i gotta go bye" and quits because he doesn't want to have to wait while they recruit another team member.
Engineer quits without saying goodbye.
The former Science Officer, now Tactical offer switches to Helmsman and the ship to solo mode and goes back to blow up the random encounter mob.
Now wouldn't that be a heck of a lot more fun than having mindless NPCs automatically doing everything for you?
More memorable? Yes. More fun? No.
Everything the system previously described puts your effectiveness in the hands of another player. That's a recipe for disaster. Bad Helmsman? Tactical can't do their job, Engineering has to repair more damage. Bad Tactical Officer? You are slow in taking out your oppontent. Bad Engineer? They get the shields and repair wrong and the ship gets blown up (unless the Helmsman can run away fast enough).
Even Puzzle Pirates, which uses a team-based system, still has a Captain who actually makes the decisions. Starfleet / the military aren't democracies. Group decision making sucks in pressure situations where everyone has their own preferences and no-one has the final say on which direction they all go in.
That is a perfect example of what would happen and the game would die quick. Not to mention the fun that is had by all of even looking for groups in the first place. You would have tons of players hanging around starports shouting "LFG" just like they did in SWG. Sometimes you would find a group in 5 minutes and at other times it would take as long as 30 minutes. That's valuable time being wasted and not everyone has multiple hours to kill. Then after you FINALLY get your group together people would start leaving after the first few lairs until eventually you are back at the starport looking for people. No thanks.
This is a good example of creating a game in your head that ignores how players actually behave. Hardcore guild players - or those disciplined enough to play as a team - might work, but the vast majority of players wouldn't. Pick up groups (PUGs) would be out entirely.
Here's how it would actually play out:
You are fired on by an enemy ship. The science officer screams, "54 degs!", accidentally transposing the '4' and the '5' when typing. The helmsman - who'd had the ship on autopilot and had gone off to get a drink because they weren't at the mission zone yet, does nothing and the ship takes some hits. The engineer is deploying repair crews but the power is dropping so he cuts power to the weapons because he wants shields up and hates random encounters and wants engines powered to get away.
The science officer determines that the lower aft center shields of the enemy ship are weakest and informs tactical. Tactical screams, "Eng need powre foton torpedoes!"
The helmsman comes back and finds everyone screaming at him. "OMG laaaaaggg!" he screams.
The engineer screams, "no eng to weapons, eng to shields, eng to engines - run away. mob gives lousy xp and drops"
Tactical screams, "i wanna fight - take 5 mins ez kill'
Helmsman is already turning the ship around because he just wants to get the mission xp and quit the ship because he's going out tonight (it's D&D night).
ZOOMMM....the helmsman sweeps under and behind the enemy and turns about. While he's doing this the tactical officer Engineer diverts all shield power to the topside shields (because you're going under the enemy ship). BOOM---KABOOM...everyone leans hard to the left for a few seconds everyone watches their ship fly under the under ship in a range of differing graphics quailty and system lag. But it's not as bad as it could have been because the science officer was debuffing their sensors accuracy and was also using a -dmg debuff.
The Engineer screams, "y u fly thru them? run away"
Tactical--"FITEFITEFITEFITEFIT n00bs FITEFITEFITEFITE" because he can't do anything else since Engineering has control over his weapon power.
Engineering--keeps all power in engines and shields so they can fly away with minimal damage.
Tactical screams, "u all sux <CENSORED> later loosers" and quits.
Science officer changes to Tactical position because firing guns is much better than applying debuffs.
Engineer screams, "cant do away mission on this map with only 3 palyers - needs 4 min"
Helmsman goes "omg wtf? i gotta go bye" and quits because he doesn't want to have to wait while they recruit another team member.
Engineer quits without saying goodbye.
The former Science Officer, now Tactical offer switches to Helmsman and the ship to solo mode and goes back to blow up the random encounter mob.
Now wouldn't that be a heck of a lot more fun than having mindless NPCs automatically doing everything for you?
More memorable? Yes. More fun? No.
Everything the system previously described puts your effectiveness in the hands of another player. That's a recipe for disaster. Bad Helmsman? Tactical can't do their job, Engineering has to repair more damage. Bad Tactical Officer? You are slow in taking out your oppontent. Bad Engineer? They get the shields and repair wrong and the ship gets blown up (unless the Helmsman can run away fast enough).
Even Puzzle Pirates, which uses a team-based system, still has a Captain who actually makes the decisions. Starfleet / the military aren't democracies. Group decision making sucks in pressure situations where everyone has their own preferences and no-one has the final say on which direction they all go in.
That is a perfect example of what would happen and the game would die quick. Not to mention the fun that is had by all of even looking for groups in the first place. You would have tons of players hanging around starports shouting "LFG" just like they did in SWG. Sometimes you would find a group in 5 minutes and at other times it would take as long as 30 minutes. That's valuable time being wasted and not everyone has multiple hours to kill. Then after you FINALLY get your group together people would start leaving after the first few lairs until eventually you are back at the starport looking for people. No thanks.
Nobody is saying you must have PCs on the bridge. The NPC's will fill in for those that want to solo or if you can't find that navigation guy at the station grab your gunner and engineer friends and the 3 of you and a couple NPC to fill out the group and you're good to go. If you want to stick around station for a little while to get a group full of PCs that's great but you wouldn't be required to. That's what all the training you give your NPCs if for. You'll still want good NPC "pets" and some of them may be better at say engineering than your friend that wants to come with you.
A little reading on the STO forums leads me to believe that PC bridge crews won't be available at launch but could possible be added in at a later time.
No cooperative bridge play, at least not at launch.
as posted in a sticky at STO fourms written by Hyord, his reference was a Q&A session at Gencon 2008
The thing is, no one here has ever said do away with the NPC crew idea entirely. All everyone want's is the ability / option of allowing another player to come onto his ship, group and do stuff together. Yes harder missions will require 'groups' which I'm sure will mean 2, 3 or more ships grouped into a fleet to beat the boss MOB, but for other missions, why not hang with your buddies?
And for our friend that keeps whinning for a how to: Want an easy, already tried 'what the other players are going to do' solution? SWG Multi-player ships. Pilot (Captian), Ops postion (sensors, Engineering), and gunners (tactical). Sure seems to work there. Saturday afternoon Starsider Imp vs Reb Space Pvp battles - 3 or more hours of hammering the dog snot out of each other. Don't want to group? Don't, solo in your own ship, want to group? let people know you're up to be someone's crew. Pug's all the way and you know what? We all wanted to be there so you rarely got the village fool type coming on. If you couldn't fly with an extra body in case of a drop out, the Ops guy would shift to a gun and run both. It worked just fine, even with lag, different internet speeds, different computer spec's.
I wouldn't want to HAVE to group on the same ship 100% of the time, I'm a casual player, log on play for 1-2 hours log off. That wouldn't be a good addition to a group. But there are times I'm on long, or I get invited to go see area X which is levels above me and would be instant death when going on a strong players ship would be nice.
I've never actually posted on a thread here, but I felt compelled to respond to this one.
Firstly, I have to say that I agree completely with Unsub, trying to get anything done when your bridge crew is made up of players sounds like a complete nightmare waiting to happen. Imagine trying to play your cleric where one player is in charge of movement, one player is in charge of your weapons, one player is in charge of healing and one player is in charge of offensive spells- that's how I view this thought of players on a crew.
No, the way they have planned where grouping means an armada of ships is perfect. Yes, grouping is an important part of any MMO, but you never want to be in a position where you are so very reliant on the group to not make your avatar worthless.... And while you are in space, the ship is your avatar. It needs to be able to move, defend and fight all at ONE PERSON'S direction. Group play in space just means making the encounters involve more ships. Five romulan craft zip in from the aft side of your armada and you each have your role to play to survive the encounter as a group. You may have a big destroyer class ship, everyone's going to see you as the tank. Larry over there has a Hermes class ship and is kinda like the ranger of the group, darting about and taking potshots where he can.
I really can't even imagine playing this game if I had to play a <whatever> officer on a ship and didn't get to just have my own ship in the armada. In fact, I had little more than idle interest in this game until I read this article.
[Helmsman]: "I'm bringing her around, I think we have them on their last legs!"
[Engineer]: "ZOMG NEWB I told u we hav no shields!!!!! L2P!!!"
