Do NPC crew still die for good if your ship is destroyed?

[WR3ND]

...

Along the lines of both relative consistency, such as it is, and meaningful consequences and choices, such as the game is, I'd be fine with some module room being used for NPC crew escape pods, such as is... sort of the case with NPC passengers. I think that's fair, within what the game allows for. Risk vs. reward, or some such.

 

[kofeyh]

Along the lines of both relative consistency, such as it is, and meaningful consequences and choices, such as the game is, I'd be fine with some module room being used for NPC crew escape pods, such as is... sort of the case with NPC passengers. I think that's fair, within what the game allows for. Risk vs. reward, or some such.

Passengers eject because a commander has failed in their responsibility (and the mission will also fail at that time). So exactly the same thing as when a commander fails in their duty of care and their crew dies. These are both consequences.

The counterpoint of having AI crew, who otherwise massively increase a commander's capability in the field, is that they can die. Making crew ignorant of death will mean they end up being treated exactly the same as the remaining AI. Not well. If you want undead space-jesus crew, then take on some commanders. They come complete with inflated egos and an inability to stay dead or necessarily follow orders or be even remotely useful. If you want something meaningful? Hire NPC crew and then keep them alive.

I think it's fine as is, because it ensures there are consequences; in a game where commanders are otherwise seldom held accountable and are utterly determined to remove more of it, just as this thread illustrates.

 

[Morbad]

I gave up using crew when I recently found out that your combat rank increase is halved when you use them. The crew takes half the xp from each kill. Way to stop people from using the feature FD!

It's a double edged aspect. For those trying to increase PF rank, for whatever reason, the crew can be a liability. For those trying to rank the crew themselves, it's quite beneficial that they take such a large share.

I do think it would be more logical to split progression based on relative ranks or contribution, however.

swarms of railgun Eagles that can take down a ship very quickly.

You'd have to be in an unengineered/non-combat vessel, or really phoning in the piloting, to be at risk of losing the ship, unless you had already been seriously over extending yourself.

It sounds like a good idea in theory but the risk for brining a highly-trained SLF pilot into combat is just not worthwhile for the benefit it provides.

Entirely subjective.

As long as I can rank up NPC crew faster than I can get them killed, the benefits more than outweigh the negligible risks.

 

[Devari]

Passengers eject because a commander has failed in their responsibility (and the mission will also fail at that time). So exactly the same thing as when a commander fails in their duty of care and their crew dies. I think it's fine as is.

That's the most ridiculous idea I've heard. Are you somehow suggesting that the entire Elite universe is somehow designed to hold CMDRs "accountable" in some manner? The Elite universe is supposed to believable and not based on some sort of game-based "reasoning". You would expect basic design features like escape pods to exist on ships because it's logical and makes sense. You wouldn't expect those escape pods to be "missing" for the SLF crew just because of some dev goal of giving a CMDR some sort of arbitrary consequence for "failure".

 

[WR3ND]

Passengers eject because a commander has failed in their responsibility (and the mission will also fail at that time). So exactly the same thing as when a commander fails in their duty of care and their crew dies. These are both consequences.

The risk of having crew, who otherwise massively increase a commanders capability in the field, is that they can die. Making crew ignorant of death will mean they end up being treated exactly the same as the remaining AI.

I think it's fine as is.

I'd be fine playing in a hardcore mode, but I have to accept the game for what it is, and the NPC crew being removed on ship loss doesn't seem consistent with that to me (even though I personally am fine with it). I think it'd be fair if there were some way for players to mitigate that, at the cost of some module room, if nothing else. Maybe even having to restock NPC escape pods would work a bit more inline.

Just my opinion and perspective of the game, of course.

 

[Devari]

You'd have to be in an unengineered/non-combat vessel, or really phoning in the piloting, to be at risk of losing the ship, unless you had already been seriously over extending yourself.

That's not true at all, a ship equipped for PVE combat is not magically immune to a swarm of Eagles with aimbot railguns. If you hang around the edges of the CZ and let the other ships do all the fighting for you then sure, you'll never pull enough aggro for the other team to focus fire on you, but if you're doing any sort of decent dps in a CZ you will quickly become the NPCs number one target. If you are not taking the majority of the fire in a CZ you are not doing anywhere near you potential dps because your aggro is so low.

