Rethink SLFs for New Era

[Old Duck]

Dear Frontier, please reconsider this telepresence nonsense when it comes to SLFs. It's just silly on multiple levels. We or our NPC pilot should be actually FLYING those SLFs. If the fighter is destroyed, then we have to rescue the pilot (or be rescued ourselves) in an escape pod. For the sake of gameplay, the escape pod can be indestructible like a Nav Beacon. Also reconsider the silly range limitations. I know this is done for instancing, but it's a terrible gimmick, and there must be a better way. As for the "insta-switch", well, you'll just have to dock your SLF if you want to change from piloting the mothership to the SLF. Yes, I know, some will see this as a nerf and complain, but you've removed "placeholders" from the game before (ADS), so just do it and the complaint threads will die down eventually.

If you insist on telepresence, the you might just as well redesign the SLFs to be drones. The idea of installing the advanced technology to holographically project our images into physical seats that we never actually sit in is stupid silly on steroids. If SLFs are to be unmanned drones 100% of the time, then they should be designed as such. Otherwise we have this half-baked hodgepodge of remote vehicles (SLF) vs. actual "sit in the seat" vehicles (SRV), and it just makes anyone who thinks about it want to bang their head against a wall.

Forgive my lack of flowery language and diplomatic tact. My coffee hasn't kicked in yet, so I'm just shooting from the hip. There is truth in my words, however. If "space legs" actually are a part of New Era, then this is the time to remove telepresence from SLFs, unless you plan to make space legs walking holograms, in which case I'm going just shave my head and walk through downtown New York City naked in protest.

(If you refuse to change SLF telepresence, then at the very least would you consider changing the NPC voice lines? They don't need to constantly remind me that they are using telepresence. Then I could at least PRETEND that they are physically flying my fighers.)

 

[Sylow]

Hmm. Yea. It's unbelieveable that they could get something like this operational in a mere thousand years and something like this of course is completely unrealistic...

 

[zimms]

Hmm. Yea. It's unbelieveable that they could get something like this operational in a mere thousand years and something like this of course is completely unrealistic...

It's also unbelievable that anybody would pilot a ship in person in the Elite universe.

 

[Old Duck]

It's also unbelievable that anybody would pilot a ship in person in the Elite universe.

You mean because telepresence is a thing, yes?

 

[Sylow]

It's also unbelievable that anybody would pilot a ship in person in the Elite universe.

Basically yes. A fully automatic ship would not have to pay attention to the vulnerable meatbag inside. Of course it also would have no windows, more efficient shapes and laser weapons would fire at sensor range, which would be thousands of kilometers. So yea, in a way you are right that the links I posted, pointing at current reality, is not the final answer for game design.

That being said, my answer was not aiming on realism or anything like that, merely pointing out that remote controlled drones are not as far fetched and unbelievable as Old Duck paints them to be in the OP. I rather consider it very logical that we have remote controlled fighters which indeed are cheaper to replace than the mothership. If anything, it could be discussed if they should have a cockpit, or if it would make more sense that our monitor would display us looking at a monitor where we control the SLF if we fly SLFs in game.

I just don't think that the "monitor inside the monitor" concept would really make it all that much more enjoyable, so I guess the current cockpits are here to stay.

 

[Badmiker]

Lack of internal consistency, not refering to 'meatbags' but to the game. Agree with all of the above.

So, SLF are drones: then why the cockpits? Shouldnt there be an NPC sitting in one of the jump seats in my cockpit piloting the drone using the controls provided? Or is this something similar to the Pilot's Federation forcing every ship to use one control panel; do the various manufacturers insist on using their 'branded' telepresence cockpits? Maybe every SLF drone comes with a ship-based 'cockpit module' which my NPC needs to jump into? Maybe we'll discover it when we have legs.

 

[zombieapocalypse]

Yeah, the whole telepresence thing is utter nonsense on several levels. All games (and fiction in general) require a certain level of "suspension of disbelief" but this is just very silly.

But at least they rectified the NPC pilot having no escape pod even though you and all your passengers do!

 

[CMDR Big Mike]

I’d be fine if they put the NPC on the bridge and made the fighters look more like drones

 

[Krash]

I’d be fine if they put the NPC on the bridge and made the fighters look more like drones

I would love it if anyone on my payroll was required to report to my ship and occupy one of the bridge chairs. This would motivate me to hire more than 1 NPC.

 

[Sylow]

I’d be fine if they put the NPC on the bridge and made the fighters look more like drones

I don't see the problem with the looks. Yes, they are re-used CQC assets and look like there's a cockpit. But it wouldn't even be that unlogical to have both options available, unmanned and manned. With unmanned being the prefered mode of operation in a combat environment, considering how little shield and hull they have.

The only thing which indeed kind of breaks immersion is that when you remote-control the SLF, you still get the CQC cockpit, instead of getting the "screen on a screen" display. Which would be more realistic, but also very ugly and quite boring. So i think that what we currently have is a reasonable compromise.

Having the NPCs use a seat on the bridge on the other hand, at least as long as you don't completely fill up all the seats with other humans by using Multi-Crew, would make perfect sense, would add to the game and i don't really see any disadvantage to it.

