I will not mention the technical complexity of implementing such a system and the potentially decent additional load on servers and clients after the introduction of such a system into the game. I like automation (robots, automatic turrets, sensor systems) that saves me from routine work, but full automation is absolutely unacceptable (NPC mercenaries shoot, extract, transport for you). I also do not like the artificial increase in quantity at the expense of quality. The increase in the number of ships will lead to the need to increase the number of ships on the part of NPC factions, which will eventually turn into a useless mess from a heap of ships on the battlefield. If you want a large number of ships and lags - welcome to EVE-online. Do you want to be a manipulator octopus and control the fleet? Welcome to any space strategy a la Civilization. And for Empyrion, leave an interesting exploration trip with friends and a fun assault on POI with a bunch of deaths and screams in voice communication A short verdict on the implementation of such a mechanic: unnecessary and not very interesting
I voted with NO. So I liked his posting. We are within a TACTICAL Game as SP. Having a crew on Board our ships ... yes, Please! But Fleet Actions...that is what Multi Player is for.
Maybe. On the other hand, if (and that's a very big if) a fun and engaging system for fleet mechanic could be implemented without an undue performance impact then I see reason to object to its presence. But I would absolutely advocate for an option to disable it for those who find it intrusive. I can easily imagine a scenario where server owners might want to disable it for player factions but allow NPC factions to use the fleet mechanics. Or maybe someone in SP might want to disable the system all together. Having more options is always better then less options.
So y'all basically said maybe if it didn't destroy the current frame rate and processing speeds. There could definitely be a limit to how many vessels each player could have on a multiplayer server. Even if it was set to 3: miner, freighter and military vessel; now you just have more attack options with pvp. If there's some kind of warning system, don't you think the player would quickly go to the aid of the vessel? Now you drew them into a real pvp battle. I think it adds a whole new level of fun to the game. What else are people going to do with their credits when they are rich late game, start over? Sounds boring. I think we should be dreaming big instead of limiting ourselves. If there is an adjustment for how many ships you can have than anyone can easily set it to a number that they are comfortable with. Set it to '0' if you like, I'd have it set to unlimited since I play with my cousin and friend on a personal server ( no wipes and server restarts). If it's developed correctly, I think it would be fun.
I chose other. I don't believe a system like this would work without some game breaking bugs attached to it. While I do like it the only thing I see in this proposal is CoQ errors galore as a freighter tries to fight a pirate vessel attacking it. I WOULD like to see however a NPC feature where you could trade with CVs that are moving cargo around.
It's "Other" for me- not because I dislike the idea, exactly- but that I think there are far more pressing issues that need attention first. Mass limiting speed instead of acceleration and CPU functionality to begin with. Fixing PV/Freighter despawn mechanic Semi-autonomous independent NPC ships as a long-term goal need a more basic foundation first, as well I would like to see NPC functionality beyond decoration, even beyond the CPU cost reduction in RG/RE- including but not limited to: Engineer- increases fuel efficiency/jump distance/thruster output. Maybe versions of each rather than one that does all Engineer2- slowly repairs to template. Needs material source and has priority list Gunner- increases accuracy Hydroponics tech- picks and stores crops. Maybe ensures inventory of certain foods (limited number) Doctor-treats wounds/injuries. Required for NPC respawn. Maybe ensures inventory of certain health items (limited number) Scanner tech- increases scan and resolution range Science- if tech tree is ever broken free of leveling and advancement is due to deconstruction/research Guard- patrols base, has targeting settings like turret Soldier- follows PC around, limited command options. Uses weapon/armor given by player Medic- soldier with light armor/weaponry and basic healing (maybe from inventory) Mining/salvage tech- operates drill/MT All NPCs consume food and O2, need special "NPC Clone Chamber" where they "respawn" as block to be placed again if killed Good AI, especially for NPCs that are not fixed or bound to a structure is very complex. There's behavior, navigation, functionality, and more. It would be a massive undertaking
I went back to playing recently and one of the things I missed and thought I would find in the game, were NPC crew members in ours ships. To my surprise there is none. I think this should be an update for yesterday.