I've never actually posted on a thread here, but I felt compelled to respond to this one. Firstly, I have to say that I agree completely with Unsub, trying to get anything done when your bridge crew is made up of players sounds like a complete nightmare waiting to happen. Imagine trying to play your cleric where one player is in charge of movement, one player is in charge of your weapons, one player is in charge of healing and one player is in charge of offensive spells- that's how I view this thought of players on a crew. No, the way they have planned where grouping means an armada of ships is perfect. Yes, grouping is an important part of any MMO, but you never want to be in a position where you are so very reliant on the group to not make your avatar worthless.... And while you are in space, the ship is your avatar. It needs to be able to move, defend and fight all at ONE PERSON'S direction. Group play in space just means making the encounters involve more ships. Five romulan craft zip in from the aft side of your armada and you each have your role to play to survive the encounter as a group. You may have a big destroyer class ship, everyone's going to see you as the tank. Larry over there has a Hermes class ship and is kinda like the ranger of the group, darting about and taking potshots where he can. I really can't even imagine playing this game if I had to play a <whatever> officer on a ship and didn't get to just have my own ship in the armada. In fact, I had little more than idle interest in this game until I read this article. [Helmsman]: "I'm bringing her around, I think we have them on their last legs!"
[Engineer]: "ZOMG NEWB I told u we hav no shields!!!!! L2P!!!"
Gameplay-wise, I agree with you.
But "trekkie"-wise, isn't it what exactly happens in the bridge of command of a Starfleet starship? Everyone does his/her job and the captain is counting on each one to do their best? Another comparison could be with American football. Wouldn't it be awesome to be playing with friends and know you won the battle or saved the ship or whatever, just because the "officers" did what they were supposed to be? REAL teamwork?
Would be hard to come up with something like that in a MMOG, where you have lots of casual players (at best), but it does happen in Star Trek play-by-mails (no, I'm not urging a pbmMMOG). But then it would have to be something more like a hardcore sandbox mmog, instead of the crappy "casual" tendency of nowadays...
Since they do have bridge crews, they could have easily let the spots on the bride be played either by players or npc's. If a player leaves, auto-replaced by npc. I've finally come to realize that while Cryptic may make a game I want to play, they're not making a Star Trek game I would want to play. Because they've chosen an IP that has such a following and so much lore built into it, and so much expectation driving it, the argument of whether its a good game and whether its a good Star Trek game are two different arguments.
I wonder if these bridge slots will actually be NPC avatars, or will they be icons on a toolbar? The former implies Bridge interior which we know won't exist at launch. My guess is that while on ship, you have your crew icons and then just click on them to activate their various functionality.
_____________________________ Currently Playing: LOTRO; DDO Played: AC2, AO, Auto Assault, CoX, DAoC, DDO, Earth&Beyond, EQ1, EQ2, EVE, Fallen Earth, Jumpgate, Roma Victor, Second Life, SWG, V:SoH, WoW, World War II Online.
Games I'm watching: Infinity: The Quest for Earth, Force of Arms.
These bridge crew fanatics are incredible. Pretty sad when they list a page full of arguments, none of which make any sense. Still waiting for someone to post a practical way to implement player bridge crews because it is my opinion you will fault flat on your face as all the previous posters have.
Your challenge was rebutted, successfully. That it disproves your point is apparent because all you can do is resort to name-calling and generalized attacks rather than a reasoned response.
_____________________________ Currently Playing: LOTRO; DDO Played: AC2, AO, Auto Assault, CoX, DAoC, DDO, Earth&Beyond, EQ1, EQ2, EVE, Fallen Earth, Jumpgate, Roma Victor, Second Life, SWG, V:SoH, WoW, World War II Online.
Games I'm watching: Infinity: The Quest for Earth, Force of Arms.
This is a good example of creating a game in your head that ignores how players actually behave. Hardcore guild players - or those disciplined enough to play as a team - might work, but the vast majority of players wouldn't. Pick up groups (PUGs) would be out entirely.
Here's how it would actually play out:
You are fired on by an enemy ship. The science officer screams, "54 degs!", accidentally transposing the '4' and the '5' when typing. The helmsman - who'd had the ship on autopilot and had gone off to get a drink because they weren't at the mission zone yet, does nothing and the ship takes some hits. The engineer is deploying repair crews but the power is dropping so he cuts power to the weapons because he wants shields up and hates random encounters and wants engines powered to get away.
The science officer determines that the lower aft center shields of the enemy ship are weakest and informs tactical. Tactical screams, "Eng need powre foton torpedoes!"
The helmsman comes back and finds everyone screaming at him. "OMG laaaaaggg!" he screams.
The engineer screams, "no eng to weapons, eng to shields, eng to engines - run away. mob gives lousy xp and drops"
Tactical screams, "i wanna fight - take 5 mins ez kill'
Helmsman is already turning the ship around because he just wants to get the mission xp and quit the ship because he's going out tonight (it's D&D night).
ZOOMMM....the helmsman sweeps under and behind the enemy and turns about. While he's doing this the tactical officer Engineer diverts all shield power to the topside shields (because you're going under the enemy ship). BOOM---KABOOM...everyone leans hard to the left for a few seconds everyone watches their ship fly under the under ship in a range of differing graphics quailty and system lag. But it's not as bad as it could have been because the science officer was debuffing their sensors accuracy and was also using a -dmg debuff.
The Engineer screams, "y u fly thru them? run away"
Tactical--"FITEFITEFITEFITEFIT n00bs FITEFITEFITEFITE" because he can't do anything else since Engineering has control over his weapon power.
Engineering--keeps all power in engines and shields so they can fly away with minimal damage.
Tactical screams, "u all sux <CENSORED> later loosers" and quits.
Science officer changes to Tactical position because firing guns is much better than applying debuffs.
Engineer screams, "cant do away mission on this map with only 3 palyers - needs 4 min"
Helmsman goes "omg wtf? i gotta go bye" and quits because he doesn't want to have to wait while they recruit another team member.
Engineer quits without saying goodbye.
The former Science Officer, now Tactical offer switches to Helmsman and the ship to solo mode and goes back to blow up the random encounter mob.
Now wouldn't that be a heck of a lot more fun than having mindless NPCs automatically doing everything for you?
More memorable? Yes. More fun? No.
Everything the system previously described puts your effectiveness in the hands of another player. That's a recipe for disaster. Bad Helmsman? Tactical can't do their job, Engineering has to repair more damage. Bad Tactical Officer? You are slow in taking out your oppontent. Bad Engineer? They get the shields and repair wrong and the ship gets blown up (unless the Helmsman can run away fast enough).
Even Puzzle Pirates, which uses a team-based system, still has a Captain who actually makes the decisions. Starfleet / the military aren't democracies. Group decision making sucks in pressure situations where everyone has their own preferences and no-one has the final say on which direction they all go in.
That is a perfect example of what would happen and the game would die quick. Not to mention the fun that is had by all of even looking for groups in the first place. You would have tons of players hanging around starports shouting "LFG" just like they did in SWG. Sometimes you would find a group in 5 minutes and at other times it would take as long as 30 minutes. That's valuable time being wasted and not everyone has multiple hours to kill. Then after you FINALLY get your group together people would start leaving after the first few lairs until eventually you are back at the starport looking for people. No thanks.
This reply is so intellectually dishonest -- Every MMO in existence already experiences the mock scenario described above. And no MMO has died because of it. And if you think it will NOT happen in the current STO configuration, your naive. Their will be group content for multiple ships, no doubt. Players will be hanging around starbases with their ships (just as they do at times in EVE), looking for groups.
The contorted lengths to which some posters will go in order 'win the internets argument' is astounding.
_____________________________ Currently Playing: LOTRO; DDO Played: AC2, AO, Auto Assault, CoX, DAoC, DDO, Earth&Beyond, EQ1, EQ2, EVE, Fallen Earth, Jumpgate, Roma Victor, Second Life, SWG, V:SoH, WoW, World War II Online.
Games I'm watching: Infinity: The Quest for Earth, Force of Arms.
I've never actually posted on a thread here, but I felt compelled to respond to this one. (Whose alt account are you?) Firstly, I have to say that I agree completely with Unsub, trying to get anything done when your bridge crew is made up of players sounds like a complete nightmare waiting to happen. Imagine trying to play your cleric where one player is in charge of movement, one player is in charge of your weapons, one player is in charge of healing and one player is in charge of offensive spells- that's how I view this thought of players on a crew.
Imagine trying to play your warrior when one player is in charge of healing you, one player is in charge of feeding you power, one player is in charge of buffing you, one player is in charge of keeping agro on you...
Your example is completely irrelevant as the PC bridge crew described in this thread would mimic almost every experience one already has in MMOs. And if one needed further proof, others have pointed out that SWG multi-crew ships worked extremely well -- someone piloting, someone gunning, someone putting out fires.
