Ships Crew... Do these ships have them?

[Darth Montu]

I am not an Elite OG. I didn't play the earlier games> Elite: Dangerous is my first journey through this world. I don't know the lore so I might as well ask. Do these ships have crew? The Big Three have cockpits so large, you cant really call them such. They are more bridge than cockpit. While the small ships would seem to need a crew, I could see something like the Krait Mk2 using a crew of 2-5 people. Maybe even just the pilot... But the Anaconda, the SMALLEST of the big three is the size if a football field... Much larger than a 747 which has a crew of at least 2... I cant seem to think the Anaconda is manned by one person. I realize there could be a lot of automation, but EVERYTHING?

I started this game feeling rather "Han Solo" like, Roaming the stars, doing jobs, and the ship itself being home. It doesnt make since to me that a ship like the Corvette, the Cutter, or the Anaconda is manned by a single person.

 

[GroG79]

Sure why not.. We are talking 3305 here.. I do know the beluga has 18 toilets. I have a schedule to frequent all of them...
What a grind that will be when legs come.

 

[MK Regular]

TL;DR: Yes, automation has progressed in the ED universe to a point where the largest playable ships could conceivably be crewed by a single person.

Longer answer:
The largest playable ships in ED are comparable in the size to modern destroyers, which are typically ~160m long. By volume, these ships have about half of the internal volume of an Anaconda, which in turn has about half of the internal volume of a Corvette or Beluga. We can therefore assume that number of people needed to crew the largest playable ships in ED without automation does not exceed the number of people needed to crew 3-4 modern guided missile destroyers. Note that this figure is a high-end estimate.

A Farragut battlecruiser is a little over 2km long, 800m wide, 300m tall, and needs a crew of 7000. For reference, a Nimitz-class aircraft carrier needs a crew of around 6000 (including the air wing). If you calculate the size difference between the ships, the Farragut comes out as being about 400 times larger than a Nimitz (by volume) while only needing a 17% larger crew. This means that automation in ED has progressed to a point where a single crew member with the help of automation can perform the tasks of about 340 crew working on a modern ship.

Considering that most guided missile destroyers and multi-role frigates have a crew complement of around 250-300, it is entirely reasonable that something like an Anaconda could be operated by a crew of 1 or 2 individuals, and that a Corvette or Beluga would only need a crew of 2 or 3




Of course, only needing a crew of 2 or 3 does not mean that you couldn't have a larger crew to allow the ship to perform a wider variety of tasks. We already have NPC crew that we can hire to fly SLFs, this feature could be expanded to include NPC gunners, engineers, quartermasters, flight attendants, sensor operators, etc..., it's really just a question of having the gameplay to support it.

 

[Hooplah]

Game design. If I remember correctly in Frontier: Elite II a Panther Clipper had a crew of 12. It wouldn't launch until they were hired and had to be regularly paid. Other than allowing the ship to fly they did nothing.

Elite Dangerous has NPC pilots we can hire. They have to be regularly paid but they actually do something. I like the new design better.

 

[GeoJase]

Would be nice to see a crew mate in the other chair though, even if they did nothing.

If crew were ever implemented, I'd like to see some incremental benefit, say 5%. Maybe reduce gun jitter, reduce missile lock time, quicker distributor charge, etc. Nothing unbalancing like Engineers, and not remove the ability to solo pilot ships either. Just sumthin'

 

[[VR] Mad Mike]

TL;DR: Yes, automation has progressed in the ED universe to a point where the largest playable ships could conceivably be crewed by a single person.

Longer answer:
The largest playable ships in ED are comparable in the size to modern destroyers, which are typically ~160m long. By volume, these ships have about half of the internal volume of an Anaconda, which in turn has about half of the internal volume of a Corvette or Beluga. We can therefore assume that number of people needed to crew the largest playable ships in ED without automation does not exceed the number of people needed to crew 3-4 modern guided missile destroyers. Note that this figure is a high-end estimate.