Entirely subjective.

No, it really isn't. It's quite obvious that spending 24 hours getting a pilot trained to Deadly isn't really a great value for taking 9% of your profits and being subject to insta-death given the dps that and SLF can put out. The large number of threads created on this topic on a regular basis should tell you that the risk/benefit ratio for SLF pilots is a serious game balance issue.

As long as I can rank up NPC crew faster than I can get them killed, the benefits more than outweigh the negligible risks.

As I mentioned above, if you are doing adequate damage in a CZ then the other team will focus fire on you. If you are playing it safe, sure, the risks are "minimal" but so is your combat contribution.

 

[Morbad]

That's not true at all, a ship equipped for PVE combat is not magically immune to a swarm of Eagles with aimbot railguns. If you hang around the edges of the CZ and let the other ships do all the fighting for you then sure, you'll never pull enough aggro for the other team to focus fire on you, but if you're doing any sort of decent dps in a CZ you will quickly become the NPCs number one target. If you are not taking the majority of the fire in a CZ you are not doing anywhere near you potential dps because your aggro is so low.

I have ships that can fight both sides of a CZ simultaneously.

It's quite obvious that spending 24 hours getting a pilot trained to Deadly

Takes far less time if you give the NPC control of the mothership.

 

[Devari]

I have ships that can fight both sides of a CZ simultaneously.

Yes, there are PVP builds that can tank a CZ all day long, but I'm specifically referring to a typical PVE build here which is still susceptible to swarms of Eagles with railguns. Anyone can sit in a Cutter at the middle of a CZ and fire off a class 8 SCB, that takes zero skill since you're just pushing a single button and aren't really doing anything. That's not how most PVE builds are designed for at all, in most cases a typical PVE build is not filled up entirely with SCBs and MRPs and will take damage from a CZ swarm faster than the shield can be maintained.

 

[h347h]

Yes they die thankfully.

 

[valbarr]

i have no problem if npc crew died to pve content, the only time any of my crew have died, is when i have been ganked by wings of players, there is zero way out, your skill doesnt matter, 1 ship against 4, if you dont combat log, even if you have a chance, your npc is dead.

if they made it so your crew dont die, from other player deaths and just pve, i could live with that, as it is, i simply only use npc crew when i play solo or private group, i will not use crew in open, i dont like it, but thats what frontier have left me with, i also think its stupid of them, but i have zero ways of making em change their minds. sigh.

 

[Morbad]

Yes, there are PVP builds that can tank a CZ all day long, but I'm specifically referring to a typical PVE build here which is still susceptible to swarms of Eagles with railguns. Anyone can sit in a Cutter at the middle of a CZ and fire off a class 8 SCB, that takes zero skill since you're just pushing a single button and aren't really doing anything. That's not how most PVE builds are designed for at all, in most cases a typical PVE build is not filled up entirely with SCBs and MRPs and will take damage from a CZ swarm faster than the shield can be maintained.

I sold my only Cutter on live about 18 months ago and I don't build ships for PvE, nor does what you describe come remotely near how I fly in a CZ, or anywhere else.

Any competently built big three, and any virtually any medium vessel that can move more than 400m/s, is at essentially zero risk in any CZ that doesn't have other CMDRs present. I've never lost anything more potent than an unmodified Eagle MkII to NPC fire in a CZ, and even then it was because I was goofing around.

 

[V'larr]

Let's say for the sake of argument that your crew didn't die and managed to get back to the station. Why would they want to ship out with someone who got them killed, let alone if it happened multiple times? That wouldn't be fun though and this is a game.

If I remember to use them at this point it's hire and fire. Until they let me pay insurance to get them back and not make me pay out the nose when they are idle they are pretty much a non-starter.

Meh, part of the job.

The fact that "hire and fire" is the go-to for using NPC crew, and that is IF you are willing to put up with halving of your XP gains and exorbitant credit costs, is just so not right.
__

So you would rather risk your whole save game than a small part of your savegame? Or you would rather increase the cost to all rather than allow each player to manage their own risk level?

Why must things swing out to the extremes, here?

Don't get me wrong, I'm broadly in favour of both your suggestions (although imo you can already ironman to your hearts content) but it seems an odd position to take to prefer risking it all rather than risking only your crew. If you die a permadeath you lose your crew anyway.

Heh, I do agree about the ironman thing, but it'd be neat to have an official mode for it anyway. I certainly wouldn't be partaking in it, it's just something I know many people who inhabit these forums would enjoy.

__

AI 'die'. Crew are AI. Ergo they die. If they did not die, people would actually treat them with less respect; people only value what can be taken from them. I always find it amusing that people can pivot from "my dude must survive!" to "AI should be easy to kill".

You're trying to draw a line between two things that have no connection here. NPC targets exist to be targets in a game where quantity is vastly more important than quality. That might be something to change if Fdev gets around to improving missions or giving us a longer, detailed & in-depth tutorial "questline" with characters with personality to remember and all that, but for now, this is the state of the game.

NPC crew are not disposable targets that serve to slowly increment our Elite rank. They are, essentially, an extra piece of equipment on the ship, a gear you can use to enhance what your ship does - but what makes them special (or is SUPPOSED to, anyway) is that they have a face and a personality and gives you an opportunity to build a lasting relationship.

Which is really damn ironic considering what's been said above, where the current situation with them promotes hire-and-fire and being completely dismissive and forgetful of NPC crew entirely.

Plus, you are cherry-picking with your consistency here.

Remember how we have Remlok? The stuff that's about to appear on billboards everywhere throughout the inhabited galaxy? The things that, upon our death, allows? us to instantly revive ourselves at the nearest station regardless of what happened or where or how?

There isn't even ONE good reason that our crew should be excluded from making use of that same Remlok service - especially if importance is to be put on our responsibility in caring for our crew.

__

I agree.
While I wouldn't be opposed to more consistency, I'd rather other penalties for being shot down increase before this one was reduced.

As I've stated previously, there's any number of ways to better add penalties/risk for failure, than to have this entirely optional crewmember feature that carries the full brunt of 100% loss of all invested time, XP, and credits upon said failure.

Like, given that there's many ships that can't have a crewmember, this reasoning of "well at least it adds SOME risk to using our ships" doesn't particularly hold water.

Also...

I currently have two deadly and an elite crew (and have had two deadlies, and possibly one elite, die in the line of duty), all trained up from harmless, that I regularly leverage to good effect in PvP.

In this regard I think you're a madman, but that's my personal subjective opinion talking.

Granted you're experienced in avoiding destruction but still.

Which is why I want an ironman mode and for engineered modules to either be lost on ship destruction, or to require a transfer delay plus a massively higher insurance cost.

Case in point @Riverside, lol

If anything it makes it more appealing to me, and I'd be happy to say so on stream, and then fend off all the stream snipers with my Elite crew onboard.

I'm literally shaking my head at you now through my screen.

By all means, do your thing, but...I don't think the opportunity to present one's e-peen and virtually flagellate themselves is a good reason to make all users of NPC crew in the game suffer from it.

Bearing in mind that I've also said the game ought to include things like an ironman mode to serve your interests, too.

__

lol. Were they in Solo or PG and had billions in the bank as well? At times I get the impression I'm about the only commander in open, on twitch, with any regularity (beyond some of the PVP guys and gals).

The streamer is MercenaryThorrn, who has streamed almost entirely in Open since he started playing Elite, though he avoids it when futzing with things like Engineers/Guardians and now whenever he's got an NPC aboard. Very combat-focused player, does not have billions in the bank.

___

I gave up using crew when I recently found out that your combat rank increase is halved when you use them. The crew takes half the xp from each kill. Way to stop people from using the feature FD!

HEAR, HEAR.

__

And given so much of this game, what I do, doesn't matter in the slightest? So much doesn't resonate because it's clinical and lacking in consequence? AI crew being vulnerable in a way we simply are not, is probably more important than people might give credit.

That's an argument for more personality and meaning to be given to those things in the game that don't "matter in the slightest", not for continuing to inconsistently punish players for bothering to engage in NPC/player crew & wing content.

__

It's a double edged aspect. For those trying to increase PF rank, for whatever reason, the crew can be a liability. For those trying to rank the crew themselves, it's quite beneficial that they take such a large share.