@Mirosya @Germanicus So after seeing some comments that address the overall state of the game, I realized that there needs to be another option in the polls. So here you go -> Maybe.... With this option, you don't think it would necessarily be a bad feature. It adds a whole new dynamic to the game, but you would like to see Eleon fine-tuning existing mechanics and features while squashing bugs before they take on this. I agree with that! If the devs focus on improving combat, 3rd person, NPC pathing, animations and improving the AI, gameplay will start feeling less like early 90s Doom or a pop-up arcade shooter. I'm really hoping to see overhauls on all the npc models currently in game.
This whole AI "autonomous" system could be a game by itself, so of course it will impact performance. It will also require lots of work upstream just to get there, like what is needed for "walking on a moving ship (and not dying in the process...). The very first step could be to see what can be strictly text-based, and what has to be supported "visually" in game via models and animations. I forgot : there is also the possibility to show images in the PDA. So this could allow to have "reports" about what is happening in the "game universe" without having to support this visually in the game with models, playfields and animations. So essentially, the most complex part would be to make the framework on which the AI will rely, which would need to work in conjunction with how the game already manages the Factions and reputation.
Hi, The idea is good, but I think that there's a lot to fix and upgrade for now. Beside downgrading the self-explosing ships joke from the latest upgrade (thank for your efforts and spent ammos : loot nothing in self-derstructed vessels)... or how to mess up an entire aspect of space piratry/looting/survival.... I won't have a judgment of valor for the (in)abilities of the devs to improve such things, but surely I think they have great challenges to overcome yet. The first beeing not wasting what was already playable if not top polished.... Just a simple basic IA follower(s) ship(s) would be great to add more firepower with us (I play only SP for now) when we attack some POi's or ships... And beeing myself a player for 35+ years, from the beginnings of ATARI console games and PONG to blockbusters like Fallout 4, Skyrim or whatever AAA game you like, I would prefer some things like : more simple space physic realism (Kerbal Space program) : exemple: a better management of space to atmosphere reentry, with heat effects and damage if no shield and hard angle and speed of entry into atmosphere. I'd like to retrieve the feeling of alien's saga ships entering hostile planets....Silicium rain hurting the hull with bad visibility. A lot to do : Space combat distance, enemy detection and identification (we can warp but we have to knock the finger on the hull to identify the enemy ship or object), electronic counter--measures etc.. Real missiles and torpedoes with far distance engagement. Fire-control system. More realistic weapon damage (and NO, explosion don't reach rear blocks, otherwise bunkers would never had existed). I really like the game and the efforts put in, especially in its current state, but when I see some gun turrets barely able to reach the end of the hull of a loooooong CV on which they are built, it is ridiculous to see space combat with distances inferior or equal to first middle-age blackpowder cannons..... The modern fighting mechanic has already been well described in games like HARPOON... I have it since three weeks, I rarely buy alpha games, and I have nearly already 300 hours on it.... I think I could beat my 1500/2000h spent on blockbusters. I will copy this post and make a new wishlist, since ideas keep coming while I'm writing. Need to stop now !!!! I'm disgressing since the beginning. My apologies, but it is because I see so much potential in this mixed craft/survival/open space game. Sorry, I'm not english speaking native.
My thoughts: On the surface this sounds great, but with a little investigation I don't think it's the direction the devs (or the players) really want Empyrion to go. Empyrion is first and foremost a survival crafting game. This feature would split the game: in the first half, it's all about survival and crafting. In the second half, once you have the resources, it becomes a RTS with crew managment. The need to go much of anywhere vanishes once you have NPCs to do it for you. I voted maybe, because: I think a variant of this could work, where you side with a faction in a galactic war, and they give you a handful of ships to command. But those commands should be issued from your cockpit, not by looking at a map. Crew management should be left to managing the crew onboard your own ship, where crew members give your ship small buffs, similar to how they work in Reforged Galaxy (from what I've read). I like the idea of NPC ships which can aid you in combat. But I dislike the idea of turning Empyrion into a RTS. Realize also that if a player can bring multiple ships to a battle easily, NPC defenses will need to be scaled accordingly.
We can already simulate "giving orders to NPCs" with "dialogues" right now, at least. Only thing missing is the animation of the NPC running away to do the job (he can vanish, not important). In dialogues, instead of giving us a task, the NPC can ask "Would you like me to do X now ?" and we can either accept or refuse, which either ends the dialogue or triggers a consequence (NPC runs away to work). Now we just need a way to make all these mini-missions have proper consequences by the actual "rewards" system.
