I've seen this posted plenty of times now and ignored since SLFs were added, but now after losing an elite SLF pilot when I was killed by a team of 6 players at once who all had ships covered in double shot frags (basically unavoidable death, especially in an asteroid belt where you're mass locked) I'm starting to agree more than ever that losing the pilot I spent at least 50 hours grinding to elite rank is absolutely absurd. I can't lose access to Professor Palin, nor can I lose my engineered modules, so why on earth is something so grind-heavy perishable? What is the point of carrying a fighter for self defense if they're quite literally the most valuable thing you can carry in that they're possible to lose with a single, very quick death? And no, I don't mind PVP or "griefing" in open play. I'm merely stating that I really think losing fighter pilots on death is an overly brutal consequence compared to quite literally every other circumstance except dying without insurance, and doesn't seem to have any positive reason for existing.
Stop Killing SLF pilots on Ship Destruction
Clearly SLF pilots don't get an Escape Pod. Perhaps a crew ecscape pod should be an internal fitting so they can survive.
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
.... tempered by the fact that inactive crew are available at *any* dock with a Crew Lounge, at no notice whatsoever.
I don't like the fact that NPC crew are lost on destruction (but, when inactive, teleport around the galaxy continuously), so I don't bother with NPC crew much - if I do, I fire them before taking profit....
I don't like the fact that NPC crew are lost on destruction (but, when inactive, teleport around the galaxy continuously), so I don't bother with NPC crew much - if I do, I fire them before taking profit....
Last edited:
Indeed. I’d much rather they be in your ship or you have to pick them up/pay a taxi if they aren’t and they should get escape pods. The bigger picture is a lack of consistency in the rules. Aside from that, I’d love a little company in the ship itself, sitting in the copilot seat.
This makes minds wonder why large expensive ships have one escape pod only.
+1 and the other bug bear I have with crew members is they shouldn't earn any commission unless they are active on your ship. I mean how do you justify someone earning by just sitting back in a station doing nothing :S
Never got that one either; It basically makes having more than one pilot completely pointless (as if it wasn't already)
The whole SLF/Crew needs a rework. For a game that keeps trying to justify "realism" (ie: the community demanded a time delay to ship modules to make it realistic) the SLF thing makes no sense. They're unmanned drones, but you can see yourself piloting them, and they have cockpits, but you don't lose the pilot unless they die in your main ship? How does that match up with the SRV? How about the original lore where a ship the size on an Anaconda (bigger than an air craft carrier) was crewed by 200, instead of just 1?
I'd revamp like this: you hire a team of pilots at various skill levels for a flat fee OR a percentage, whichever they prefer. When they get blown up they either survive an ejection or they die. If they survive, you have to scoop them up or else they disappear. Many games that have "teams" like Assasin's Creed or Battletech are like this. And battletech is just like Elite with static pictures and text talking.
I'd revamp like this: you hire a team of pilots at various skill levels for a flat fee OR a percentage, whichever they prefer. When they get blown up they either survive an ejection or they die. If they survive, you have to scoop them up or else they disappear. Many games that have "teams" like Assasin's Creed or Battletech are like this. And battletech is just like Elite with static pictures and text talking.
Oh great, it's going to be yet aother limpet controller isn't it?
FDev reasons for this was to avoid players only training 1-2 pilots to Elite and then Keep them "forever", I understand this part. but I do not agree with their way on how they went on to implement this.
They could have made this in so many other ways.
They could have added personality to our NPCs, so they we need to bring them along for certain activities, and if we do not do that, they get upset and if enough upset, they will leave.... this will solve having NPCs sitting in the station doing nothing...
When ship is destroyed, let us have a mission to go and pick our crew member, I saw another interesting aspect to this, that some pirates could have picked up our crew member, and is now requesting ransom to be paid.
This is just two ways they could have made this alot more interestingly.
Also the part on how we pay NPCs, is terrible, and it invites other CMDRs to treat NPCs like a hire and fire, meaning they hire them for doing conflict zones, and then fire them before handing in missions/Bounties/war bonds. cheating the NCP of their pay.
If something like the first option was introduced, we could change how we pay NPC so that they get a cut on everything we do while they are onboard the ship. And if we try to be cheap, and disembark our NPCs crew before completing missions, they should be upset and we have risk of them leaving.
Bounties/War Bonds, here we could divide those as we earns them, so they will always get paid regardless if the NPC is on our ship or not when turn those in.
And also, NPC sitting in station does not get paid. Tie that into the first suggestion, and they get grumpy if you have no work for them. and they might leave because if this...
Now we would actually have to work to keep a NPC pilot happy. And if neglect this, he/she will leave.
So this current situation is rubbish, imagine if FDev had treated Engineered modules with the same logic. You get your ship back, but not your engineered modules? just the stock modules...
They could have made this in so many other ways.
They could have added personality to our NPCs, so they we need to bring them along for certain activities, and if we do not do that, they get upset and if enough upset, they will leave.... this will solve having NPCs sitting in the station doing nothing...
When ship is destroyed, let us have a mission to go and pick our crew member, I saw another interesting aspect to this, that some pirates could have picked up our crew member, and is now requesting ransom to be paid.
This is just two ways they could have made this alot more interestingly.
Also the part on how we pay NPCs, is terrible, and it invites other CMDRs to treat NPCs like a hire and fire, meaning they hire them for doing conflict zones, and then fire them before handing in missions/Bounties/war bonds. cheating the NCP of their pay.