_____________________________ Currently Playing: LOTRO; DDO Played: AC2, AO, Auto Assault, CoX, DAoC, DDO, Earth&Beyond, EQ1, EQ2, EVE, Fallen Earth, Jumpgate, Roma Victor, Second Life, SWG, V:SoH, WoW, World War II Online.
Games I'm watching: Infinity: The Quest for Earth, Force of Arms.
I've never actually posted on a thread here, but I felt compelled to respond to this one. (Whose alt account are you?) Firstly, I have to say that I agree completely with Unsub, trying to get anything done when your bridge crew is made up of players sounds like a complete nightmare waiting to happen. Imagine trying to play your cleric where one player is in charge of movement, one player is in charge of your weapons, one player is in charge of healing and one player is in charge of offensive spells- that's how I view this thought of players on a crew.
Imagine trying to play your warrior when one player is in charge of healing you, one player is in charge of feeding you power, one player is in charge of buffing you, one player is in charge of keeping agro on you...
Your example is completely irrelevant as the PC bridge crew described in this thread would mimic almost every experience one already has in MMOs. And if one needed further proof, others have pointed out that SWG multi-crew ships worked extremely well -- someone piloting, someone gunning, someone putting out fires.
First off, SWG mutligun ships are ok, but they have very limited functionality. You either fly or shoot, so it is a very limited multi function. The problem that most of you can't get through your thick skulls is that beyond those functions coming up with something for others in the group to do that is meaningful in a fight is a real flight in fantasy. So most will want to be captain, a few will want to be gunners and the rest well...good luck. The more you think about it the more you will realize how a multi class crew just will not function well in a MMO setting.
Besides as someone pointed out previously on a ship, captains word is law, how is that going to fly in a MMO? It isn't. You can argue all you want about a bridge crew, but I have not seen one argument in this thread supporting it that makes one iota of sense.
I'm really excited to hear this, but I'm kind of worried at how he compares bridge officers to freaking epic gear. I think he even said "phat lootz" like a idiot also. Wouldn't it be kind of stupid for like, everyone to be trying to get the SAME person on their ship? All crew members and bridge officers should be uniquely named.
My understanding is that it's not like everyone is going to get "Spock"--you complete a mission/arc/whatever and get a science officer with high level computing skills. Then you complete another arc and get an engineer who is really good at repair. Then you have your science officer cross-train your engineer and your engineer is able to acheive a more efficient dilithium mix.
So instead of getting specific named people, you get people with specific skills. Eventually, you can have one of your science officers cross-trained by all your other science officeres and wind up with an uber-science officer.
------------- The less you expect, the more you'll be surprised. Hopefully, pleasantly so.
First off, SWG mutligun ships are ok, but they have very limited functionality. You either fly or shoot, so it is a very limited multi function. The problem that most of you can't get through your thick skulls is that beyond those functions coming up with something for others in the group to do that is meaningful in a fight is a real flight in fantasy. So most will want to be captain, a few will want to be gunners and the rest well...good luck. The more you think about it the more you will realize how a multi class crew just will not function well in a MMO setting.
I've gotten to the point here I actually look forward to your blue text as it always makes me smile, you just don't have a clue do you? If you've ever played SWG there's no way you'd even have posted the above.
While your first sentence "First off, SWG mutligun ships are ok, but they have very limited functionality." is true, the fact that they are still in use means that players have found a place for them.
For the small 2 man ships, yes 'fly or shoot' is the only option be it strapped in the back of a Tie, or the top of a Y-wing or 'gila. But for the larger you seem to have blown over the Ops position or even the spare body doing repair work. I know the ships I've been on have lasted (well atleast 10 sec longer ) in a fire fight because the Ops guy shutted shields to protect us or the repair guy hustled his fanny down to fix a coolant leak. So finding something meaningful in a fight isn't such a fantasy is it?
Did it get boring sitting in my gun turret while the pilot took us all over and I had nothing to do? Yes but that's why chat was invented. I never got the feeling I was a fifth wheel or something.
If it's just all about you, then fine, fly your own ship, be the Captain and NPC crew and go to town. No one's making you have players on your ship, but don't whine if no one wants you in thier fleet the next battle because you couldn't follow the orders of your squadron commander. Oh wait there's that following orders for the good of the group thing again ......
Group play in space just means making the encounters involve more ships. Five romulan craft zip in from the aft side of your armada and you each have your role to play to survive the encounter as a group. You may have a big destroyer class ship, everyone's going to see you as the tank. Larry over there has a Hermes class ship and is kinda like the ranger of the group, darting about and taking potshots where he can.
Ok, so what is the difference between everyone doing their part with different ships and everyone doing their part as crew on one ship? Really, how can people so adamantly insist that one is impossible while the other is perfectly fine and workable when both scenerios come down to the same thing: people doing their part in a group.
So in your multi-ship groups what happens if the destroyer (tank) doesn't "hold agro"? What happens if the DPS ships don't do their part? What happens if the repair ship or science vessel or whatever doesn't do it's part? What happens if a player controlling one of the ships lags at a critical moment?
How can people say that's it's impossible for people to successfully work together as a group when talking about player crew and then just assume that all of the problems they were just expounding will not affect groups of ships?
It's the same damn thing. The only difference is that instead of having different jobs performed by crew on one ship you instead have multiple ships each performing different functions.
And what about away missions? They have said that it will be possible to group with other players for those, groups entirely composed of ship Captains which is pretty damn silly..but whatever. So why aren't people arguing that this shouldn't be included because of the impossibility of successfull cooperation between human players?
And why aren't people bringing up the "but who's in charge" argument in regard to away missions and groups of ships? Every argument that people have used against player crews could also be applied to fleets and away missions but, mysteriously, nobody is doing that.
You know, I was sort of joking around before when I was talking about everyone wanting to be Captain Kirk and having their own customized, hot rod starship. But now I'm starting to think that that is what this argument is really all about. The people arguing against player crews don't seem to have any problem with grouping as long it doesn't threaten their desire to have their own personal, ugpradable, hot rod to fly around in and to always be the Captain. So it's not grouping that is the problem it's the percieved threat to personal e-peen that is getting people worked up.
Ok, so how about if everyone gets their own personal, upgradable ship...but...you could invite other players to crew on your ship? So you guys could still do all the "Pimp my ride" stuff that you're dreaming about AND have player crews in the game at the same time. Of course I don't expect this suggestion to change anyone's mind either because people would be afraid that they might occassionally have to leave their ship and serve as crew on someone else's ship, OMG!!!
This makes it just about perfect for solo players, and groups alike! It reminds me of Guild Wars, where you could hire Henchmen and control them in combat. You could also group with another player and decide who would bring henchmen to round out the team.
Balancing content should also be easier, as you have a set group, 5 players always.
This seems like the best of both worlds for Solo and Group oriented players. If you're lucky I guess you can actually do away missions with 5 human players :-)
What would be interesting, though, is the AI. How much control will you have over your Bridge Team in battle?
The game that I found did this wonderfully is Final Fantasy XII with the Gambit system, whereby you could more or less setup your NPC team member's response to various situations such as Low Health, first line attacks etc. etc. This reduced Micromanagement in the heat of battle tremendously, and prevented fights from becoming crazy click-fests, but still allowed you finer control if you really needed it.
Well with the presentation of this NPC bridgecrew mechanic, we can safely say that we will never see player bridge crew in the game. Ever!
Thanks. But no thanks.
Basically, the only real grouping mechanic will be Space battles with numerious ships. And we got that already with EVE Online and upcoming titles as JGE and BP.
I cannot see ground away missions with a group of ship captains. Pretty much immersion breaking if you ask me and downright silly.
Wow. I'm wasn't sure who to exactly reply too, cos everyone brings up some very good points overall, so I'll just try to hit as many points as I can.
Firstly, I'm no alt account... I just have never posted on any of these forums ever.. I just thought that this particular conversation was specifically very interesting! Especially since I originally assumed that everyone would start as a starfleet cadet and would have to work their way up through the ranks "Doing their time" on other people's ship, and thus had NO INTEREST IN THIS GAME until I read this blurb.
Next.. I didn't say that the idea of pc bridge crews were impossible, I just said that they would be incredibly frustrating. I understand that everyone who is for them sees them as fundamentally the same thing, but they differ in some extremely important (to many of us) ways.
