i would not be suprised at all, if this has been suggested before...
but what about the idea of short-term crew contracts?
ie, instead of being a on-until-dismissed/death high price, there is a with-insurance (plot/believeability -wise) for the families , debtors, etc of the crew...
low cost to the hirER ... low cost to the employer, the player ...
contract... of a small number of options ;
#1# n days 1-? ....
#2# length of a CG (normally a week)
#3# a number of flights?
the advantages of this additional system ( so NOT ONLY, replacing - adding this as well as permanent-employment)
could be multiple ;
1 it could be cross-reference matched with combinations of GPs, governemnts, and faction types for more realism.
(it would make sense that not all governments would allow it , since a cheaper price on risking someone's life is at least questionable )
2 with a range of minimum skill-difficulty HIGHER than the long-term-contracts, it would mean that you can get good quality at a lower price,
but not for as long as you could have, had you planned better and bought someone permanently.
(punishment for bad planning on the other side of the coin )
3 it would allow for more use of the gunner-accuracy feature, (especially if that is made better than it already is), for new players / players that find fighting difficult, which would be more accomodating for players with disabilities, or just as a more reliable option when playing relaxed, etc.
4 it would allow for more risk taking, on the small scale (low impact) , for players new to the game, wanting MORE FLEXIBILITY, but not the binding cost, to try things out, or when doing something more risky than their usual missions/actions, etc, when trying new things (when otherwise reluctant/finding things too difficult, etc) .
4-2 when experienced players would also be able to not have to invest as much in someone they might only use a few times, and then dismiss, (so as to not have to split one's pay-outs ) ... it would also have the advantage of not costing as much for short term protection, BUT ;
when doing what it does in point(4) , it would not create much of an advantage for experienced players, in terms of any significant combat / unfair advantage , imapct - experienced players can afford permenent contracts anyway, but it seems rediculous, to SAVE money by dissmissing them, only to have to pay full price, 5 minutes later.
it's an example, that people already try exploiting HANDING IN, credits / missions, or simply get their NPC killed, to avoid the share. instant kill-credits reduction, works, but this would take care of the other end, without removing risk/cost entirely (which would be taking out too much)
** the simultaneous fact that (4) , would only create a bit more flexibility for noobs, and those struggling with combat, etc, would add something more flexible for them, when they're trying new craft/combinations out, but it would not add anything at the HIGH skill level, especially in terms of higher-end weapons/systems, in PvP. **
it would normally(by quantity) only have much of an impact, in low-end PvE ... but would make the idea of hiring MORE APPEALING ... since i'm sure, many players change their mind about even having a fighter-bay + pilot, to prevent the huge amount more, that one loses to their share.
i am sure, to many, that that APPEAL, is lost, soon after you realize how much you share. that would remain, but not with AS MUCH a initial cost, in case you change your mind, etc - the balance, soto speak, IN RISKING HIRING THEM... thought of as a risk ITSELF...
would be reduced. - that's the idea, in a nutshell.
the share-system should remain, but short term contracts would be more realistic for short term gambles, as well as short term defence.
------------------
5 The insurance ( for them ), would add a little touch in terms of realism / believeability - gamblers with debts... emperial slaves, suicidal Kumo-sufferants, etc, would make good highER-risk contract fighters, etc.
it would add a nice CONTRAST , to the way the character, already adds something in terms of what kinds of pressures/oppertunities, the trillions and trillions of NPCs are meant to be surviving IN.
the contrast of risk, would add another layer of... something - whose Galatic Power, cares more about life?
etc.
life SHOULD be cheap, in Delaine / Some empire ... but it should be more prescious, in others.
for example, in the Groms, they would VALUE PILOT SKILL ... in order to prevent more smuggling - the better skilled pilots are, the more successful bounty hunters, they would facilitate / nuture. so they would demand a higher skill level minimum, to protect many pilots in training, to become better, and not be wasted, etc, and to try to reduce the exploitation of the short-term cost.
THAT, would add a interesting layer of... impact, for us to take on board, in terms of policy-impact , in terms of the story.
==============
SOUNDS COMPLICATED... but ;
all you'd need to do, is use what's already there, and add a second option/balance/cost-ranges , and write a few more character-stories.
