Multicrew show allow owner to switch from the helm position
- Thread starter Olivia Vespera
- Start date
Yes. It's good for trading too. Taking turns flying legs of the route. Really though this feature should so obviously be added that I find it hard to believe frontier don't want to give us this option. It's probably just a technical limitation. I'm sure it will make it's way to us eventually along with SRV control. A dev reply confirming this would be nice. They aren't going to say no to us if they want our money.
Last edited:
Give the ship owner the ability to hand the helm over to someone else, but take it back at any point they choose whilst the guest can only accept the offer of the helm and can't prevent the owner taking it back? Sounds good, if it could be done. You could chill with friends and share the piloting load of long-distance exploration or something [hotas]
Last edited:
We've already given them our money by buying into Season 2.
On the otherhand... Plenty of vanity purchases~there's going to be a Q&A coming up. Would be nice if some of you were willing to ask then.
Adding the ability to give the con to your friend should have been a no-brainer but i think it presented a technical challenge at which point where the devs just scrapped the idea 'cos ' game iz too complicated guys'.
It would have been a great tool for traders or explorers to remove some tedium which might have even opened some interesting gameplay possibilities.
It would have been a great tool for traders or explorers to remove some tedium which might have even opened some interesting gameplay possibilities.
Last edited:
YES, YES, Yes, This yes.[up].
I have not engineered one ship but multi-crew, With all it's abilities, I have been keenly awaiting.
If you have any doubt, Don't hand over control.
I have not engineered one ship but multi-crew, With all it's abilities, I have been keenly awaiting.
If you have any doubt, Don't hand over control.
If you give your ships helm to a random guy you just met 5 mins ago from LFC and the guy goes and crashes it into a station or planet on purpose whose fault is that? Also you guys all talk like it would be impossible to implement a way to get your own ships control back again.
I have yet to hear anyone accurately explain this line of reasoning.
The server is constantly checking things that are going on, like ship stats etc.
Instances, ships, "islands" all depend on single players to be held under "authority "
Swapping out the controller of the ship will mess with so much spaghetti code that assumes your "in your ship" that it would be a massive undertaking to implement (not impossible) as it would likely require a complete overhaul of really base code (especially network stuff)
They'd have to make it so everyone (even the ship owner) have "joined" a crew. So in that case, who's client is in control? Does it swap when the helm role swaps? If so, how do you then handle ship ownership, and returning it in the correct state when the session ends/current helm crew drops out due to lag/disconnect/etc. The data is now with them, but they don't exist, so the data is gone.
I'd you keep it all on the ship owner, how's his client going to handle the extra load from the stuff related to the role he is currently in?
These are a few random questions. There are hundreds more I'm sure.
The game really isn't designed for this, as not much data is held independently of specific clients, which can dissappear at a moments notice.
That's why the owner has to stay there. To be the anchor
- - - Updated - - -
This is possibly the reason for no srv too. As that was probably designed in the same way.
There is so much assumption with absolutely zero basis in this post. Nothing you have said is even remotely grounded in observable fact and is born purely out of your misunderstanding of how basic netcode operations are handled. You've created mountains out of trivial things that don't even qualify as molehills.
I don't even need to reply to it. I'll just let the armchair software engineers pick it apart.
The best explanation I can think of, being a software developer myself, but not having seen the code in question, is that the "player" object and the "ship" object are tied together a lot more closely than one might think, meaning that allowing the helm to be turned over to another player would require re-initializing way too much of the client program. Given that there's already enough flexibility to support fighters and the SRV, this doesn't appear to be the case, but I can only speculate as to how the code for the game is actually written.
It's also possible that the way commands are handled would have to change in order to implement limitations on what a player can do with a ship he or she doesn't own. For instance, currently, there's presumably no permission checking when issuing commands to the ship because it's just assumed that the current player owns the current ship. If it were possible for a different player to take the helm, there would likely need to be some set of controls that are off limits (such as self-destruct) to guest players. This could conceivably require a check for every single input, or some sort of configurator, to say nothing of who is responsible for collisions, or getting slaughtered for firing on a ship too close to a station and so forth.
I can totally see why the devs might say "Yeah, that's way too complicated. We'll just tack on a gunner mode."
Let's stop guessing for a moment here.
Player object and ship object are tied together is the assumption, but we have proof that is not the case.
If your ship gets blown up while you're in an SRV, you do not go to the rebuy screen.
When you dismiss your ship in an SRV, it despawns. It doesn't just conveniently hide out of sight, it is deleted from the game instance.
No entity is needed to replace you if you choose to fly an SLF with no NPC crew to pilot the mothership. You just slip from one to the other effortlessly.
Players can assume control of another player's SLF, so the re-initializing that you're worried about is already occurring during other events in the game. It's proven possible.
You don't need to limit functions such as self-destruct, even if that was an issue. Arguably, if you can't trust the person you're handing control over to not spit in your face in such a low-brow fashion you shouldn't have handed control over to them in the first place. However, if it is an issue just "hide" the features you don't want appearing on menus from appearing for people who don't need to see them. In this scenario you don't need to check who is in the pilot's seat and then determine what options they have. Assuming the multicrew member had LEGS that he could use in SPACE (Waiting FDev...) and walked over to the helmsman's panels, which he could see since they are activated by proximity, the option still wouldn't appear to him because he is not flagged owner.
There is no reason to swap the ownership flag from player to player. Input controls are the only thing that need to be transferred, and we already have multiple instances of controls being transferred from vehicle to vehicle, and soon multicrew position to multicrew position (Idle, SLF, Gunner) so that's not an issue either.
All fines and bounties are already shared between all multicrew members, so that question has been long answered.
Last edited:
Indeed...
I think thats the key right over there.
You've made the same mistake I made.
This is not the game you thought it was going to be. It's a galaxy-sized frag-fest arcade game. Like me, you should stop taking it so seriously
So what size landing pads do you have in that Ivory Tower you're living in?
You think you're too good for arcade games?
When did 'arcade' become an expletive?
Also unless there is a technical limitation, absolutely yes a trusted friend should be able to take over the helm of the ship if you so wish it. Productivity would skyrocket from all the productivity during bathroom breaks alone! So I vote 'yes'