The biggest and most important difference is that one thing that players of every MMO seem to universally agree on is that it sucks to not have (for whatever mechanical reason) control over your character. Stuns, fears, dazes, mezzes, slows, mc's, roots, snares.. whatever form they come in, it seems to be a universally hated mechanic. If you have an entire group of people all on one ship, only a single person has control over that character's effective motion / movement. To a purist, that one person should be the captain. In gameplay terms, it winds up being the helm... which brings me to my second point.
In the movies, the captain says "Go left and fire full torpedoes!" and the helmsmen punches in "L E F T" and the ship goes left and the weapons officer punches the big bright red torpedo button and everyone goes "AHA! Bold move captain!" In an MMO, the Captain says "GO LEFT ADN SHOOT TROPEDOS!" and fifteen seconds later the helmsman notices it and says "LOL OOPS" because the ship has already careened off to the right into a bigger group of enemies that the science officer picked up on scanner and failed to mention on group chat cos he's in vent with the captain and mentioned it there instead. Meanwhile the weapons guy has just fired torpedoes into a group (cos he's a good group mate) as requested into the big group that was up until that moment actually neutral. This kinda speaks to the points about doing play by mail, as well. I have no problem agreeing that the sort of gameplay would be quite interesting and fun in a turn based type situation, but in a 'live' type setting, no matter which person I was in that group, I'd be annoyed... as the helmsman I'd be annoyed for not being told that the group was there hanging out right behind the asteroid debris, as the captain I'd be annoyed that my orders weren't followed, as the science guy I'd be annoyed that the helmsman refuses to buy headphones and a mic, and as the weapons officer I'd be annoyed that everyone is now yelling at me for doing what I was told to do.
Consider that scenario in an armada situation. Big destroyer ship bears left and the rest of his group don't notice in time and break right, one member accidentally engages a gaggle of neutral mobs way too high for the group.. Everyone else can limp away, try to save him, try to slow the gaggle of neutrals and help him limp away... point is, there are choices that just don't have the complication and frustration factor that the 'pc bridge crew' model has. Sure they have their own complications.. yes as a scout vessel I'm relying on my destroyer to keep the majority of the torpedoes aimed at him instead of me.. but I don't think it's too much to ask that your ship (which is, while in space, your character) work pretty much without a hitch unless acted upon by a specifically detrimental force.
The one thing that this detracts from in some ways is the 'surprise me' factor. Happens in the movies, capt. gives general orders or isn't able to give orders and a member of the crew surprises him with some brilliant thing he pulls out of his ..exhaust port...? But, I think we see those situations in group play on any MMO, and still can.. that scout that is under heavy fire and the 'tank' ship is having a hard time intercepting the ...interceptors.. and another scout comes out of nowhere and saves the day.. that sort of thing. Sure you can't go "Good job, ensign, you deserve a promotion.. congrats you get to be chief engineer now!", but saving a fellow captain's ship has its own rewards, I think.
Lastly, to the comment about 'everyone wanting to be captain kirk with his own hot-rod ship'... I don't really see that generalization as a fair one, personally. I know I don't really care what ship I have, as long as it suits the role I want to perform when in a 'space group' situation, and it gets me to where I want to go do 'away team' missions with my buddies. Assuming that just because someone wants control of their own character means that they want to paint flames on the side of their character and brag about doing the kessel run in- wait.. wrong property... Anyway... Point being that the benefit of this system to me isn't that I want ooh phat lewtz ship bling, but rather that my standard issue ship is mine to point in the direction I choose and shoot at the things that I choose.
Oh, and just as an aside, I like the idea of having my crew being the 'loot', and I like that the crew will all be customizable (and thus very personal and unique), and tradeable. Very cool, imo.
First off, SWG mutligun ships are ok, but they have very limited functionality. You either fly or shoot, so it is a very limited multi function. The problem that most of you can't get through your thick skulls is that beyond those functions coming up with something for others in the group to do that is meaningful in a fight is a real flight in fantasy. So most will want to be captain, a few will want to be gunners and the rest well...good luck. The more you think about it the more you will realize how a multi class crew just will not function well in a MMO setting.
I've gotten to the point here I actually look forward to your blue text as it always makes me smile, you just don't have a clue do you? If you've ever played SWG there's no way you'd even have posted the above.
While your first sentence "First off, SWG mutligun ships are ok, but they have very limited functionality." is true, the fact that they are still in use means that players have found a place for them.
For the small 2 man ships, yes 'fly or shoot' is the only option be it strapped in the back of a Tie, or the top of a Y-wing or 'gila. But for the larger you seem to have blown over the Ops position or even the spare body doing repair work. I know the ships I've been on have lasted (well atleast 10 sec longer ) in a fire fight because the Ops guy shutted shields to protect us or the repair guy hustled his fanny down to fix a coolant leak. So finding something meaningful in a fight isn't such a fantasy is it?
Did it get boring sitting in my gun turret while the pilot took us all over and I had nothing to do? Yes but that's why chat was invented. I never got the feeling I was a fifth wheel or something.
If it's just all about you, then fine, fly your own ship, be the Captain and NPC crew and go to town. No one's making you have players on your ship, but don't whine if no one wants you in thier fleet the next battle because you couldn't follow the orders of your squadron commander. Oh wait there's that following orders for the good of the group thing again ......
Actually the only clueless person posting here is you. I tend to fly at least a couple weekends a month. The fact is that no one wants to fly in the multiplayer ships, they are NO FUN! I very rarely see them in action at all. There are some two mans, but the bigger ships, nada. Sure I have the bigger ships, but getting a crew together to fly it, not a chance.
Hence the point that it is meaningless to provide human bridge crew functionality when only a small percentage of the playerbase would utilize such.
Originally posted by TCrossBar I just said that they would be incredibly frustrating. I understand that everyone who is for them sees them as fundamentally the same thing, but they differ in some extremely important (to many of us) ways. - It would be frustrating if you had to group on 1 ship 100% of the time. I would find it frustrating and I yet I still think having the OPTION to do it would be OK. The biggest and most important difference is that one thing that players of every MMO seem to universally agree on is that it sucks to not have (for whatever mechanical reason) control over your character. Stuns, fears, dazes, mezzes, slows, mc's, roots, snares.. whatever form they come in, it seems to be a universally hated mechanic. If you have an entire group of people all on one ship, only a single person has control over that character's effective motion / movement. To a purist, that one person should be the captain. In gameplay terms, it winds up being the helm... which brings me to my second point. - True, but how much control do you really have even when playing in a group. The healer is still going to heal who he thinks needs it. Some yo-yo is still going to charge off to attack the boss MOB, even though everyone else has said 'lets wait a minute for our regen to finish, etc...' I think we're looking at degree's of control. In a large battle, more control. Off to do a fluff mission, less control. Also take in the fact that from time to time your guild may want to do the Super Level Killer Quest Mission. Now you CAN go in your own low level newbie ship and try to enjoy the wopping 10sec of game time before you become space dust or you could crew on a guildie's ship, score some XP and get to see what the missions all about. Your choice.
Alot of what you said is 100% on the money, especially your scenario's on what could happen. Problem is they could just as easily happen if you were on your own ship, as on someone elses.
Actually the only clueless person posting here is you. I tend to fly at least a couple weekends a month. The fact is that no one wants to fly in the multiplayer ships, they are NO FUN! I very rarely see them in action at all. There are some two mans, but the bigger ships, nada. Sure I have the bigger ships, but getting a crew together to fly it, not a chance.
What server? Because the large Sat. afternoon Starsider events I played in, Factions only rarely had problems fielding multi-player ships and crews.
If you're talking about the Deep Space zero's battles (free for all's) then you are 100% totally correct. Single ships all the way.
If you're talking the scripted event's like I am, then no, they are set up specifically to include Multi-player ships. Planned in advanced and set up in advanced.
Multi-player ships while not the best idea (in SWG) do work and can have a purpose. Heck one of the 100% kill on sight, problems a comin' ships was the Spinning Cloud. A souped up YT-1300 (M. Falcon class) with 2 gunners, 1 ops spot and a pilot. Multi-player all the way. He was there for all the events and always gave us massive amounts of heart-ache and pain. What that guy could do with a multi-player ship is probably the best reason for giving STO the OPTION of allowing players to crew on each others ships.
Originally posted by Ozmodan
Hence the point that it is meaningless to provide human bridge crew functionality when only a small percentage of the playerbase would utilize such.
- Looking at a bigger picture (for other games, not just STO for example). So they should also leave Pvp, PvE, Housing, Crafting, Role-playing emotes, Storyline quest write up's, (add your example here) etc... etc.... etc..... because only a small percentage of the playerbase would utilize that function? You cut something down too much and you've either totally niched the game or killed it from even getting off the ground.