MOST of this impact, would come from how awesome an idea it is... *chuff chuff*
but what about the idea of short-term crew contracts?
ie, instead of being a on-until-dismissed/death high price, there is a with-insurance (plot/believeability -wise) for the families , debtors, etc of the crew...
low cost to the hirER ... low cost to the employer, the player ...
contract... of a small number of options ;
#1# n days 1-? ....
#2# length of a CG (normally a week)
#3# a number of flights?
the advantages of this additional system ( so NOT ONLY, replacing - adding this as well as permanent-employment)
could be multiple ;
1 it could be cross-reference matched with combinations of GPs, governemnts, and faction types for more realism.
(it would make sense that not all governments would allow it , since a cheaper price on risking someone's life is at least questionable )
2 with a range of minimum skill-difficulty HIGHER than the long-term-contracts, it would mean that you can get good quality at a lower price,
but not for as long as you could have, had you planned better and bought someone permanently.
(punishment for bad planning on the other side of the coin )
3 it would allow for more use of the gunner-accuracy feature, (especially if that is made better than it already is), for new players / players that find fighting difficult, which would be more accomodating for players with disabilities, or just as a more reliable option when playing relaxed, etc.
4 it would allow for more risk taking, on the small scale (low impact) , for players new to the game, wanting MORE FLEXIBILITY, but not the binding cost, to try things out, or when doing something more risky than their usual missions/actions, etc, when trying new things (when otherwise reluctant/finding things too difficult, etc) .
4-2 when experienced players would also be able to not have to invest as much in someone they might only use a few times, and then dismiss, (so as to not have to split one's pay-outs ) ... it would also have the advantage of not costing as much for short term protection, BUT ;
when doing what it does in point(4) , it would not create much of an advantage for experienced players, in terms of any significant combat / unfair advantage , imapct - experienced players can afford permenent contracts anyway, but it seems rediculous, to SAVE money by dissmissing them, only to have to pay full price, 5 minutes later.
it's an example, that people already try exploiting HANDING IN, credits / missions, or simply get their NPC killed, to avoid the share. instant kill-credits reduction, works, but this would take care of the other end, without removing risk/cost entirely (which would be taking out too much)
** the simultaneous fact that (4) , would only create a bit more flexibility for noobs, and those struggling with combat, etc, would add something more flexible for them, when they're trying new craft/combinations out, but it would not add anything at the HIGH skill level, especially in terms of higher-end weapons/systems, in PvP. **
it would normally(by quantity) only have much of an impact, in low-end PvE ... but would make the idea of hiring MORE APPEALING ... since i'm sure, many players change their mind about even having a fighter-bay + pilot, to prevent the huge amount more, that one loses to their share.
i am sure, to many, that that APPEAL, is lost, soon after you realize how much you share. that would remain, but not with AS MUCH a initial cost, in case you change your mind, etc - the balance, soto speak, IN RISKING HIRING THEM... thought of as a risk ITSELF...
would be reduced. - that's the idea, in a nutshell.
the share-system should remain, but short term contracts would be more realistic for short term gambles, as well as short term defence.
------------------
5 The insurance ( for them ), would add a little touch in terms of realism / believeability - gamblers with debts... emperial slaves, suicidal Kumo-sufferants, etc, would make good highER-risk contract fighters, etc.
it would add a nice CONTRAST , to the way the character, already adds something in terms of what kinds of pressures/oppertunities, the trillions and trillions of NPCs are meant to be surviving IN.
the contrast of risk, would add another layer of... something - whose Galatic Power, cares more about life?
etc.
life SHOULD be cheap, in Delaine / Some empire ... but it should be more prescious, in others.
for example, in the Groms, they would VALUE PILOT SKILL ... in order to prevent more smuggling - the better skilled pilots are, the more successful bounty hunters, they would facilitate / nuture. so they would demand a higher skill level minimum, to protect many pilots in training, to become better, and not be wasted, etc, and to try to reduce the exploitation of the short-term cost.
THAT, would add a interesting layer of... impact, for us to take on board, in terms of policy-impact , in terms of the story.
==============
SOUNDS COMPLICATED... but ;
all you'd need to do, is use what's already there, and add a second option/balance/cost-ranges , and write a few more character-stories.
MOST of this impact, would come from how awesome an idea it is... *chuff chuff*
Last edited: