Multicrew flaws: Unfocused feedback thread

[Gryphorim]

The current state of multicrew is, to me at least, flawed.

Firstly, it currently only allows for combat operation.
When opting to fly a SLF, on those ships that allow it, it's mostly fine, there's good fun to be had there.
However, the gunner role requires fitting out expensive and underpowered turrets, pulling firepower away from the forward arc of the ship, away from the pilot's own control. This reduces the ability of the pilot to effectively fight, making them dependent on the gunner to make up the difference.
Furthermore, steps taken to simplify the gunner experience actually negatively impact on the effectiveness of the role. For example, the automatic selection of the ship under the crosshair of the gunner means that in situations where a friendly flies in between a gunner and their intended target, the friendly will momentarily be targeted, meaning any accidental fire hitting them is treated as intentional, and incurring a bounty. Not fun for either the gunner or the pilot.

Secondly, there is no synergy of multicrew with wings.
This forces players to choose one or the other, with wings having far more flexibility in gameplay, making multicrew an unattractive opposition.



In an idealised scenario, I'd like to see the following changes made to multicrew as a whole.

-Synergy with wings, making crew and wing count toward the same total of 4 players to a crew/wing. This also allows wing missions to be rearding for crew.
-Enhanced "idle" crew functionality (With limits set by captain) to operate power management, sensors and navigation. This allows for a dedicated first officer role.
-Replacement of the crew power pips with an engineer role, which would have access to deeper level power management, effecting the same potential power gains as the extra pip. Ideally, this role would have some prettier and more detailed holograms of the ship to look at, with internal components and weapons modelled and visible in different coloured overlays. As such an engineer would feel like they have a finer view of onboard systems and more agency over them. Also, allowing the possibility of directional shield management.
-Overhaul of the gunner role, seperating into two parts: Remote gun operator, and turret operator.

Spoiler

--Remote gun operator would function much like current gunner, but with better control over targeting of objects around the ship. The operator would be able to set remote guns to track their target, switching to manual targeting when target is within a few degrees of operator crosshair. They could also be set to target hostiles within their field of fire, if the operator's target is outside of that arc. Finally, they could be set to prioritise (shielded) friendlies, if fitted with regenerative weapons.
--Turret operator gains control of a manned turret which would be a new addition to some, but not all, ships. I envision the fitment of a manned turret as similar to ship kits, however, these would either include a dedicated anti fighter gun with similar firepower to a SLF, or, on selected ships, a full weapon enclosure with room to mount traditional fixed weapons in a traversible fixture (Naturally these would only work as fixed weapons, unless operated by a turret operator).
The AA gun could, to save on art assets, use the same model as SLF turret, scaled appropriately, on a simple adapter plate to blend with ship's lines when folded down. Weapon types for these smaller turrets would be as per SLF weapon options.
Ships with the AA gun (location in brackets) would be:

Spoiler

Asp Scout (tail)
Asp X (Tail & Dorsal)
Type 6 (Tail)
Type 7 (Tail & Dorsal)
Type 9 (Tail & Dorsal)
IClipper (Tail)
Orca (Tail)
Federal Gunship (Dorsal, fitment replaces small hardpoints)
Anaconda (Nose window, fitment disables small hardpoints) [I'm less sure of this one]
Those ships with both a tail and a dorsal gun, as well as the FGS, and Anaconda, would gain an additional crew seat, as well.

Ships with the larger turret option would be the ICutter and the FedCorvette. In these two cases, the turret replaces existing weapon mounts with a full enclosure, styled to match the rest of the ship, and an additional crew seat added

Spoiler

ICutter trading it's two dorsal large hardpoints for a sleek housing that can fit 2 large or 3 medium weapons
FedCorvette trading it's 2 huge hardpoints for an armoured, angular housing for 2 huge, 3 large or 4 medium weapons.

The intent of the turret operator is, in the case of the smaller guns, to capture the feel of turret operation as depicted in Star Wars ep 4, like the Millenium Falcon. On the larger ships, this shifts to feeling more like a tank crew.

-Introducing a range of non-combat functions, like Science officer for exploration, or potentially the operation of advanced mining and salvage gear.
-Allowing the remote use of SRVs for crew (no life support, limited range from ship, or ship owner if they are in SRV, their SRV acting as a signal repeater)
-Many ships, those mentioned above, all having an additional crew seat added, to support the additional turret operator and engineer role.
-Allow hiring of NPC crew or robots to man these crew stations, though likely not as effectively as a player. This would modify current NPC crew, as they would visibly take a seat onboard the ship.
-Allow crew to see HUD elements as drawn on entities outside the ship (orbit lines, target reticule, etc) as well as other crew console displays.

I feel like the addition of these details would enhance the existing multicrew experience, elevating it from barely used curiousity, to regularly used, nearly core gameplay.
Players would not only aspire to command their own ship, but also crew up with friends, to jointly venture the stars.

 

[[VR] Dr Gentech]

God that sounds incredible... I hope someone from FDev reads this

 

[c00ky1970]

Also remove the scaling of payouts based on rank differential, it doesn’t happen in wings, so don’t do it for Multicrew.

Allow Multicrew to take wing missions and received a payout on them once completed.I like the idea of Multicrew SRV being like SLF, with no occupant and limited range, that sounds cool!

 

[Drelthar]

A lot of this sounds great, but has very little detail as to what you would really do in these new roles.

The engineer position sounds a bit like looking at pretty pictures while you wait around, the science officer, wait, let me just read back... oh right, they are "For exploration" well sure, sounds amazing! what would they DO though? The first officier role also, they would... work with the sensors? sounds... pretty boring honestly.

The main problem with multicrew is that it was added in after the rest of the game had been designed.

It should have been a part of the games design from day one, then we would have ships that actually had functionality unique to multidrew, which REQUIRED crew to utilise said functionality. Then there would be stuff to do.

Also, one of the major problems with multicrew, is the fact the SRV can't be used during a multicrew session by anyone. That needs fixing as it's completely crazy to add a major feature into an expansion that is about exploring planet surfaces, which locks you out of all the planet surface content.

 

[fuub]

Also remove the scaling of payouts based on rank differential, it doesn’t happen in wings, so don’t do it for Multicrew.

This really shows the incompetent designing skills

 

[NeilF]

Multicrew basically appeared still born because of years of lack of investment in core gameplay improvements... And not much has changed in the year since I posted about it (ie: The same issue is causing lack of depth in the Thargoid invasion too) - https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showt...is-now-coming-back-to-bite-ED-in-the-boosters!

 

[Ignition]

Multicrew is following the path of CQC.

With all the things that they could implement they went for a stupid 3rd person camera hahahaha.

What else you can expect for a game that still doesnt have basic game mechanics and features for smuggling, mining, exploration since more than 3 years.

 

[IndigoWyrd]

Multi-crew would certainly benefit from a number of things.

1. Non-combat role

While the non-combat role of "External Camera Operator" is already valid, there are only so many things another multi-crew member can actually do, as there are only so many things we can do. Perhaps the one thing that would be most useful is SRV Operator. This would open a huge venue of gameplay by itself - from Installation raids to Exploration and Scientific Research (Ram Tah/Palin Missions).

2, The Third-Person External Camera

This should be an option, not an Only Means. We've seen first-person mounted weapons operations in plenty of other games - Dead Space did a nice job of this with the incredibly frustrating Asteroid Shooter segment in the first game. We could still maintain the 360 degree viewing using a first-person Gunner role that would feel a lot less hokey.

3. Stability

This has been the bane of Multicrew since day one. It's hard to maintain the illusions created when you're having to reconnect.

Multicrew pay is lower than Wing pay because the risk for the crew person is non-existent. It's as Free Money as Free Money gets, hence it is tiered the way it is.
Multi-Wing-Crew is just a bad idea. Wings are unstable enough. Multi-crew is unstable enough. Mix the two and you've a recipe for disaster.

 

[Gryphorim]

A lot of this sounds great, but has very little detail as to what you would really do in these new roles.

The engineer position sounds a bit like looking at pretty pictures while you wait around, the science officer, wait, let me just read back... oh right, they are "For exploration" well sure, sounds amazing! what would they DO though? The first officier role also, they would... work with the sensors? sounds... pretty boring honestly.

The main problem with multicrew is that it was added in after the rest of the game had been designed.