A good example would be Prep's version of ST. Each ship was the server and all players had to be on that 1 ship? Only Federation, no playing other organizations. That didn't fly did it?
WoW. Mainly a Pvp game I believe, isn't that the big selling point? DoAC RvR is either it's main thrust or best point. For either of them, why even have RP, PvE? Easy to get around the PvE leveling. Tutorial zone to teach you how, then straight into Combat. But instead they have those other features. They even have PvE only and RP server's. DoAC has lot's of different kinds of server's pre-change, post-change, everyone's friends, normal. With all those choices someone's going to count as the 'small percentage of the playerbase'.
Bottom line is; if it can be done at a reasonable expense. Do you cut off that source of revenue? Or put it in the game to attract more sub's (money)?
They should have made this a single player game, cause it seems to be going that way anyway. Whats multiplayer about having a NPC crew? Star Wars: The Old Republic's companions sound better, at least you can pull stories, quests, and romance out of them. This has Cryptic faill all over it. Sorry I never like City of Heroes or any other Cryptic games. Cryptic is going to piss off a lot Trekkies and you don't want to piss off Trekkies. Their worst fanbois of all time, they can get violent. Lol. Trekkies want to role play, not give commands to NPCs. They would have been better off with making starships, guild ships. Making the guild leader captain, and the guild leader appoints the different jobs to the different crew/guild members. It would be more multiplayered that way. So the Trekkies can have their own little Star Trek role play fantasies.
That that sounds gawd awful lame. I don't want to have to be the guild leader to captain my own ship.
See how you can't please everyone.
Am I the only person interested in this game for the Starships and not some lame forced RP crew environment? I want my own ship, I want to customize its layout, look, name etc. That is what a Star Trek game is about to me. The Starship and the Universe it exists in... along with all the politicking that goes on between different species. The exploration, the combat, the technology.
Don't get me wrong, I think its pretty clever how they are handling crew, much better that 99.9% of the ideas I hear on the boards. But its definitely not the make or break point of the game for me.
How the hell is this going to be an MMO?!?! Jeez, if I want to have a gaggle of NPCs to direct, I'll install IceWind Dales and play through that game, or one of the many others just like it.
I don't like passing judgment on games before they're released because impressions are often incorrect, but this just sounds horrible. Ugh. I'll still keep on eye on STO, but this doesn't sound the least bit revolutionary, innovative, or interesting.
I'll be damned, I didn't realize there is only one ship in the entire game. Thanks for pointing out why this won't work.
first off there is more than 1 ship in the game.. secondly its not like u cant group up with other ships and form a armada. It happened all the time in the star trek universe. so plz stop saying not having a pc crew is going to be lonely because u will have other ships to party with. this is just people trying to troll and its annoying. there is no way being a science officer is going to be fun. and yes the scenario where they find the weakspot in sheilds could be fun wtf else are you going to do while the helmsman/captain are going from point a to b absolutely nothing.
Comments
Well, if we couldn't have a sandbox Star Trek mmog, where one would start as a cadet at the Academy, train, start at a space station and perhaps go work at a starship and perhaps achieve captain's chair, I think what they've come up is good, even interesting.
Still, I can't stop thinking on the comparison: the bridge crew are the weapons of the captain-warrior - you train with each one and develop your skills on it. After that successful dungeon last night, he managed to get a green new crew member, which he'll equip on the new slot (station) and trade or sell his previous crew member.
Crew members grant buffs? What a magical thing! I wonder to whom will the captain-warrior turn to when his bridge crew worns out? A shore-leave on a quick warp to the planet "Re-pair IX"?
I shiver, thinking of raid nights so that everybody in the Fleet gets their purple items...
This is a good example of creating a game in your head that ignores how players actually behave. Hardcore guild players - or those disciplined enough to play as a team - might work, but the vast majority of players wouldn't. Pick up groups (PUGs) would be out entirely.
Here's how it would actually play out:
You are fired on by an enemy ship. The science officer screams, "54 degs!", accidentally transposing the '4' and the '5' when typing. The helmsman - who'd had the ship on autopilot and had gone off to get a drink because they weren't at the mission zone yet, does nothing and the ship takes some hits. The engineer is deploying repair crews but the power is dropping so he cuts power to the weapons because he wants shields up and hates random encounters and wants engines powered to get away.
The science officer determines that the lower aft center shields of the enemy ship are weakest and informs tactical. Tactical screams, "Eng need powre foton torpedoes!"
The helmsman comes back and finds everyone screaming at him. "OMG laaaaaggg!" he screams.
The engineer screams, "no eng to weapons, eng to shields, eng to engines - run away. mob gives lousy xp and drops"
Tactical screams, "i wanna fight - take 5 mins ez kill'
Helmsman is already turning the ship around because he just wants to get the mission xp and quit the ship because he's going out tonight (it's D&D night).
ZOOMMM....the helmsman sweeps under and behind the enemy and turns about. While he's doing this the tactical officer Engineer diverts all shield power to the topside shields (because you're going under the enemy ship). BOOM---KABOOM...everyone leans hard to the left for a few seconds everyone watches their ship fly under the under ship in a range of differing graphics quailty and system lag. But it's not as bad as it could have been because the science officer was debuffing their sensors accuracy and was also using a -dmg debuff.
The Engineer screams, "y u fly thru them? run away"
Tactical--"FITEFITEFITEFITEFIT n00bs FITEFITEFITEFITE" because he can't do anything else since Engineering has control over his weapon power.
Engineering--keeps all power in engines and shields so they can fly away with minimal damage.
Tactical screams, "u all sux <CENSORED> later loosers" and quits.
Science officer changes to Tactical position because firing guns is much better than applying debuffs.
Engineer screams, "cant do away mission on this map with only 3 palyers - needs 4 min"
Helmsman goes "omg wtf? i gotta go bye" and quits because he doesn't want to have to wait while they recruit another team member.
Engineer quits without saying goodbye.
The former Science Officer, now Tactical offer switches to Helmsman and the ship to solo mode and goes back to blow up the random encounter mob.
Now wouldn't that be a heck of a lot more fun than having mindless NPCs automatically doing everything for you?
More memorable? Yes. More fun? No.
Everything the system previously described puts your effectiveness in the hands of another player. That's a recipe for disaster. Bad Helmsman? Tactical can't do their job, Engineering has to repair more damage. Bad Tactical Officer? You are slow in taking out your oppontent. Bad Engineer? They get the shields and repair wrong and the ship gets blown up (unless the Helmsman can run away fast enough).
Even Puzzle Pirates, which uses a team-based system, still has a Captain who actually makes the decisions. Starfleet / the military aren't democracies. Group decision making sucks in pressure situations where everyone has their own preferences and no-one has the final say on which direction they all go in.
That is a perfect example of what would happen and the game would die quick. Not to mention the fun that is had by all of even looking for groups in the first place. You would have tons of players hanging around starports shouting "LFG" just like they did in SWG. Sometimes you would find a group in 5 minutes and at other times it would take as long as 30 minutes. That's valuable time being wasted and not everyone has multiple hours to kill. Then after you FINALLY get your group together people would start leaving after the first few lairs until eventually you are back at the starport looking for people. No thanks.
Currently Playing: World of Warcraft
Nobody is saying you must have PCs on the bridge. The NPC's will fill in for those that want to solo or if you can't find that navigation guy at the station grab your gunner and engineer friends and the 3 of you and a couple NPC to fill out the group and you're good to go. If you want to stick around station for a little while to get a group full of PCs that's great but you wouldn't be required to. That's what all the training you give your NPCs if for. You'll still want good NPC "pets" and some of them may be better at say engineering than your friend that wants to come with you.
A little reading on the STO forums leads me to believe that PC bridge crews won't be available at launch but could possible be added in at a later time.
as posted in a sticky at STO fourms written by Hyord, his reference was a Q&A session at Gencon 2008
The thing is, no one here has ever said do away with the NPC crew idea entirely. All everyone want's is the ability / option of allowing another player to come onto his ship, group and do stuff together. Yes harder missions will require 'groups' which I'm sure will mean 2, 3 or more ships grouped into a fleet to beat the boss MOB, but for other missions, why not hang with your buddies?