Beneficial my foot. In a "normal" game, there'd be every reason to assume they would simply gain XP at the same rate that you do, as in double what they currently do.

Even then, they could have them gain XP at half our normal rate - the status quo currently - *without* stealing from our XP income and that would be fine.

It really is hard for me to not get mad just thinking about it, I earnestly do not understand whomever at Fdev offices designed it this way.

I do think it would be more logical to split progression based on relative ranks or contribution, however.

Isn't relative rank progression in place though, since XP gain is based on your rank relative to the target's?

You'd have to be in an unengineered/non-combat vessel, or really phoning in the piloting, to be at risk of losing the ship, unless you had already been seriously over extending yourself.

I dunno, given that many players are not as risk-averse as myself or as experienced as you, I think it's unreasonable to assume that most players just won't lose their ship. One must remember that lethal bugs continue to crop up with disturbing regularity as well...remember "skimmer rain"?

As long as I can rank up NPC crew faster than I can get them killed, the benefits more than outweigh the negligible risks.

I flatly disagree with this last point. Any time your invested XP/credits/time with an NPC goes up in smoke, that is permanent, unrecuperable loss. I feel the fact that you've gone and trained multiple NPC crew already is slightly skewing your perspective here.

 

[Devari]

I sold my only Cutter on live about 18 months ago and I don't build ships for PvE, nor does what you describe come remotely near how I fly in a CZ, or anywhere else.

Any competently built big three, and any virtually any medium vessel that can move more than 400m/s, is at essentially zero risk in any CZ that doesn't have other CMDRs present. I've never lost anything more potent than an unmodified Eagle MkII to NPC fire in a CZ, and even then it was because I was goofing around.

I'm sorry but that statement is nonsense if you are engaging in routine CZ combat rather than staying at the edges of the CZ and pulling almost zero aggro. If you are in the middle of a CZ and you accidentally tag your own side (i.e,. allies run into your fire) or the enemy ships suddenly spawn near you without a higher priority target being present (happens occasionally) then you will be the focus of fire for around 6-12 enemy ships. That is enough to threaten most medium ships built for PVE engagements. A PVE build will usually carry at least some cargo space (i.e., they are not filling every available internal with SCBs or HRP/MRPs) and aren't built around ridiculously high shield strength (i.e., prismatics plus heavy duty boosters). Those ships will not be able to continuously take on 6-12 NPCs simultaneously without seeing their shields drain faster than they can keep them up. If you have a ship build that is truly "zero risk" in a CZ then it is basically a PVP build and not a PVE build. You claimed you could "fight both sides of a CZ simultaneously" and if by this you mean take focused fire from both sides of the CZ in a ship that is not essentially build for PVP combat I do not believe you. I believe that you could hang around the edges of a CZ and take almost no aggro and survive, but you are not sustainably fighting both sides of a CZ in a PVE equipped ship.

Also weren't you complaining about the location of the Chieftain and Krait PP being positioned centrally in this thread due to the NPC's default aim points taking out your PP "too quickly": https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showt...regarding-Chieftain-Challenger-and-Krait-MKII

How is it that you consider fighting NPCs in a CZ "zero risk" but somehow can't properly protect your PP from those same NPCs? One of those statements must be inaccurate as they are mutually exclusive concepts of NPCs being either "zero risk" or "too effective". So which is it? Can you really "fight both sides of a CZ simultanteously" because the entire CZ poses "zero risk" to your ship? Or are NPCs that happen to fire on your PP due to a central default location somehow giving you too much trouble due to an inability to protect your PP? You can't have it both ways.

 

[Devari]

Takes far less time if you give the NPC control of the mothership.

How does that speed up the process of leveling the SLF pilot? The few occasions I've allowed my SLF pilot to fly my ship I've found they don't keep 4 pips to shields, rapidly use up my SCBs and fire off all of my limited-ammo weapons like missiles ineffectively against shields. I don't let them near my ship's helm control for that reason because they are terrible at keeping my main ship properly defended. They're free to fly recklessly and lose the SLF if they like because I can keep giving them replacement fighters but I don't trust them to fly my main ship effectively, even at Dangerous or Deadly rank.