A Farragut battlecruiser is a little over 2km long, 800m wide, 300m tall, and needs a crew of 7000. For reference, a Nimitz-class aircraft carrier needs a crew of around 6000 (including the air wing). If you calculate the size difference between the ships, the Farragut comes out as being about 400 times larger than a Nimitz (by volume) while only needing a 17% larger crew. This means that automation in ED has progressed to a point where a single crew member with the help of automation can perform the tasks of about 340 crew working on a modern ship.

Considering that most guided missile destroyers and multi-role frigates have a crew complement of around 250-300, it is entirely reasonable that something like an Anaconda could be operated by a crew of 1 or 2 individuals, and that a Corvette or Beluga would only need a crew of 2 or 3




Of course, only needing a crew of 2 or 3 does not mean that you couldn't have a larger crew to allow the ship to perform a wider variety of tasks. We already have NPC crew that we can hire to fly SLFs, this feature could be expanded to include NPC gunners, engineers, quartermasters, flight attendants, sensor operators, etc..., it's really just a question of having the gameplay to support it.

End of the day it is a fictional game in a fictional universe, FD could have chosen to writen in what ever they wanted into the lore HOWEVER, they chose to keep ships being flown by people and they wrote in that high level AI was illegal. I think this was a good idea.

given the elite lore already has the number of crew needed for all ships (for the old world ships) i think they should just keep those numbers for internal consistency. Yes ED iis set in the future so they could change them if they wanted, but TBH the numbers as a minimum seem ok to me personally.

example... Anaconda

Anaconda (classic) - Elite Wiki

wiki.alioth.net

40-72 crew.

Now i can imagine it may not be that much fun to manage all those people to the same fidelity as in the ddf, with each crew having a personality etc, so i propose specialist crew and generic crew. Generic crew could just be a pay X amount per year for a blob on a seat,

however it would be the specialist crew who have the personalities, and these would be the ones which give you a little boost over and above base gear, so you could have science officer, navigator, weapons officer, engineer, trade broker <insert what ever here>

and these ones would have the rpg elements of gaining XP in what ever areas they get experience in. Every now and then a random generic crew could get promoted after your speicialist contacts you and says CMDR Mad Mike, this is Jimbob, he has been with us for some time and i see he has a real aptitude for XYZ so with your permission i would like to take him as an apprentice and train him.

Yes the above is some work but FGS ED is meant to be a cutting edge game meant to be played for 1000s of hrs and that is the kind of long term content i think loads of players would love to have as long term goals, finding and training crew, building relationships with them (no not like the purple alien love scene in mass effect)

hopefully FD are looking at 2020 and are making a fist of tacking this stuff even if it is hard to do.

 

[MK Regular]

End of the day it is a fictional game in a fictional universe, FD could have chosen to writen in what ever they wanted into the lore HOWEVER, they chose to keep ships being flown by people and they wrote in that high level AI was illegal. I think this was a good idea.

given the elite lore already has the number of crew needed for all ships (for the old world ships) i think they should just keep those numbers for internal consistency. Yes ED iis set in the future so they could change them if they wanted, but TBH the numbers as a minimum seem ok to me personally.

example... Anaconda

Anaconda (classic) - Elite Wiki

wiki.alioth.net

40-72 crew.

Continuing with the example of the Anaconda, the same ship that needed a crew of 40-72 in the original Elite (taking place in the year 3100), by the year 3200 (when FE2 takes place) it did not need such a large crew:

http://wiki.alioth.net/index.php/Anaconda

A crew of 8 was more than enough to operate the ship. This means that in the 100 years between the Original Elite and FE2, automation advanced enough that a single person in FE2 could do the jobs of 5-9 people in the original Elite. If we assume that automation has continued to progress at the same rate for the 100 years between FE2 and ED, it is conceivable that an Anaconda could be operated by a crew of 1 or 2 individuals.

