Why hasn't frontier ever responded to killing our SLF NPC's?

[SushiCW]

Imagine this instead: You spot the incoming opponent and wake before he can line up an interdiction.
Or this: You get pulled, but thanks to your knowledge of how to act in this situation, you have a wake plotted, submit the interdiction, outrun the torps, and wake out.

Dying in this game is 99% of the time your own fault. When you lose a crew member, it is through your own mistakes. Learn to fly.

You're entirely missing the point, I'm afraid.

Even so, imagine this: let's say I want to PvP, so I go looking for trouble. It's supposed to be fun, right? My odds of dying are, of course, pretty high. Before crew, that wasn't a problem: I'd get everything back except for credits, and for all but the most expensive ships that's a trivial and easy-to-replace cost. I have full control over how much value I'm willing to risk.

With crew, I don't have that safety net or that control. The risk spike is so high that the only sane option is to leave the valuable crew behind and take some poor hire&fire shmuck. That's not a fun dynamic. For the same reason that losing all your engineered modules on rebuy wouldn't be a fun "risk" dynamic, given how long it takes to get them.

 

[Kaybe]

Hello Commanders!

I'm fairly sure that I've mentioned this topic on more than one occasion. Oh well, once more, with feeling!

We have some ideas for preventing fighter crew death whilst retaining some form of jeopardy, but we haven't got round to implementing them.

Clearly we don't want a situation where crew can always be saved, this would mean that everyone would only ever hire one or two fighter crew. However, we accept that the current situation is too harsh in terms of investment versus risk. Look for more information in a future update.

Awesome, thanks! Many of us had not seen any previous comment and threads about this have become pretty heated after a year and a half. I'll go ahead and paste this in the main thread as well to keep people updated that Frontier are not in fact ignoring the issue as many of us believed.

 

[Kaybe]

Hello Commanders!

I'm fairly sure that I've mentioned this topic on more than one occasion. Oh well, once more, with feeling!

We have some ideas for preventing fighter crew death whilst retaining some form of jeopardy, but we haven't got round to implementing them.

Clearly we don't want a situation where crew can always be saved, this would mean that everyone would only ever hire one or two fighter crew. However, we accept that the current situation is too harsh in terms of investment versus risk. Look for more information in a future update.

Also, honestly, you really should consider letting crew always be saved. We don't mind if it becomes really difficult and require an hours long mission to do, but it really is a must. No other grind in the game ever results in a permanent loss. Even engineered modules come back in exactly the same state if your ship is destroyed. And until crew salvage can be guaranteed, absolutely no one would ever use their NPC crew in PVP since PVP has a very high risk of destruction. My hope is that NPC pilots will be treated with the same kind of respect for player time as the rest. Even if you need to rebalance them to make the grind longer. I'd much rather have to spend a full year to get a pilot to elite than spend 3 months and loads of money ... and then lose all that time investment in an instant because I bit off more than I could chew or accidentally hit the boost button inside a station.

 

[Eminor]

Hello Commanders!

I'm fairly sure that I've mentioned this topic on more than one occasion. Oh well, once more, with feeling!

We have some ideas for preventing fighter crew death whilst retaining some form of jeopardy, but we haven't got round to implementing them.

Clearly we don't want a situation where crew can always be saved, this would mean that everyone would only ever hire one or two fighter crew. However, we accept that the current situation is too harsh in terms of investment versus risk. Look for more information in a future update.

Thanks for the response - and confirmation that you are looking at this issue.
Hmmm, I can't imagine that there are that many people who currently hire more than 2 NPC crew at a time... ?

 

[V'larr]

Hello Commanders!

I'm fairly sure that I've mentioned this topic on more than one occasion. Oh well, once more, with feeling!

We have some ideas for preventing fighter crew death whilst retaining some form of jeopardy, but we haven't got round to implementing them.

Clearly we don't want a situation where crew can always be saved, this would mean that everyone would only ever hire one or two fighter crew. However, we accept that the current situation is too harsh in terms of investment versus risk. Look for more information in a future update.

Then why not turn off the death switch in the meantime?

I mean, making us players accept the short end of the stick until affairs are in order doesn't seem awfully nice, does it?

And given that it takes *so* much time and monetary investment to train a crew member up & keep them active - I would like to directly challenge your claim that "we don't want a situation where crew can always be saved". In light of the investment I just mentioned, I think that is wrong.