 

[Winegums]

l honestly can't justify having SLF on board or ever hiring an NPC as all they do is die in a CZ or HAZ RES while stealing my exp and credits. The thought of training one in the current NPC crew setup is insanity as they offer so little help for the price they seem like a joke.

 

[kofeyh]

l honestly can't justify having SLF on board or ever hiring an NPC as all they do is die in a CZ or HAZ RES while stealing my exp and credits. The thought of training one in the current NPC crew setup is insanity as they offer so little help for the price they seem like a joke.

So you lose your ship in a CZ just all the time? Also my dude is probably a better pilot than I am. He's an utter demon on those dual beams and just carves ships to pieces. He's not even Deadly.

 

[kofeyh]

You're trying to draw a line between two things that have no connection here. NPC targets exist to be targets in a game where quantity is vastly more important than quality. That might be something to change if Fdev gets around to improving missions or giving us a longer, detailed & in-depth tutorial "questline" with characters with personality to remember and all that, but for now, this is the state of the game.

Wait; you can't claim "NPC targets exist to be targets" and then pivot to state your own NPC target (which it is when it engages on your behalf) is somehow immune to the same supposed "they exist to be destroyed".

NPC crew are not disposable targets that serve to slowly increment our Elite rank.

Neither are normal AI; they are the remainder of humanity mate. They are an analog for the rest of humanity. Not just an exploitable resource. This is the double standard.

They are, essentially, an extra piece of equipment on the ship, a gear you can use to enhance what your ship does - but what makes them special (or is SUPPOSED to, anyway) is that they have a face and a personality and gives you an opportunity to build a lasting relationship.

The NPC crew is an analog for another human being. Just how many positions on NPCs do you want to take? Important. Not important. Just a bit of kit on a ship that doesn't matter. NPC CREW LIVES MATTER. Meanwhile, the rest of the NPCs an irrelevant bullet magnet.

I really am not overly concerned how you want to justify that it's cool to wax like 900 irrelevant NPCs then have one special snowflake on board to be fair; I just find it amusing to watch the contortions required.

 

[Devari]

Wait; you can't claim "NPC targets exist to be targets" and then pivot to state your own NPC target (which it is when it engages on your behalf) is somehow immune to the same supposed "they exist to be destroyed".

A crew member is not a simple "NPC", it is a player's crew which is far more important than the potato NPCs we currently fight in the game. An SLF pilot should be far more important than a random procedurally-generated NPC enemy that takes us under a minute to destroy and will quickly respawn in droves in any RES or CZ. We need to spend upwards of 12 hours to level our SLF pilot to Dangerous, 24 hours to Deadly and around 48 hours to reach Elite. They are expected to be a significant part of their CMDR's gameplay experience and should not be disposable or treated like the enemy NPC potato AI we encounter in the game.

I don't know if you play pencil and paper RPGs but they are basically equivalent to a "follower" that a high-level RPG character gets to follow them around. Those followers are part of the character's "story" and are not meant to be disposable. Yet that is how FD apparently wants us to treat our SLF pilots given that we have no way to rescue them from ship destruction and are expected to grind out another replacement when our ship is destroyed.

 

[kofeyh]

A crew member is not a simple "NPC", it is a player's crew which is far more important than the potato NPCs we currently fight in the game.

Frontier have created a hired work-force. Not a constant companion. They are crew. Hired guns. Not a constant companion that sits in the seat next to us and is constantly part of the experience.

Yes, they are and can be important. Enough to keep alive. But they can die, because despite endless protests from people, consequences do and should exist within ED. And they are crew, not companions. I don't believe Frontier expected them to be treated like followers because really a 'follower' is just a polite term for slave or indentured servant. Sworn to carry our burdens.

I think the entire mechanic would have to be reworked really. So. Not dying in elite. Is that more convenient? Absolutely. A good enough reason to elevate NPC crew to personal companions and thus be unkillable space-jesus like we are? No, I don't think so. NPC crew matter to people, because they can be taken away. They would not matter at all, if that was never a threat. And I think the mechanics would need a rework to shift how NPC crew worked, first.

I have no problem with Frontier doing that? But just making crew undead slaves because it's convenient, I really can't get behind. Sorry. Needs a rework. Which, honestly? I'd suggest would be a far better outcome than just making something not die because you know so inconvenient.