Now i can imagine it may not be that much fun to manage all those people to the same fidelity as in the ddf, with each crew having a personality etc, so i propose specialist crew and generic crew. Generic crew could just be a pay X amount per year for a blob on a seat,

however it would be the specialist crew who have the personalities, and these would be the ones which give you a little boost over and above base gear, so you could have science officer, navigator, weapons officer, engineer, trade broker <insert what ever here>

and these ones would have the rpg elements of gaining XP in what ever areas they get experience in. Every now and then a random generic crew could get promoted after your speicialist contacts you and says CMDR Mad Mike, this is Jimbob, he has been with us for some time and i see he has a real aptitude for XYZ so with your permission i would like to take him as an apprentice and train him.

Again, while a ship like an Anaconda could be operated by a crew of 1 or 2 individuals, there is no rule against using a larger crew. I would absolutely love to have the ability to hire on additional crew members (provided that the cost of doing so doesn't eat 3/4 of my profits glares at NPC SLF pilots) that would give my ship a few bonuses. If sad crew comes with their own personalities, all the better.

Yes the above is some work but FGS ED is meant to be a cutting edge game meant to be played for 1000s of hrs and that is the kind of long term content i think loads of players would love to have as long term goals, finding and training crew, building relationships with them

( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)

(no not like the purple alien love scene in mass effect)

Why do you have to ruin my fun?

hopefully FD are looking at 2020 and are making a fist of tacking this stuff even if it is hard to do.

One can always hope.

 

[[VR] Mad Mike]

@MK Regular Damn i was rushing, i was 90% sure the numbers of crew had gone down in FE2 but i didnt have time to find the link.
Had I of done it, this could grok with my suggestion above. for instance, just to tie everything up in a bow lore wise (again there is no need to have to do this but i think it is always nice to keep things consistent when you can)

An anaconda could need 40-72 crew for general operation BUT on top of that, up to 8 of those crew could be active specialists which would allow you different passive / active bonuses depending on what those 8 specialists skills were and what level.... thus remaining consistent with both games.

Honestly....... just want npc crew and if FD add them and allow us to train them or replace them with more skilled people, or with different traits etc, i do not really care how they do it, so long as they do it.

oh and as an edit..... I agree with wages... Crew should not be bankrupting us SLF crew should not take as much cash or XP as they do imo....

the generic crew i think yearly contracts 1 button press and done is fine, and paying them - sptiballing - 30,000 credits per head per year... should a player log out for 3 years then come back they dont have to pay loads, but just renew those contracts.... an anaconda pilot should be able to afford 2 - 3 million credits per year imo.

the specialist crew would want paying more.......... it is not for me to cross the Is and dot the Ts but perhaps we get a choice with those, pay them a percentage of our earnings (but less than we do now! possibly all 8 in an anaconda would want 25% of our earnings combined IF they were elite) OR we could pay a yearly contract.

depending on our rep with them and our own rankings etc would depend how good a deal we could get.
IF we are earning 100s of millions of credits per week we could insist on lowering percentages to them, but if we are earning next to nothing and the crew are taking a percentage of nothing perhaps they approach you and ask for a better deal or to go on a yearly salary. you can tell them to buzz off but your rep takes a hit...... pay more they like you more.

again , this is not every day micromanaging just once every blue moon. i dont think it is ourtageous for big ship owners to do some management.

 

[Hank]

I wish we had crew that were useful to the functions of the ship instead of just for flying a SLF or the ship while I'm in the SLF. My only experience with crew for a space sim was Evochron. You could hire up to 4 crew of differing skills; science officer, engineer, navigator or weapons officer. Each would give your ship small boosts or skills. An example would be a science officer who would alert the commander there were astronomical anomalies or other fun places to go see. A weapons officer may increase rate of fire (slightly) or increase reload speed. Nothing that makes the ship overpowering in combat - just a tweak. The crew comes at a cost. In Evochron the crew may jump ship, then you have to decide to hire another or not. ... then there's my everytime comment about butts in seats - I need crew who are on the bridge with me. nuff said

GL HF Commanders ... its the weekend woohoo