Why shouldn't we be able to hire and keep one, special crew? Why shouldn't we, through effort and guile and care, be able to treat NPC crewmembers as something more than disposable cheap hires with no life expectancy?

I don't see how it's wrong to want to hire one or two fighter crew, and from that point onward make them into an Elite member of your team, ones who have faced many challenges together with you and have supported you through thick and thin.

The way you seem to be approaching this, where you want the players to repeatedly have to lose all effort/time spent with an NPC and bring on a new hire, denies the opportunity to establish any kind of long-term, meaningful relationship with these characters.

If you want us to have a reason to look for more NPCs to hire, why not allow us to hire more crew on our ships? And just letting us *see* them on our bridge would give a reason based on aesthetics alone....

Or suppose we have player settlements. Or suppose you make it so larger ships require a certain sized crew, as I've heard lore seems to indicate that Anacondas aren't supposed to be manned by a lone CMDR.

There are many potential options here that would be more fun and allow for more emotional investment, options that don't involve holding out and keeping the death switch on.

 

[AzraelDirge]

You're entirely missing the point, I'm afraid.

Even so, imagine this: let's say I want to PvP, so I go looking for trouble. It's supposed to be fun, right? My odds of dying are, of course, pretty high. Before crew, that wasn't a problem: I'd get everything back except for credits, and for all but the most expensive ships that's a trivial and easy-to-replace cost. I have full control over how much value I'm willing to risk.

With crew, I don't have that safety net or that control. The risk spike is so high that the only sane option is to leave the valuable crew behind and take some poor hire&fire shmuck. That's not a fun dynamic. For the same reason that losing all your engineered modules on rebuy wouldn't be a fun "risk" dynamic, given how long it takes to get them.

Your odds of dying are low if you go in prepared correctly. Sorry that you're so risk adverse that the one thing you actually risk losing in this game needs to be fixed as well. Literally every decent big ship PvP pilot I know brings their SLF and pilot along for the extra DPS.

 

[V'larr]

Your odds of dying are low if you go in prepared correctly. Sorry that you're so risk adverse that the one thing you actually risk losing in this game needs to be fixed as well. Literally every decent big ship PvP pilot I know brings their SLF and pilot along for the extra DPS.

Deadly bugs happen. Combat balance is entirely out of whack. No amount of preparation is going to fix those two facts. And every instance of PvP pilots bringing fighter crew I've ever heard of only involved hire-and-fire Expert NPCs whose names/faces they will never put any effort into remembering.

Instead of scoffing at "risk-adverse" pilots and insisting on getting gud, can we focus on improving things?

If *you* want to roleplay in a certain risky way, *you* are entirely free to enforce your own rules on yourself. Don't buy back your ships on rebuy, fire your NPC crew if your SLF ever gets blown up, whatever gets your jollies going. Fdev switching off the permadeath button will in no way harm *your* ideals or game experience here.

 

[WR3ND]

Hello Commanders!

I'm fairly sure that I've mentioned this topic on more than one occasion. Oh well, once more, with feeling!

We have some ideas for preventing fighter crew death whilst retaining some form of jeopardy, but we haven't got round to implementing them.

Clearly we don't want a situation where crew can always be saved, this would mean that everyone would only ever hire one or two fighter crew. However, we accept that the current situation is too harsh in terms of investment versus risk. Look for more information in a future update.

Maybe some significant risk for players themselves in the game would be nice too. I play as a survivalist/adventurer/explorer primarily in the game and haven't lost a ship since 3301 and only 5 ships total. Not saying there is anything wrong with that specifically, but having the option to repay my claims in full and pay them off retrospectively would be nice too. Sure, it's just an otherwise meaningless number, but then so are the ranks...

 

[AzraelDirge]

Deadly bugs happen. Combat balance is entirely out of whack. No amount of preparation is going to fix those two facts.

Odd that every combat death I've ever had then was attributable to very specific, definite mistakes on my part, and because of that, I don't ask to have the penalty lightened.

And every instance of PvP pilots bringing fighter crew I've ever heard of only involved hire-and-fire Expert NPCs whose names/faces they will never put any effort into remembering.

Then you need to talk to more PvP players.

Instead of scoffing at "risk-adverse" pilots and insisting on getting gud, can we focus on improving things?.

Sure, suggest something that will improve the game instead of just something that lessens the impact of eating a rebuy and we'll talk.

 

[StefanOS]

Hello Commanders!

I'm fairly sure that I've mentioned this topic on more than one occasion. Oh well, once more, with feeling!