It should have been a part of the games design from day one, then we would have ships that actually had functionality unique to multidrew, which REQUIRED crew to utilise said functionality. Then there would be stuff to do.

Also, one of the major problems with multicrew, is the fact the SRV can't be used during a multicrew session by anyone. That needs fixing as it's completely crazy to add a major feature into an expansion that is about exploring planet surfaces, which locks you out of all the planet surface content.

The Engineer position as I see it, would have some looking at pretty pictures, yes. Flight engineers in current aircraft focus on monitoring a range of screens, gauges and dials, as it is their role to monitor the inner workings of the craft. I would like to see them have some external view option, perhaps similar to current gunner role, but with more than just weapons highlighted on their ship. From this role, they could see the internal modules highlighted, possibly colour coded for health. They could be able to "angle the deflectors" positioning the shields to concentrate over specific arcs, and remote fly repair and other limpets.
But yes, the "in cockpit" component of the role would involve manipulating dials, slidebars and other elements on a control panel to manage power and cooling of ship systems.

The Science officer role, I left vague, as there are better ideas than I have, written by folks with far more experience exploring than I.
In summary, though, they would scan planets and other entities, possibly using a telescopic view of targeted entities, gaining information based on science equipment fitted, to see mineral makeup and concentration of worlds, POI's on surface at far greater range than a pilot could, odd energy readings that could lead to human, guardian or thargoid bases. They could also obtain details on USS's within a system, as well as what type, and perhaps even a vague breakdown of what is present in a USS. X number of ships of size class, debris, weapons fire intensity, and so on.
This role could also assist in mining and salvage ops, allowing fine use of ship sensors to gain results similar to prospecting limpets, freeing up vital slots for other tech.
If this role had combat utility at all, it could read target resistances, working with an engineer to tune weapons (at least energy weapons) to better cut through said resistances.

I imagine their being more roles on board a ship than there are crew, however. A crew working to maximum effectiveness, would have a fighter con flying the fighter, and switching with NPC pilot if needed on the bridge to support other roles, a gunner handling remote operation of weapons, then once they are programmed, switching to the manned turret to put firepower downrange, an engineer switching between external and internal views to manage systems and keep shields where they are needed, and occasionally looking at science screens to find enemy weaknesses. And of course the pilot, flying the ship, and handling navigation.
In non combat operations, a mining crew would have a pilot flying the ship and using primary mining lasers (or other hardware, as hinted at arriving later this year,) A science officer prospecting the field for best deposits, and flagging them for pilot, an engineer managing the refinery and limpet collection priorities, and possibly a SLF fighter on guard duty, or assisting with mining, if we get utility SLFs. An explorer crew would have a pilot, a navigator, an engineer boosting sensors and FTL performance, and a science officer collecting data on worlds. These crew could then all disembark in SRVs and SLFs to scout out a discovered site. Hopefully, we get more SRVs, with more role specialisation.

If a crew member were confined to a single role, for more than a few hours at least, the role itself could get monotonous, but I envision there being enough roles on board a ship for crew to switch things up as they go, and to also build on the interaction they can have with other members of the crew. That should keep the crew positions an entertaining prospect. Even then, none of this is mandatory, and a skilled commander should even be able to access these roles on their own ship, to maximise specific performance for a given task. Though, if they were alone, the process could be cumbersome. that's why you take on a crew, after all.

 

[Gryphorim]

Multi-crew would certainly benefit from a number of things.

1. Non-combat role

While the non-combat role of "External Camera Operator" is already valid, there are only so many things another multi-crew member can actually do, as there are only so many things we can do. Perhaps the one thing that would be most useful is SRV Operator. This would open a huge venue of gameplay by itself - from Installation raids to Exploration and Scientific Research (Ram Tah/Palin Missions).

2, The Third-Person External Camera

This should be an option, not an Only Means. We've seen first-person mounted weapons operations in plenty of other games - Dead Space did a nice job of this with the incredibly frustrating Asteroid Shooter segment in the first game. We could still maintain the 360 degree viewing using a first-person Gunner role that would feel a lot less hokey.

3. Stability

This has been the bane of Multicrew since day one. It's hard to maintain the illusions created when you're having to reconnect.