And for our friend that keeps whinning for a how to: Want an easy, already tried 'what the other players are going to do' solution? SWG Multi-player ships. Pilot (Captian), Ops postion (sensors, Engineering), and gunners (tactical). Sure seems to work there. Saturday afternoon Starsider Imp vs Reb Space Pvp battles - 3 or more hours of hammering the dog snot out of each other. Don't want to group? Don't, solo in your own ship, want to group? let people know you're up to be someone's crew. Pug's all the way and you know what? We all wanted to be there so you rarely got the village fool type coming on. If you couldn't fly with an extra body in case of a drop out, the Ops guy would shift to a gun and run both. It worked just fine, even with lag, different internet speeds, different computer spec's.
I wouldn't want to HAVE to group on the same ship 100% of the time, I'm a casual player, log on play for 1-2 hours log off. That wouldn't be a good addition to a group. But there are times I'm on long, or I get invited to go see area X which is levels above me and would be instant death when going on a strong players ship would be nice.
SWG (pre-cu) - AoC (pre-f2p) - PotBS (pre-boarder) - DDO - LotRO (pre-f2p) - STO (pre-f2p) - GnH (beta tester) - SWTOR - Neverwinter
I've never actually posted on a thread here, but I felt compelled to respond to this one.
Firstly, I have to say that I agree completely with Unsub, trying to get anything done when your bridge crew is made up of players sounds like a complete nightmare waiting to happen. Imagine trying to play your cleric where one player is in charge of movement, one player is in charge of your weapons, one player is in charge of healing and one player is in charge of offensive spells- that's how I view this thought of players on a crew.
No, the way they have planned where grouping means an armada of ships is perfect. Yes, grouping is an important part of any MMO, but you never want to be in a position where you are so very reliant on the group to not make your avatar worthless.... And while you are in space, the ship is your avatar. It needs to be able to move, defend and fight all at ONE PERSON'S direction. Group play in space just means making the encounters involve more ships. Five romulan craft zip in from the aft side of your armada and you each have your role to play to survive the encounter as a group. You may have a big destroyer class ship, everyone's going to see you as the tank. Larry over there has a Hermes class ship and is kinda like the ranger of the group, darting about and taking potshots where he can.
I really can't even imagine playing this game if I had to play a <whatever> officer on a ship and didn't get to just have my own ship in the armada. In fact, I had little more than idle interest in this game until I read this article.
[Helmsman]: "I'm bringing her around, I think we have them on their last legs!"
[Engineer]: "ZOMG NEWB I told u we hav no shields!!!!! L2P!!!"
Gameplay-wise, I agree with you.
But "trekkie"-wise, isn't it what exactly happens in the bridge of command of a Starfleet starship? Everyone does his/her job and the captain is counting on each one to do their best? Another comparison could be with American football. Wouldn't it be awesome to be playing with friends and know you won the battle or saved the ship or whatever, just because the "officers" did what they were supposed to be? REAL teamwork?
Would be hard to come up with something like that in a MMOG, where you have lots of casual players (at best), but it does happen in Star Trek play-by-mails (no, I'm not urging a pbmMMOG). But then it would have to be something more like a hardcore sandbox mmog, instead of the crappy "casual" tendency of nowadays...
I wonder if these bridge slots will actually be NPC avatars, or will they be icons on a toolbar? The former implies Bridge interior which we know won't exist at launch. My guess is that while on ship, you have your crew icons and then just click on them to activate their various functionality.
_____________________________
Currently Playing: LOTRO; DDO
Played: AC2, AO, Auto Assault, CoX, DAoC, DDO, Earth&Beyond, EQ1, EQ2, EVE, Fallen Earth, Jumpgate, Roma Victor, Second Life, SWG, V:SoH, WoW, World War II Online.
Games I'm watching: Infinity: The Quest for Earth, Force of Arms.
Find the Truth: http://www.factcheck.org/
Your challenge was rebutted, successfully. That it disproves your point is apparent because all you can do is resort to name-calling and generalized attacks rather than a reasoned response.
_____________________________
Currently Playing: LOTRO; DDO
Played: AC2, AO, Auto Assault, CoX, DAoC, DDO, Earth&Beyond, EQ1, EQ2, EVE, Fallen Earth, Jumpgate, Roma Victor, Second Life, SWG, V:SoH, WoW, World War II Online.
Games I'm watching: Infinity: The Quest for Earth, Force of Arms.
Find the Truth: http://www.factcheck.org/
This is a good example of creating a game in your head that ignores how players actually behave. Hardcore guild players - or those disciplined enough to play as a team - might work, but the vast majority of players wouldn't. Pick up groups (PUGs) would be out entirely.
Here's how it would actually play out:
You are fired on by an enemy ship. The science officer screams, "54 degs!", accidentally transposing the '4' and the '5' when typing. The helmsman - who'd had the ship on autopilot and had gone off to get a drink because they weren't at the mission zone yet, does nothing and the ship takes some hits. The engineer is deploying repair crews but the power is dropping so he cuts power to the weapons because he wants shields up and hates random encounters and wants engines powered to get away.
The science officer determines that the lower aft center shields of the enemy ship are weakest and informs tactical. Tactical screams, "Eng need powre foton torpedoes!"
The helmsman comes back and finds everyone screaming at him. "OMG laaaaaggg!" he screams.
The engineer screams, "no eng to weapons, eng to shields, eng to engines - run away. mob gives lousy xp and drops"
Tactical screams, "i wanna fight - take 5 mins ez kill'
Helmsman is already turning the ship around because he just wants to get the mission xp and quit the ship because he's going out tonight (it's D&D night).
ZOOMMM....the helmsman sweeps under and behind the enemy and turns about. While he's doing this the tactical officer Engineer diverts all shield power to the topside shields (because you're going under the enemy ship). BOOM---KABOOM...everyone leans hard to the left for a few seconds everyone watches their ship fly under the under ship in a range of differing graphics quailty and system lag. But it's not as bad as it could have been because the science officer was debuffing their sensors accuracy and was also using a -dmg debuff.
The Engineer screams, "y u fly thru them? run away"
Tactical--"FITEFITEFITEFITEFIT n00bs FITEFITEFITEFITE" because he can't do anything else since Engineering has control over his weapon power.
Engineering--keeps all power in engines and shields so they can fly away with minimal damage.
Tactical screams, "u all sux <CENSORED> later loosers" and quits.
Science officer changes to Tactical position because firing guns is much better than applying debuffs.
Engineer screams, "cant do away mission on this map with only 3 palyers - needs 4 min"
Helmsman goes "omg wtf? i gotta go bye" and quits because he doesn't want to have to wait while they recruit another team member.
Engineer quits without saying goodbye.
The former Science Officer, now Tactical offer switches to Helmsman and the ship to solo mode and goes back to blow up the random encounter mob.
Now wouldn't that be a heck of a lot more fun than having mindless NPCs automatically doing everything for you?
More memorable? Yes. More fun? No.
Everything the system previously described puts your effectiveness in the hands of another player. That's a recipe for disaster. Bad Helmsman? Tactical can't do their job, Engineering has to repair more damage. Bad Tactical Officer? You are slow in taking out your oppontent. Bad Engineer? They get the shields and repair wrong and the ship gets blown up (unless the Helmsman can run away fast enough).
Even Puzzle Pirates, which uses a team-based system, still has a Captain who actually makes the decisions. Starfleet / the military aren't democracies. Group decision making sucks in pressure situations where everyone has their own preferences and no-one has the final say on which direction they all go in.
That is a perfect example of what would happen and the game would die quick. Not to mention the fun that is had by all of even looking for groups in the first place. You would have tons of players hanging around starports shouting "LFG" just like they did in SWG. Sometimes you would find a group in 5 minutes and at other times it would take as long as 30 minutes. That's valuable time being wasted and not everyone has multiple hours to kill. Then after you FINALLY get your group together people would start leaving after the first few lairs until eventually you are back at the starport looking for people. No thanks.
This reply is so intellectually dishonest -- Every MMO in existence already experiences the mock scenario described above. And no MMO has died because of it. And if you think it will NOT happen in the current STO configuration, your naive. Their will be group content for multiple ships, no doubt. Players will be hanging around starbases with their ships (just as they do at times in EVE), looking for groups.
The contorted lengths to which some posters will go in order 'win the internets argument' is astounding.
_____________________________
Currently Playing: LOTRO; DDO
Played: AC2, AO, Auto Assault, CoX, DAoC, DDO, Earth&Beyond, EQ1, EQ2, EVE, Fallen Earth, Jumpgate, Roma Victor, Second Life, SWG, V:SoH, WoW, World War II Online.
Games I'm watching: Infinity: The Quest for Earth, Force of Arms.