And maybe having the ability to hire a companion, who is far more engaged in what we are doing, can sit in a chair next to us -- rather than a wise-cracking workforce with a reduced life expectancy -- kinda sounds like a decent improvement to me. More than undead crew, to be fair.

 

[Devari]

Frontier have created a hired work-force. Not a constant companion. They are crew. Hired guns.

To the extent that Elite is heavily based on "immersion" over actual gameplay content, they really are supposed to be more than a simple gameplay mechanism. They are supposed to provide the immersion of "hiring" a crew, even "training" a crew. That's why the crew have voices and "personalities", otherwise there's no need for any of that to exist in-game.

Not a constant companion that sits in the seat next to us and is constantly part of the experience.

I specifically purchased a second account so I could have my SLF pilot "sit" in the cockpit next to my CMDR. In fact many players have requested that our SLF crew have this option automatically without needing to use multicrew as a workaround, again for the same immersion-related reasons I mentioned above.

Yes, they are and can be important. Enough to keep alive. But they can die, because despite endless protests from people, consequences do and should exist within ED. And they are crew, not companions. I don't believe Frontier expected them to be treated like followers because really a 'follower' is just a polite term for slave or indentured servant. Sworn to carry our burdens.

Followers in most pencil and paper RPGs are much the same as SLF crew in Elite, it really depends on how the player views them. Some players will only care about combat effectiveness, and some will treat their follower as disposable, but really those players are not interested in roleplaying in the first place. Most roleplayers will consider the follower an "extension" of their main character. That is how I handle followers in any RPG that I run, even to the point of "overriding" players control if it is clearly out of character ("I send my follower directly into the dragon's lair", "I ask my follower to give me all of his gold" and so on). For many Elite players an SLF pilot is supposed to add to their gameplay experience, not simply to add a modest amount of dps to a ship fight.

I think the entire mechanic would have to be reworked really. So. Not dying in elite. Is that more convenient? Absolutely. A good enough reason to elevate NPC crew to personal companions and thus be unkillable space-jesus like we are? No, I don't think so. NPC crew matter to people, because they can be taken away. They would not matter at all, if that was never a threat. And I think the mechanics would need a rework to shift how NPC crew worked, first.

Like many other gameplay mechaincs that have serious flaws, yes, the SLF crew gameplay would need to be reworked considerably. However it would not be hard to add an appropriate "penalty" to the rebuy costs like they have done for every other aspect of ship loss in Elite. In fact Engineering weapons doesn't even increase rebuy, which I think it should add a 20-25% premium for the cost of replacing Engineered weapons or modules. It could be the same issue for SLF players, you could add their profit cost as a rebuy "premium" for the cost of SLF pilot insurance or rescue operations. So for a Dangerous pilot who costs 8% of their profits, they could also increase rebuy costs by 8%. That would add an appropriate "death penalty" for losing them to the point that it isn't trivial but it also doesn't harshly punish ship loss by irreplaceably losing your SLF pilot. Even if they make the "cost" more steep, such as requiring a certain type of utility module or Engineering mod (say an enhancement to life support) to enable us to rescue our crew that would also be acceptable. Really anything to show that they've developed the mechanism beyond "welcome to another 12/24/48 hour grind to replace your Dangerous/Deadly/Elite pilot".

I have no problem with Frontier doing that? But just making crew undead slaves because it's convenient, I really can't get behind. Sorry. Needs a rework. Which, honestly? I'd suggest would be a far better outcome than just making something not die because you know so inconvenient.

And maybe having the ability to hire a companion, who is far more engaged in what we are doing, can sit in a chair next to us -- rather than a wise-cracking workforce with a reduced life expectancy -- kinda sounds like a decent improvement to me. More than undead crew, to be fair.

Well sure, I think there should be a cost to it, but not a steep one and certainly not something that is so out of proportion to the other "death" costs we have in-game right now. The ability to hire a "wingman" in their own ship would also be a great idea, much like they had in Tachyon: The Fringe where they had their own ship and were essentially a "mercenary" contracted to fly with the pilot. Still if FD can't properly balance the SLF gameplay I don't see them adding another game mechanic to what we already have.