Multicrew pay is lower than Wing pay because the risk for the crew person is non-existent. It's as Free Money as Free Money gets, hence it is tiered the way it is.
Multi-Wing-Crew is just a bad idea. Wings are unstable enough. Multi-crew is unstable enough. Mix the two and you've a recipe for disaster.

1. Agreed

2. Agreed, mostly. Some things are simpler, if you have a full 360 degree view of the surroundings, and doing full 360 would be very difficult to do from a first person perspective. Others feel better from a constrained viewpoint. This is why I suggested the gunner role be modified into a version similar to what we have, as well as operation of dedicated manned turrets (with a similar viewpoint mechanic to the SRV turret)
How would a first person full 360 work? Do you hop the viewpoint from turret to turret as target circles the ship? Is your ship rendered transparent, other than weapon mounts? If you keep viewpoint in gunner seat, how would you combat the skew between the gunner position and the possibly quite large distance to the turrets? Would you use a viewpoint in the ship's center of mass, and if so, how would that be better than 3PV we have now? Not criticising, just asking how you'd tackle the challenges a FPV gunner role would face.

3. Yes stability is an issue, but I feel like this might have to do with it being limited in scope to a novelty, and not a core gameplay element. FDev may have simply not allocated the resources to ensuring this element of the game be as stable as other things, like PVP.
As for the free money thing, Right now we only have telepresence, as the elements required to allow us to physically be present on another player's ship are not present. Yet. I hope that we someday see the ability to transfer onto another player's ship if docked or landed at the same instance, and perhaps someday after that, being able to walk there ourselves via spacelegs.

 

[Yosharian]

I think these ideas are interesting, but we can't have it both ways: Frontier was previously focused on adding new features to the game, and people complained (rightly so, in my opinion) that the game's core systems are incredibly lacking. So Frontier have shifted focus to improving the core game systems. So to complain about multi-crew now, and suggest the implementation of many brand-new features that would necessarily require a lot of work...

I do think these ideas could be the focus of a future update, maybe once Frontier has finished with the core systems overhaul, though. However, I suspect that Frontier would be better served implementing and overhauling features that a majority of the playerbase will appreciate, rather than a niche feature like multi-crew.

Maybe turret balance could be looked at in the meantime, since it would be relatively easy to give turrets a tweak to make them more viable in a multi-crew situation? AFAIK turrets are pretty weak. I could be wrong, but I think they could use a pretty big boost.

 

[Gryphorim]

I think these ideas are interesting, but we can't have it both ways: Frontier was previously focused on adding new features to the game, and people complained (rightly so, in my opinion) that the game's core systems are incredibly lacking. So Frontier have shifted focus to improving the core game systems. So to complain about multi-crew now, and suggest the implementation of many brand-new features that would necessarily require a lot of work...

I do think these ideas could be the focus of a future update, maybe once Frontier has finished with the core systems overhaul, though. However, I suspect that Frontier would be better served implementing and overhauling features that a majority of the playerbase will appreciate, rather than a niche feature like multi-crew.

Maybe turret balance could be looked at in the meantime, since it would be relatively easy to give turrets a tweak to make them more viable in a multi-crew situation? AFAIK turrets are pretty weak. I could be wrong, but I think they could use a pretty big boost.

I'm hoping that the majority of what I've suggested can be tackled with a "low-hanging fruit" approach. Integrating crew and wings might be quite a large undertaking, true, but should also allow the devs to look at some long-standing instancing and stability issues present in both wing and crews today.
Enhancing idle crew functionality should only involve some cloning of some viewscreens, and adapting things like navigation to not just display what a crewmember is targeting (as we see in wings) but also over-write the navigation target for the pilot. The new menu to allow or disallow crew activities would admittedly be a new menu for the pilot to use, but with a relatively simple layout.
Engineer and science roles would be a bit more involved, true, but could reuse holograms and art assets found elsewhere in the game, and reuse 3PV camera for outside the ship.
Manned turrets (at least the small ones) Could re-use assets from SRVs. Crew SRVs could reuse assets from SLFs.
The larger turrets would admittedly be a larger undertaking, but I think it'd be worth it. Art direction is already firmly established, so adding new assets to these ships would be as simple as a single ship kit. Having hardpoint number scale according to weapon size could be achieved by having turret weapons be copies of standard weapons, but in fixed-only mounts, on a larger, common mounting plate in the turret.