We have some ideas for preventing fighter crew death whilst retaining some form of jeopardy, but we haven't got round to implementing them.

Clearly we don't want a situation where crew can always be saved, this would mean that everyone would only ever hire one or two fighter crew. However, we accept that the current situation is too harsh in terms of investment versus risk. Look for more information in a future update.

"this would mean that everyone would only ever hire one or two fighter crew"

Hello Sandro, nice that you take part in this discussion!

Why do you think it is so important that we hire many different crew members? Why???

The absolute basic implementation of crew right now makes them look like AI robots... there is no PERSONAL connection between the CMDR and the "crew". They are impemented like a flying (and speaking) AI battle robot. They dont have any attributes (fear, bravery, skills, honor .......) only a rank.
You are missing the point here that some players WANT to be connected to their crew - some dont want them to be a disposable asset like a SLF.

 

[vindicator jones]

Hello Commanders!

I'm fairly sure that I've mentioned this topic on more than one occasion. Oh well, once more, with feeling!

We have some ideas for preventing fighter crew death whilst retaining some form of jeopardy, but we haven't got round to implementing them.

Clearly we don't want a situation where crew can always be saved, this would mean that everyone would only ever hire one or two fighter crew. However, we accept that the current situation is too harsh in terms of investment versus risk. Look for more information in a future update.

Hi Sandro, really happy your at least thinking about this issue.

But I am curious about one thing.. Whats so clear about always being able to save your crew, a problem, and that it is undesirable to only ever one crew member? When you hire someone to work at Frontier, do you want a fast turn around of staff? or prefer to have someone stay and grow within the company?

I want to be able to keep my crew member, my most recent lost of my Elite level pilot still irks me even a few months on.. refer to video below..

And while yes, I agree its a bit silly developing a relationship with a Static NPC portrait image and name, it still happened, and not only was it very infuriating because it happened over something silly, I just couldn't fathom logically why this should happen..

Dont get me wrong, I agree that there should be an element of risk involved.. we dont want NPC's to seem like modules.. However I would like that risk to be managed by the player rather than some kind of RNG role or in game code.

Many people have mentioned the following, but I want to highlight them here...

NPC's could have loyalty levels based on their Alignment.. Act in a way that opposes their alignment, and then you loose loyalty.. For example.. a former security officer could threaten to leave you if you start acting like a pirate.. Or a Pirate pilot could threaten to leave you if you dont pirate enough.. You could then hire more than one NPC Pilot so you can perform chosen activities with specific NPC pilots

How about rescue missions to save your NPC's escape pod in a certain amount of time?

Maybe the NPC could have injuries and will need to rest for a certain amount of time, making the NPC inaccessible for a period of time.

There are so many different ways to make the risk placed squarely on the players shoulders, and not have some kind of in game arbitrary system, and that's what we should be aiming for.

Cheers

VJ

[video=youtube_share;e7jKJX9OEyU]https://youtu.be/e7jKJX9OEyU[/video]

 

[Sandro Sammarco]

Hello Commanders!

Just clarify my statement about not wanting Commanders to only ever train one or two fighter crew.

It's absolutely not that we want to force players to continually cycle through new crew (which is why we'll hopefully get around to making a change here), it's because we want to retain jeopardy. If the only risk was some extra credits cost then we think the risk would be too easy to mitigate.

Part of the concept of attachment with crew is knowing that you have kept them alive during situations where you *might* have lost them.

hope this makes some sense.

 

[Genar-Hofoen]

Hello Commanders!

Just clarify my statement about not wanting Commanders to only ever train one or two fighter crew.

It's absolutely not that we want to force players to continually cycle through new crew (which is why we'll hopefully get around to making a change here), it's because we want to retain jeopardy. If the only risk was some extra credits cost then we think the risk would be too easy to mitigate.

Part of the concept of attachment with crew is knowing that you have kept them alive during situations where you *might* have lost them.

hope this makes some sense.

To be honest Sandro, it doesn't really make any sense to me

I'm just not feeling this one.

 

[Bertrand Du Guesclin]

Hello Commanders!

Just clarify my statement about not wanting Commanders to only ever train one or two fighter crew.

It's absolutely not that we want to force players to continually cycle through new crew (which is why we'll hopefully get around to making a change here), it's because we want to retain jeopardy. If the only risk was some extra credits cost then we think the risk would be too easy to mitigate.

Part of the concept of attachment with crew is knowing that you have kept them alive during situations where you *might* have lost them.

hope this makes some sense.