Find the Truth: http://www.factcheck.org/
Imagine trying to play your warrior when one player is in charge of healing you, one player is in charge of feeding you power, one player is in charge of buffing you, one player is in charge of keeping agro on you...
Your example is completely irrelevant as the PC bridge crew described in this thread would mimic almost every experience one already has in MMOs. And if one needed further proof, others have pointed out that SWG multi-crew ships worked extremely well -- someone piloting, someone gunning, someone putting out fires.
_____________________________
Currently Playing: LOTRO; DDO
Played: AC2, AO, Auto Assault, CoX, DAoC, DDO, Earth&Beyond, EQ1, EQ2, EVE, Fallen Earth, Jumpgate, Roma Victor, Second Life, SWG, V:SoH, WoW, World War II Online.
Games I'm watching: Infinity: The Quest for Earth, Force of Arms.
Find the Truth: http://www.factcheck.org/
Imagine trying to play your warrior when one player is in charge of healing you, one player is in charge of feeding you power, one player is in charge of buffing you, one player is in charge of keeping agro on you...
Your example is completely irrelevant as the PC bridge crew described in this thread would mimic almost every experience one already has in MMOs. And if one needed further proof, others have pointed out that SWG multi-crew ships worked extremely well -- someone piloting, someone gunning, someone putting out fires.
First off, SWG mutligun ships are ok, but they have very limited functionality. You either fly or shoot, so it is a very limited multi function. The problem that most of you can't get through your thick skulls is that beyond those functions coming up with something for others in the group to do that is meaningful in a fight is a real flight in fantasy. So most will want to be captain, a few will want to be gunners and the rest well...good luck. The more you think about it the more you will realize how a multi class crew just will not function well in a MMO setting.
Besides as someone pointed out previously on a ship, captains word is law, how is that going to fly in a MMO? It isn't. You can argue all you want about a bridge crew, but I have not seen one argument in this thread supporting it that makes one iota of sense.
My understanding is that it's not like everyone is going to get "Spock"--you complete a mission/arc/whatever and get a science officer with high level computing skills. Then you complete another arc and get an engineer who is really good at repair. Then you have your science officer cross-train your engineer and your engineer is able to acheive a more efficient dilithium mix.
So instead of getting specific named people, you get people with specific skills. Eventually, you can have one of your science officers cross-trained by all your other science officeres and wind up with an uber-science officer.
-------------
The less you expect, the more you'll be surprised. Hopefully, pleasantly so.
I've gotten to the point here I actually look forward to your blue text as it always makes me smile, you just don't have a clue do you? If you've ever played SWG there's no way you'd even have posted the above.
While your first sentence "First off, SWG mutligun ships are ok, but they have very limited functionality." is true, the fact that they are still in use means that players have found a place for them.
For the small 2 man ships, yes 'fly or shoot' is the only option be it strapped in the back of a Tie, or the top of a Y-wing or 'gila. But for the larger you seem to have blown over the Ops position or even the spare body doing repair work. I know the ships I've been on have lasted (well atleast 10 sec longer
) in a fire fight because the Ops guy shutted shields to protect us or the repair guy hustled his fanny down to fix a coolant leak. So finding something meaningful in a fight isn't such a fantasy is it?
Did it get boring sitting in my gun turret while the pilot took us all over and I had nothing to do? Yes but that's why chat was invented. I never got the feeling I was a fifth wheel or something.
If it's just all about you, then fine, fly your own ship, be the Captain and NPC crew and go to town. No one's making you have players on your ship, but don't whine if no one wants you in thier fleet the next battle because you couldn't follow the orders of your squadron commander. Oh wait there's that following orders for the good of the group thing again ......
SWG (pre-cu) - AoC (pre-f2p) - PotBS (pre-boarder) - DDO - LotRO (pre-f2p) - STO (pre-f2p) - GnH (beta tester) - SWTOR - Neverwinter
Ok, so what is the difference between everyone doing their part with different ships and everyone doing their part as crew on one ship? Really, how can people so adamantly insist that one is impossible while the other is perfectly fine and workable when both scenerios come down to the same thing: people doing their part in a group.
So in your multi-ship groups what happens if the destroyer (tank) doesn't "hold agro"? What happens if the DPS ships don't do their part? What happens if the repair ship or science vessel or whatever doesn't do it's part? What happens if a player controlling one of the ships lags at a critical moment?
How can people say that's it's impossible for people to successfully work together as a group when talking about player crew and then just assume that all of the problems they were just expounding will not affect groups of ships?
It's the same damn thing. The only difference is that instead of having different jobs performed by crew on one ship you instead have multiple ships each performing different functions.
And what about away missions? They have said that it will be possible to group with other players for those, groups entirely composed of ship Captains which is pretty damn silly..but whatever. So why aren't people arguing that this shouldn't be included because of the impossibility of successfull cooperation between human players?
And why aren't people bringing up the "but who's in charge" argument in regard to away missions and groups of ships? Every argument that people have used against player crews could also be applied to fleets and away missions but, mysteriously, nobody is doing that.
You know, I was sort of joking around before when I was talking about everyone wanting to be Captain Kirk and having their own customized, hot rod starship. But now I'm starting to think that that is what this argument is really all about. The people arguing against player crews don't seem to have any problem with grouping as long it doesn't threaten their desire to have their own personal, ugpradable, hot rod to fly around in and to always be the Captain. So it's not grouping that is the problem it's the percieved threat to personal e-peen that is getting people worked up.
Ok, so how about if everyone gets their own personal, upgradable ship...but...you could invite other players to crew on your ship? So you guys could still do all the "Pimp my ride" stuff that you're dreaming about AND have player crews in the game at the same time. Of course I don't expect this suggestion to change anyone's mind either because people would be afraid that they might occassionally have to leave their ship and serve as crew on someone else's ship, OMG!!!
So why can't I have a crew made up of my friends (or at least some of them) instead of all NPCs? O_o
Fantastic approach to the game!
This makes it just about perfect for solo players, and groups alike! It reminds me of Guild Wars, where you could hire Henchmen and control them in combat. You could also group with another player and decide who would bring henchmen to round out the team.
Balancing content should also be easier, as you have a set group, 5 players always.
This seems like the best of both worlds for Solo and Group oriented players. If you're lucky I guess you can actually do away missions with 5 human players :-)
What would be interesting, though, is the AI. How much control will you have over your Bridge Team in battle?
The game that I found did this wonderfully is Final Fantasy XII with the Gambit system, whereby you could more or less setup your NPC team member's response to various situations such as Low Health, first line attacks etc. etc. This reduced Micromanagement in the heat of battle tremendously, and prevented fights from becoming crazy click-fests, but still allowed you finer control if you really needed it.
Well with the presentation of this NPC bridgecrew mechanic, we can safely say that we will never see player bridge crew in the game. Ever!
Thanks. But no thanks.
Basically, the only real grouping mechanic will be Space battles with numerious ships. And we got that already with EVE Online and upcoming titles as JGE and BP.
I cannot see ground away missions with a group of ship captains. Pretty much immersion breaking if you ask me and downright silly.
Cheers
Wow. I'm wasn't sure who to exactly reply too, cos everyone brings up some very good points overall, so I'll just try to hit as many points as I can.
Firstly, I'm no alt account... I just have never posted on any of these forums ever.. I just thought that this particular conversation was specifically very interesting! Especially since I originally assumed that everyone would start as a starfleet cadet and would have to work their way up through the ranks "Doing their time" on other people's ship, and thus had NO INTEREST IN THIS GAME until I read this blurb.
Next.. I didn't say that the idea of pc bridge crews were impossible, I just said that they would be incredibly frustrating. I understand that everyone who is for them sees them as fundamentally the same thing, but they differ in some extremely important (to many of us) ways.
The biggest and most important difference is that one thing that players of every MMO seem to universally agree on is that it sucks to not have (for whatever mechanical reason) control over your character. Stuns, fears, dazes, mezzes, slows, mc's, roots, snares.. whatever form they come in, it seems to be a universally hated mechanic. If you have an entire group of people all on one ship, only a single person has control over that character's effective motion / movement. To a purist, that one person should be the captain. In gameplay terms, it winds up being the helm... which brings me to my second point.