 

[Drelthar]

The fighters would need some serious buffs to survivability then, otherwise they would be entirely useless.

Don't get me wrong, I'm for your premise on a conceptual level, practicality though is an entirely different thing in this case though.

 

[metatheurgist]

There is one thing tho. Printing multiple SLFs becomes less useful. They would have to max out at 3 then.

And I'm not sure how my pilots would feel about me abandoning them to die in the SLF when my ship is in danger. Maybe in that case you should just lose them forever?

 

[Drelthar]

There is one thing tho. Printing multiple SLFs becomes less useful. They would have to max out at 3 then.

And I'm not sure how my pilots would feel about me abandoning them to die in the SLF when my ship is in danger. Maybe in that case you should just lose them forever?

Or get a "in space mission" with a corrupted Comms signal from your stranded SLF pilot, sometimes floating in space still in the fighter, sometimes in an escape pod, sometimes in a crashed fighter with an escape pod somewhere nearby (scan the fighter for the last logs with estimated pod landing co-ords) sometimes just in an escape pod on a planet surface, sometimes he gets a message through somehow from the slave ship he's being carried on and you have to liberate the escape pod.

Or you know, any other idea an actual game designer could come up with.

 

[Old Duck]

Or get a "in space mission" with a corrupted Comms signal from your stranded SLF pilot, sometimes floating in space still in the fighter, sometimes in an escape pod, sometimes in a crashed fighter with an escape pod somewhere nearby (scan the fighter for the last logs with estimated pod landing co-ords) sometimes just in an escape pod on a planet surface, sometimes he gets a message through somehow from the slave ship he's being carried on and you have to liberate the escape pod.

Or you know, any other idea an actual game designer could come up with.

Cut it out! You're making me realize how shallow the current gameplay loops are.

 

[Good Whiskey]

Dear Frontier, please reconsider this telepresence nonsense when it comes to SLFs. It's just silly on multiple levels. We or our NPC pilot should be actually FLYING those SLFs. If the fighter is destroyed, then we have to rescue the pilot (or be rescued ourselves) in an escape pod. For the sake of gameplay, the escape pod can be indestructible like a Nav Beacon. Also reconsider the silly range limitations. I know this is done for instancing, but it's a terrible gimmick, and there must be a better way. As for the "insta-switch", well, you'll just have to dock your SLF if you want to change from piloting the mothership to the SLF. Yes, I know, some will see this as a nerf and complain, but you've removed "placeholders" from the game before (ADS), so just do it and the complaint threads will die down eventually.

Ok, so, I don't even want crew members in the first place. The SLF should be controlled by an artificial intelligence. If not, I would prefer telepresence to remain a thing. Why? Because having to scoop up a damn escape pod floating in space in the middle of a fight with NPCs, other players or a Thargoid Cyclops is just wildly inefficient busywork that only adds to immersion for some people. I'm not even lamenting the inability to immediate launch another fighter, which would be "nerfing" the current system, merely the fact that I would now have to launch a fighter to distract, for example, a swarm, then watch it pop a few seconds later, then have to circle back and scoop up my crew member before doing it again.

What a pain in the bum! Why you do this to me, Duck?

 

[Old Duck]

What a pain in the bum! Why you do this to me, Duck?

My immersion trumps your laziness

Just equip a collector limpet controller - you should have one anyway to gather materials from the ships you destroy.

 

[Drelthar]

Ok, so, I don't even want crew members in the first place. The SLF should be controlled by an artificial intelligence. If not, I would prefer telepresence to remain a thing. Why? Because having to scoop up a damn escape pod floating in space in the middle of a fight with NPCs, other players or a Thargoid Cyclops is just wildly inefficient busywork that only adds to immersion for some people. I'm not even lamenting the inability to immediate launch another fighter, which would be "nerfing" the current system, merely the fact that I would now have to launch a fighter to distract, for example, a swarm, then watch it pop a few seconds later, then have to circle back and scoop up my crew member before doing it again.

What a pain in the bum! Why you do this to me, Duck?

Well, you could have multiple pilots on board, and multiple fighters in the bay (or printed)

Couple this with utterly necessary fighter survival buffs (not just shields/armour, but AI that was able to flee before being fully destroyed, and possibly dock for repairs) and it would work.

 

[Drelthar]

My immersion trumps your laziness

Just equip a collector limpet controller - you should have one anyway to gather materials from the ships you destroy.

That would require FD to stop making cargo explode when your limpet tries to drop it off if you are traveling more than 1m/s too.

 

[Good Whiskey]

My immersion trumps your laziness

I worked very hard to become this lazy!

Couple this with utterly necessary fighter survival buffs (not just shields/armour, but AI that was able to flee before being fully destroyed, and possibly dock for repairs) and it would work.

Doesn't this risk making the SLF an OP "game changer" in PvP fights for those who have ships containing fighter bays?

 

[Old Duck]

That would require FD to stop making cargo explode when your limpet tries to drop it off if you are traveling more than 1m/s too.

As mentioned in OP, Pilot Federation escape pods should be made of the same vibranium that nav beacons are, for the sake of gameplay.