But then what is the motivation for them to become a crew member, when being a crewmember on a Pilot's Federation ship is the most dangerous job?

The idea of jeopardy is understandable BUT it is inconsistent with the existence of escape pods.
If only the pilot of the ship can get an escape pod, then pirating in a High Intensity Res with a shieldless Hauler is less risky than joining a crew on a fully equipped Federal Corvette.

In a realistic "breathing & living galaxy", NPC crewmembers would work for us for 1 or 2 missions, then say "Well cap'n, shove it, I'm'a purchasing my very own Sidey. Thanks bye"

 

[Watcher]

Hello Commanders!

Just clarify my statement about not wanting Commanders to only ever train one or two fighter crew.

It's absolutely not that we want to force players to continually cycle through new crew (which is why we'll hopefully get around to making a change here), it's because we want to retain jeopardy. If the only risk was some extra credits cost then we think the risk would be too easy to mitigate.

Part of the concept of attachment with crew is knowing that you have kept them alive during situations where you *might* have lost them.

hope this makes some sense.

Hi Sandro,

I can see where you are coming from with this, if there is no risk of losing them then doesn't that dilute their meaning and eventually your sense of attachment? I agree there is a danger there but I'm with VJ and other on this one that fleshing them out with a bit more personality and having some consequences beyond straight out death would help maintain or improve attachment while lowing the risk of losing them. Could be some interesting new gameplay here too which is always welcome. Still, I'm sure you've bounced this around a reasonable amount internally and I've got some faith you'll find a good balance here - I look forward to hearing what you come up with!

 

[Moritasgus]

The real problem is that crew xp only goes up, maybe they could become invincible but on death their xp resets by a number of grades to be determined.
Basically the reason they die is because otherwise everyone ends up with an elite crew risk free with no other factors involved except time. Nobody would ever have any reason to hire a good pilot.

 

[Martind Forlon]

Hello Commanders!

Just clarify my statement about not wanting Commanders to only ever train one or two fighter crew.

It's absolutely not that we want to force players to continually cycle through new crew (which is why we'll hopefully get around to making a change here), it's because we want to retain jeopardy. If the only risk was some extra credits cost then we think the risk would be too easy to mitigate.

Part of the concept of attachment with crew is knowing that you have kept them alive during situations where you *might* have lost them.

hope this makes some sense.

The PROBLEM here is that atm you need to avoid ship destruction ALL the time when is NPC active, if you want keep "alive" that particular NPC which you have trained for months and which is paid with quite big % of income (no matter if active or not). Losing deadly/elite NPC is imo atm the highest penalty for death in ED. It would be much nicer if NOW is possible use moneys for keep ours NPC and later have more richer gameplay ... (with above said I want to add that I think that NPC crew have huge potential for fun and richer play which is unused atm.)

 

[raymondo the great]

Hello Commanders!

I'm fairly sure that I've mentioned this topic on more than one occasion. Oh well, once more, with feeling!

We have some ideas for preventing fighter crew death whilst retaining some form of jeopardy, but we haven't got round to implementing them.

Clearly we don't want a situation where crew can always be saved, this would mean that everyone would only ever hire one or two fighter crew. However, we accept that the current situation is too harsh in terms of investment versus risk. Look for more information in a future update.

Ah good

So our huge ships will continue to have problems with enough escape pods to fit the crew in despite their huge size and plenty of space....oh and the fact that in any reasonably imagined future there would be standards expressing numbers of pods needed per crew + passengers etc. You know like how on Earth we changed things post Titanic in most jurisdictions...

The simple fact is that anything other than them surviving is illogical and immersion breaking

Plus your logic is faulty - right now most people only hire one or two and replace as they die, which for many commanders is fairly rare, so it's not like it's going to massivly change "traffic" to the crew lounge! Plus people literally use disposable crew and sack them before turning in missions etc right now because they can't be bothered training them up on the off chance they may die and have to start again!

Yes people only hire a limited number of crew, so what? Just like most people set up their holo-me once and barely touch it, doesn't mean that feature has no value just because we aren't constantly forced to use it!

 

[EidLeWeise]

To be honest Sandro, it doesn't really make any sense to me

I'm just not feeling this one.

I'm with you here Gameplayer... I understand what Sandy's on about, but it doesn't actually make sense to me.

 

[AzraelDirge]

Y'all heard the man. There's supposed to be a risk, and the way to keep your crew alive is DON'T DIE.