If something like the first option was introduced, we could change how we pay NPC so that they get a cut on everything we do while they are onboard the ship. And if we try to be cheap, and disembark our NPCs crew before completing missions, they should be upset and we have risk of them leaving.
Bounties/War Bonds, here we could divide those as we earns them, so they will always get paid regardless if the NPC is on our ship or not when turn those in.
And also, NPC sitting in station does not get paid. Tie that into the first suggestion, and they get grumpy if you have no work for them. and they might leave because if this...
Now we would actually have to work to keep a NPC pilot happy. And if neglect this, he/she will leave.
So this current situation is rubbish, imagine if FDev had treated Engineered modules with the same logic. You get your ship back, but not your engineered modules? just the stock modules...
That I'm fine with, they get paid a salary whether I use them or not. The cost I'm not so fine with, or the fact that it eats into my combat CG contributions.
It does add an element of risk. Losing all your engineered modules would add yet more elements of risk. But somehow that doesn't happen.
Not trying to be nasty, but this is a big issue in my book, too, and I strongly support keeping the pilots alive, whatever the in-game credit cost.
Lestat
Banned
I agree they should be saved with a small catch.
1 Give the NPC Workman Comp. Maybe Not active for 7 14 days time (Not player time). If they are injured. So you can't use those players for that timeline. Or if you want them back Sooner. Their injuries could hamper combat for the set amount of time and you have to pay the higher price to get them back faster plus a pay raise.
2 If it the player fault for NPC getting hurt. They should be able to quit the job. You know an NPC who doesn't believe in stealing or fighting against a set Faction.
3 When they get back to work they get a Pay Raise.
1 Give the NPC Workman Comp. Maybe Not active for 7 14 days time (Not player time). If they are injured. So you can't use those players for that timeline. Or if you want them back Sooner. Their injuries could hamper combat for the set amount of time and you have to pay the higher price to get them back faster plus a pay raise.
2 If it the player fault for NPC getting hurt. They should be able to quit the job. You know an NPC who doesn't believe in stealing or fighting against a set Faction.
3 When they get back to work they get a Pay Raise.
Guest 161958
G
Here is a possible solution:
Make hired npcs not omnipresent at any station but only where you have left them to balance the fact that they have a chance of surviving based on when the mothership was blown up. Said chance will depend on:
If there was no manned SLF out at mothership's destruction, then the npc was able to leave battlestations and eject with you;
Otherwise, RIP.
Has the added advantage of tactical responsibility on when launching fighters: Decide wether launching the fighter might help you escape and save the boat, or prioritize crew safety and abandon ship. Like a true wannabe James Tiberius Kirk.
Make hired npcs not omnipresent at any station but only where you have left them to balance the fact that they have a chance of surviving based on when the mothership was blown up. Said chance will depend on:
If there was no manned SLF out at mothership's destruction, then the npc was able to leave battlestations and eject with you;
Otherwise, RIP.
Has the added advantage of tactical responsibility on when launching fighters: Decide wether launching the fighter might help you escape and save the boat, or prioritize crew safety and abandon ship. Like a true wannabe James Tiberius Kirk.
Last edited by a moderator:
.
It adds a strange element of risk. I mean, you get shot down. You use your escape pod to get away, but you lock the door before your crew can get in. But you take the time to pack up all materials to take them along. And you return to a brand new ship, which is a 100% copy of your previous ship, including the one-of-a-kind engineering modifications.
.
Honestly, it would make much more sense if you'd be back to base with your NPC, but your ship is back to all stock modules and no engineering done.
.
Of course, that would be a huge element of risk. It would be painful to be shot down. It would discourage PvP even more, would reduce the population in open, frustrate people and result into even more combat logging. I don't claim that it would be beneficial for the game. But it would also be an element of risk, and one which is much more logical than what we have now.
.
Additionally, it might be just me, but i actually also see an option for gameplay vs. SLF pilot loss. (Yea! The dreaded word: gameplay!) Imagine that instead of the NPC just being lost, he still is gone, but you get a message: your crew member was (pick and combine):
- Recovered by a nearby faction.
- Abducted by pirates.
- Lost but there is an emergency signal.
.
Depending on that, you get a recovery mission, have to travel somewhere and pay the recovery fee (which might just as well be a pile of modular terminals), do jobs for a criminal organisation to recover the NPC or alternatively find the NPC ship carrying your NPC, attack it, crack the cargo hatch and collect your NPC.
.
There's plenty of options, all of them would be more interesting than just loosing the NPC. It's still punishment and time invested for loosing the NPC. But it'd be more fun and more logical than what we currently have.
.
Last edited:
Not at all. I like the risk of being destroyed. But Elite is not a Roguelike. If it was, I'd get destroyed several times and quit the game as it would be impossible to get anywhere unless you're playing it so safe it is not worth playing.
If I'd lose engineered modules on destruction, I wouldn't be engineering them. Just far too much time wasted. And with SLF pilots it is more or less the same. If I didn't value the company (that leaves a lot to be desired in terms of company), I'd stop using one long ago.
Ranks definitely matter A LOT. Anyone using an SLF in say Thargoid hunting can attest to that. The damage potential and time keeping the SLF "alive" are incomparable between them. Dangerous rank is good enough to be useful but anything before that is more or less worthless. Even to get to dangerous you'll spend far more time training the pilot than you would engineering a module. And this is really the cause for threads like this one.
It lacks internal consistency. I don't accpet it.