Basically FDev, could cover the easiest to achieve elements first, then tackle the larger and more intensive stuff in a follow-on update, if it did not all make it into the first.

It is my opinion (Probably an unpopular one) that multicrew should have always been a core gameplay element, so Beyond is the perfect time to build it up so that it can be one.

 

[DelphinusCombaticus]

Multicrew could certainly use some attention.
Expanding the viable roles and activities, and reducing the restrictions currently in-game would go far.
My friend and I have been having a lot of fun with it recently. He is new to the game, and telling him about all the things that you CAN'T do in multicrew (when he asks) makes it sound pretty poor. Plus because of the lack of proper gunner targeting, when we tried to do some res-mining+bountyhunting, we kept getting wanted because he accidentally hit police when they flew in front of where he was aiming.

Multicrew SRV support could be great. Add in some missions that require a multi-pronged attack or something. Perhaps the ship can act as a GPS/satellite for the person in the SRV with a top down view, help pinpoint POIs, mission objectives, resources, or enemies, whatever.

 

[Schmack]

A lot of this sounds great, but has very little detail as to what you would really do in these new roles.

The engineer position sounds a bit like looking at pretty pictures while you wait around, the science officer, wait, let me just read back... oh right, they are "For exploration" well sure, sounds amazing! what would they DO though? The first officier role also, they would... work with the sensors? sounds... pretty boring honestly.

The main problem with multicrew is that it was added in after the rest of the game had been designed.

It should have been a part of the games design from day one, then we would have ships that actually had functionality unique to multidrew, which REQUIRED crew to utilise said functionality. Then there would be stuff to do.

Also, one of the major problems with multicrew, is the fact the SRV can't be used during a multicrew session by anyone. That needs fixing as it's completely crazy to add a major feature into an expansion that is about exploring planet surfaces, which locks you out of all the planet surface content.

It seems pretty simple actually. The science officer/first officer would simply look into a scope and say something like "there's some form of pure energy eminating from the planet's surface, captain". The engineer would be the replacement for the AFMU except he'd predict a couple weeks to repair the FSD which is at 79%. Then when you click "repair" he'd do it in just about 4 seconds. When you need more power to the weps, you hear "aye I can do it but if this keeps up the damn thing is going to melt to the grrrrround" instead of the heat alert voice.

 

[Phord Prefect]

I just wish when joining someone else's crew for "Bounty Hunting" I would not keep getting dropped in someones Cobra. Or Asp Explorer.

Seriously. My last attempt was to an Asp Explorer with 309 shields. Not even a single turreted hardpoint.

But hey, the guy had 3 shield boosters.. so he means business I guess.

But in all seriousness.. sometimes I would just like a fighter break. A step away from the grindeyness that is "endgame". Engineers etc etc. A half hour of pew pew running someones fighter. Is that too much to ask?

/endrant. sry. Just been one of those nights.

/beginrant2.0 If I open my 'vette up for multicrew... pls pls pls don't sit in the "gunner seat" and shoot my engineered missiles at shielded anacondas. Just... stop. You got thrown out the airlock for a reason.

Give us mothership pilots the option to lock out that "gunner seat" altogether. Pls and thx.

 

[NeilF]

Sorry, just going to state again, that IMHO, the only way Multicrew can be made more interesting/useful, is for the gameplay, mechanics and depth to FIRST be improved.

eg: Exploration drones are introduced which allow you to enter a system, look at the orrey map, and designate the paths and locations to send your drones to, and decide which targets you'll do in person. When your drones arrive at a location (eg: planet) then will go into orbit to scan it, and you can even look at a video feed to see the planet first hand and get the scan results. When leaving the system, you'd decide the best location (using the orrey map) to meet up with your drones before jumping out.

Now, the above is a minor improvement/variation to exploration. But, if it were added, it could give at least give a crew member something to do.

Now add some more depth to mining with "heat scans" of the best locations on asteroids to mine. Add in mining outfitting to SLFs. etc etc... And that depth gives crew members something to actually do!

https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showt...is-now-coming-back-to-bite-ED-in-the-boosters



FD knew multicrew was coming, yet spend years investing development in dead end gameplay/mechanics (eg; CQC, Generationships etc). And likewise with the Thargoid invasion. Is it any surprised both are rather limp wasted opportunities?