In the movies, the captain says "Go left and fire full torpedoes!" and the helmsmen punches in "L E F T" and the ship goes left and the weapons officer punches the big bright red torpedo button and everyone goes "AHA! Bold move captain!" In an MMO, the Captain says "GO LEFT ADN SHOOT TROPEDOS!" and fifteen seconds later the helmsman notices it and says "LOL OOPS" because the ship has already careened off to the right into a bigger group of enemies that the science officer picked up on scanner and failed to mention on group chat cos he's in vent with the captain and mentioned it there instead. Meanwhile the weapons guy has just fired torpedoes into a group (cos he's a good group mate) as requested into the big group that was up until that moment actually neutral. This kinda speaks to the points about doing play by mail, as well. I have no problem agreeing that the sort of gameplay would be quite interesting and fun in a turn based type situation, but in a 'live' type setting, no matter which person I was in that group, I'd be annoyed... as the helmsman I'd be annoyed for not being told that the group was there hanging out right behind the asteroid debris, as the captain I'd be annoyed that my orders weren't followed, as the science guy I'd be annoyed that the helmsman refuses to buy headphones and a mic, and as the weapons officer I'd be annoyed that everyone is now yelling at me for doing what I was told to do.
Consider that scenario in an armada situation. Big destroyer ship bears left and the rest of his group don't notice in time and break right, one member accidentally engages a gaggle of neutral mobs way too high for the group.. Everyone else can limp away, try to save him, try to slow the gaggle of neutrals and help him limp away... point is, there are choices that just don't have the complication and frustration factor that the 'pc bridge crew' model has. Sure they have their own complications.. yes as a scout vessel I'm relying on my destroyer to keep the majority of the torpedoes aimed at him instead of me.. but I don't think it's too much to ask that your ship (which is, while in space, your character) work pretty much without a hitch unless acted upon by a specifically detrimental force.
The one thing that this detracts from in some ways is the 'surprise me' factor. Happens in the movies, capt. gives general orders or isn't able to give orders and a member of the crew surprises him with some brilliant thing he pulls out of his ..exhaust port...? But, I think we see those situations in group play on any MMO, and still can.. that scout that is under heavy fire and the 'tank' ship is having a hard time intercepting the ...interceptors.. and another scout comes out of nowhere and saves the day.. that sort of thing. Sure you can't go "Good job, ensign, you deserve a promotion.. congrats you get to be chief engineer now!", but saving a fellow captain's ship has its own rewards, I think.
Lastly, to the comment about 'everyone wanting to be captain kirk with his own hot-rod ship'... I don't really see that generalization as a fair one, personally. I know I don't really care what ship I have, as long as it suits the role I want to perform when in a 'space group' situation, and it gets me to where I want to go do 'away team' missions with my buddies. Assuming that just because someone wants control of their own character means that they want to paint flames on the side of their character and brag about doing the kessel run in- wait.. wrong property... Anyway... Point being that the benefit of this system to me isn't that I want ooh phat lewtz ship bling, but rather that my standard issue ship is mine to point in the direction I choose and shoot at the things that I choose.
Oh, and just as an aside, I like the idea of having my crew being the 'loot', and I like that the crew will all be customizable (and thus very personal and unique), and tradeable. Very cool, imo.
I've gotten to the point here I actually look forward to your blue text as it always makes me smile, you just don't have a clue do you? If you've ever played SWG there's no way you'd even have posted the above.
While your first sentence "First off, SWG mutligun ships are ok, but they have very limited functionality." is true, the fact that they are still in use means that players have found a place for them.
For the small 2 man ships, yes 'fly or shoot' is the only option be it strapped in the back of a Tie, or the top of a Y-wing or 'gila. But for the larger you seem to have blown over the Ops position or even the spare body doing repair work. I know the ships I've been on have lasted (well atleast 10 sec longer
) in a fire fight because the Ops guy shutted shields to protect us or the repair guy hustled his fanny down to fix a coolant leak. So finding something meaningful in a fight isn't such a fantasy is it?
Did it get boring sitting in my gun turret while the pilot took us all over and I had nothing to do? Yes but that's why chat was invented. I never got the feeling I was a fifth wheel or something.
If it's just all about you, then fine, fly your own ship, be the Captain and NPC crew and go to town. No one's making you have players on your ship, but don't whine if no one wants you in thier fleet the next battle because you couldn't follow the orders of your squadron commander. Oh wait there's that following orders for the good of the group thing again ......
Actually the only clueless person posting here is you. I tend to fly at least a couple weekends a month. The fact is that no one wants to fly in the multiplayer ships, they are NO FUN! I very rarely see them in action at all. There are some two mans, but the bigger ships, nada. Sure I have the bigger ships, but getting a crew together to fly it, not a chance.
Hence the point that it is meaningless to provide human bridge crew functionality when only a small percentage of the playerbase would utilize such.
Alot of what you said is 100% on the money, especially your scenario's on what could happen. Problem is they could just as easily happen if you were on your own ship, as on someone elses.
SWG (pre-cu) - AoC (pre-f2p) - PotBS (pre-boarder) - DDO - LotRO (pre-f2p) - STO (pre-f2p) - GnH (beta tester) - SWTOR - Neverwinter
Actually the only clueless person posting here is you. I tend to fly at least a couple weekends a month. The fact is that no one wants to fly in the multiplayer ships, they are NO FUN! I very rarely see them in action at all. There are some two mans, but the bigger ships, nada. Sure I have the bigger ships, but getting a crew together to fly it, not a chance.
What server? Because the large Sat. afternoon Starsider events I played in, Factions only rarely had problems fielding multi-player ships and crews.
If you're talking about the Deep Space zero's battles (free for all's) then you are 100% totally correct. Single ships all the way.
If you're talking the scripted event's like I am, then no, they are set up specifically to include Multi-player ships. Planned in advanced and set up in advanced.
Multi-player ships while not the best idea (in SWG) do work and can have a purpose. Heck one of the 100% kill on sight, problems a comin' ships was the Spinning Cloud. A souped up YT-1300 (M. Falcon class) with 2 gunners, 1 ops spot and a pilot. Multi-player all the way. He was there for all the events and always gave us massive amounts of heart-ache and pain. What that guy could do with a multi-player ship is probably the best reason for giving STO the OPTION of allowing players to crew on each others ships.
Originally posted by Ozmodan
Hence the point that it is meaningless to provide human bridge crew functionality when only a small percentage of the playerbase would utilize such.
- Looking at a bigger picture (for other games, not just STO for example). So they should also leave Pvp, PvE, Housing, Crafting, Role-playing emotes, Storyline quest write up's, (add your example here) etc... etc.... etc..... because only a small percentage of the playerbase would utilize that function? You cut something down too much and you've either totally niched the game or killed it from even getting off the ground.
A good example would be Prep's version of ST. Each ship was the server and all players had to be on that 1 ship? Only Federation, no playing other organizations. That didn't fly did it?
WoW. Mainly a Pvp game I believe, isn't that the big selling point? DoAC RvR is either it's main thrust or best point. For either of them, why even have RP, PvE? Easy to get around the PvE leveling. Tutorial zone to teach you how, then straight into Combat. But instead they have those other features. They even have PvE only and RP server's. DoAC has lot's of different kinds of server's pre-change, post-change, everyone's friends, normal. With all those choices someone's going to count as the 'small percentage of the playerbase'.
Bottom line is; if it can be done at a reasonable expense. Do you cut off that source of revenue? Or put it in the game to attract more sub's (money)?
SWG (pre-cu) - AoC (pre-f2p) - PotBS (pre-boarder) - DDO - LotRO (pre-f2p) - STO (pre-f2p) - GnH (beta tester) - SWTOR - Neverwinter
I want maned Predator Drones. OH and lets not forget MRE's for away missions.
Jihad works both ways
MAGA
That that sounds gawd awful lame. I don't want to have to be the guild leader to captain my own ship.
See how you can't please everyone.
Am I the only person interested in this game for the Starships and not some lame forced RP crew environment? I want my own ship, I want to customize its layout, look, name etc. That is what a Star Trek game is about to me. The Starship and the Universe it exists in... along with all the politicking that goes on between different species. The exploration, the combat, the technology.
Don't get me wrong, I think its pretty clever how they are handling crew, much better that 99.9% of the ideas I hear on the boards. But its definitely not the make or break point of the game for me.
I'll be damned, I didn't realize there is only one ship in the entire game. Thanks for pointing out why this won't work.
first off there is more than 1 ship in the game.. secondly its not like u cant group up with other ships and form a armada. It happened all the time in the star trek universe. so plz stop saying not having a pc crew is going to be lonely because u will have other ships to party with. this is just people trying to troll and its annoying. there is no way being a science officer is going to be fun. and yes the scenario where they find the weakspot in sheilds could be fun wtf else are you going to do while the helmsman/captain are going from point a to b absolutely nothing.
Which Final Fantasy Character Are You?
Final Fantasy 7