I agree with you : NPC's on your OWN ship would make more life and atmosphere (who want a Spock near you.... nah forget Spock, I said "make more life") More ships would lead to an RTS and the survival goal would totally goes off.
Not necessarily. I think what's most likely to happen if "crewmates" are anything like turrets, is that the player will get beaten up badly by spiders right next to his parked CV while the whole "crew" is watching in silence...
To the no crowd that believes Empyrion Galactic Survival has to be purely about survival constantly I have something to say What does survival mean to you? Filling a stupid oxygen bar, scavenging for food from wild plants, and filling an oxygen bar while also monitoring serious health conditions? We already have all that!!!! How about dominating a portion of the galaxy for your own glory or as a faction against an tyrannical regime that is hellbent on destroying your faction. With npc fleets you are still surviving, you still eat, use oxygen and monitor health conditions. You still fuel your ship, raid POIs, and explore. None of that changes. The only thing that changes is you have more that you can accomplish by starting your empire that is still "surviving" amidst the continuous onslaught of enemy factions. Factions that are pushing in to take what yours, trying to capture your bases, destroy your vessels and capture your companions. Survival to me is.... "To crush your enemies, to see them driven before you, and to hear the lamentations of their women" Not pick a garden and run back to an emergency 02 to get a refill before its empty. We still have to do all that stuff, except this just adds more to the plate and gives me something to do with the billions of late game credits.
It's all about creating illusions, players don't have to see all the details of what's going on in each playfield and on each ship. The main problem making it impossible to begin planning any kind of multi-branching dynamic story now is the fact that scenarios can only be run one at a time (even very short and small) and only give a basic yes/no linear sequence. The moment we can have 2, then everything is possible. It's not much, but it means we can run concurrent and simultaneous chains of events ; that's all what is needed to get started. The API may be the other way to go, but I'm not familiar with it.
Sure but when the word "Survival" is in a title you come to expect that to be a central focus in a PvE sense. Even with what is already implemented it could be much much better. Real fatigue/sleep mechanics, dehydration in addition to hunger, better AI for the behavior of wild life (why do I seem to be only prey in the galaxy?), ect. What comes after that is why we have story missions. Why does it have to be an RTS? Plenty of RTS around already (you like fleet actions then Galactic Civ III might be the game for you) How about a business sim while we are at it. Establish a series of space stations across the galaxy to provide fuel/food/etc. services that compete to undermine the monopoly of Polaris? Its still survival by definition (..."and hear the lamentations of their accountants" ). You could have NPCs that both operate the kiosks and occasionally use the services. Admittedly I'm being sarcastic but it would give you something to do with all those credits and at the same time allow for the creative element of this game to shine as you build your stations and bases. On a serious note, sarcasm aside, Fallout 4's addition of the settlement building to the franchise was one thing I loved. Not only was it a nice change up from the usual diving into to ruins and combat, but it allowed players to be creative and make use of all those caps and junk they collected. It was also nice when the NPCs seemed to make use of those buildings you created. Creativity and sandboxes are nice but to see your creations put to some game practicable use makes for a better experience. IMO.
That is the definition of conquest, not mere survival. Conquest is what most RTS games are based on. Survival more implies that you are struggling to stay alive, against all odds. Not that you have a fleet at your disposal to do your bidding. I would LOVE to have a constant threat of an enemy sending you back to the early game by destroying your ship and stranding you on some distant world. On that front, we totally agree. But I don't think we need to turn EGS into an RTS to achieve that. In fact, taking a clear genre game and changing its genre half way through gameplay is a great way to alienate the portion of the player base who loves the survival aspect, but not RTS. This is why games should stick to a defined genre or clear mix of genres from the outset: your player base is built on players who like playing the game. Add in a different game, and you're now catering to a different player base, while possibly alienating the one you have. As a gaming company, it is not a smart move.
Hmm what about a city builder as well and zoo tycoon. I'd love to start collecting specimens from all over the galaxy to show in my city. Who knows maybe the happiness of my citizens will increase!