 

[Vorxian]

How does it work anyway? telepresence with hard interaction...

Especially over the 22,000 LY to Colonia.... 22,000 ly, no latency, no problem controlling some kind of hard light interactive hologram? Why can't I project myself onto another ship and initiate self-destruct?

How come I can't back up my exploration data with a datastream in that case?

I don't get it


I'd get it a lot more if one was actually on the ship in person....

 

[ZeroAi]

The current state of multicrew is, to me at least, flawed.

Firstly, it currently only allows for combat operation.
When opting to fly a SLF, on those ships that allow it, it's mostly fine, there's good fun to be had there.
However, the gunner role requires fitting out expensive and underpowered turrets, pulling firepower away from the forward arc of the ship, away from the pilot's own control. This reduces the ability of the pilot to effectively fight, making them dependent on the gunner to make up the difference.
Furthermore, steps taken to simplify the gunner experience actually negatively impact on the effectiveness of the role. For example, the automatic selection of the ship under the crosshair of the gunner means that in situations where a friendly flies in between a gunner and their intended target, the friendly will momentarily be targeted, meaning any accidental fire hitting them is treated as intentional, and incurring a bounty. Not fun for either the gunner or the pilot.

Secondly, there is no synergy of multicrew with wings.
This forces players to choose one or the other, with wings having far more flexibility in gameplay, making multicrew an unattractive opposition.



In an idealised scenario, I'd like to see the following changes made to multicrew as a whole.

-Synergy with wings, making crew and wing count toward the same total of 4 players to a crew/wing. This also allows wing missions to be rearding for crew.
-Enhanced "idle" crew functionality (With limits set by captain) to operate power management, sensors and navigation. This allows for a dedicated first officer role.
-Replacement of the crew power pips with an engineer role, which would have access to deeper level power management, effecting the same potential power gains as the extra pip. Ideally, this role would have some prettier and more detailed holograms of the ship to look at, with internal components and weapons modelled and visible in different coloured overlays. As such an engineer would feel like they have a finer view of onboard systems and more agency over them. Also, allowing the possibility of directional shield management.
-Overhaul of the gunner role, seperating into two parts: Remote gun operator, and turret operator.

Spoiler

--Remote gun operator would function much like current gunner, but with better control over targeting of objects around the ship. The operator would be able to set remote guns to track their target, switching to manual targeting when target is within a few degrees of operator crosshair. They could also be set to target hostiles within their field of fire, if the operator's target is outside of that arc. Finally, they could be set to prioritise (shielded) friendlies, if fitted with regenerative weapons.
--Turret operator gains control of a manned turret which would be a new addition to some, but not all, ships. I envision the fitment of a manned turret as similar to ship kits, however, these would either include a dedicated anti fighter gun with similar firepower to a SLF, or, on selected ships, a full weapon enclosure with room to mount traditional fixed weapons in a traversible fixture (Naturally these would only work as fixed weapons, unless operated by a turret operator).
The AA gun could, to save on art assets, use the same model as SLF turret, scaled appropriately, on a simple adapter plate to blend with ship's lines when folded down. Weapon types for these smaller turrets would be as per SLF weapon options.
Ships with the AA gun (location in brackets) would be:

Spoiler

Asp Scout (tail)
Asp X (Tail & Dorsal)
Type 6 (Tail)
Type 7 (Tail & Dorsal)
Type 9 (Tail & Dorsal)
IClipper (Tail)
Orca (Tail)
Federal Gunship (Dorsal, fitment replaces small hardpoints)
Anaconda (Nose window, fitment disables small hardpoints) [I'm less sure of this one]
Those ships with both a tail and a dorsal gun, as well as the FGS, and Anaconda, would gain an additional crew seat, as well.

Ships with the larger turret option would be the ICutter and the FedCorvette. In these two cases, the turret replaces existing weapon mounts with a full enclosure, styled to match the rest of the ship, and an additional crew seat added

Spoiler

ICutter trading it's two dorsal large hardpoints for a sleek housing that can fit 2 large or 3 medium weapons
FedCorvette trading it's 2 huge hardpoints for an armoured, angular housing for 2 huge, 3 large or 4 medium weapons.

The intent of the turret operator is, in the case of the smaller guns, to capture the feel of turret operation as depicted in Star Wars ep 4, like the Millenium Falcon. On the larger ships, this shifts to feeling more like a tank crew.

-Introducing a range of non-combat functions, like Science officer for exploration, or potentially the operation of advanced mining and salvage gear.
-Allowing the remote use of SRVs for crew (no life support, limited range from ship, or ship owner if they are in SRV, their SRV acting as a signal repeater)
-Many ships, those mentioned above, all having an additional crew seat added, to support the additional turret operator and engineer role.
-Allow hiring of NPC crew or robots to man these crew stations, though likely not as effectively as a player. This would modify current NPC crew, as they would visibly take a seat onboard the ship.
-Allow crew to see HUD elements as drawn on entities outside the ship (orbit lines, target reticule, etc) as well as other crew console displays.

I feel like the addition of these details would enhance the existing multicrew experience, elevating it from barely used curiousity, to regularly used, nearly core gameplay.
Players would not only aspire to command their own ship, but also crew up with friends, to jointly venture the stars.

+Rep

Great ideas.

Here's my wish short list for multi-crew:

1) More Roles!

I would really love to see more roles added and allowing making "real" credits outside of combat.

The reason I heard the roles were limited combat was the concern that otherwise a crew member could make credits doing nothing.

Sad if true because there is an easy fix - give non-combat "credit earning" roles exclusive use of basic tasks required to complete missions, like plotting routes and requesting docking.

If each role member was required to do "something" essential in order to take part in "earning" credits, afk crew members wouldn't be able to make a dime.

It would also be nice for the ship owner to decide on the payout %, so say if he had two friends join him he could choose to pay them up to a max of an even split / 33% each of his earnings.


2) More CMDRs and seats

I'd like to see Multi-crew bumped to four players, and more seats added to more ships - most of them have plenty of room for them.

Would also be awesome to have NPCs appear in those seats when not filled with actual crew members, and have up to three npcs on board, even if they were just "eye candy"

3) SRV and SLF support for entire crew

Not sure why in MC the ship owner can't leave in an SLF (I do it all the time in when not in MC,) and why there are not four slf bays.

Also would love to see support for SRVs added.

4) Wing Support

Once making credits in MC in non-combat roles is a thing, it would also be awesome to add Wing support too.

Say my friend and I are in a wing on a long expedition and another friend would like to hop in and ride along for awhile - currently we would have to disband the wing first, which then makes it a challenge to stay together.

 

[NeilF]

How does it work anyway? telepresence with hard interaction...

Especially over the 22,000 LY to Colonia.... 22,000 ly, no latency, no problem controlling some kind of hard light interactive hologram? Why can't I project myself onto another ship and initiate self-destruct?

How come I can't back up my exploration data with a datastream in that case?

I don't get it


I'd get it a lot more if one was actually on the ship in person....

I have no issue with telepresence for the sake of gameplay reasons.

I mean, had CQC been put into the core game as content (instead of a huge wasted development on a stand alone 'dust collector'), and you could undertake a mission (or Powerplay task) to undertake a fighter your of duty for 20-30mins, operating for example from a Capital Ship, trying to defend a location, or attack a location etc etc, and that had been explained by instantly appearing at the location via telepresence, I'd have been fine with that...

 

[NeilF]

1) More Roles!

I would really love to see more roles added and allowing making "real" credits outside of combat.

BUT! More roles means more depth and stuff to do! The game needs core gameplay improvements FIRST to deepen gameplay, to then allow Multicrew to make use of those elements.

FD have done precious little to deepen gameplay. Then allowed a ships operations to be split up via Multicrew. Meaning, that the result experience is a small slice of a pretty empty pie...

And worse still, they've now needlessly created a development rod for their backs such that all onward development needs to carry multicrew with it. eg: With the mining and exploration improvements coming Q4, development effort needs to go into ensuring it doesn't break multicrew.

Multicrew was added at the wrong phase of the game... It should have been added later, when more core gameplay had been improved...