Could Engineering Ruin Star Citizen Solo Play? (Ft. Loud Guns) | Launch Sequence Podcast

Engineering gameplay will add a multitude of resources to ships, vehicles, and buildings that players will need to balance and control for maximum efficiency. This could provide a TON more unique gameplay for players, but it also could make ship ownership more difficult. Today I’m joined by Loud Guns to discuss the complexities and reasons for engineering, and whether it may ruin solo gameplay for Star Citizen players?
Today’s Guests:
Loud Guns
KZbin: / @loudguns
Twitch: / loudguns
ToC:
00:00 Introductions
01:50 How Are You Feeling About Star Citizen?
11:00 What is Multicrew Gameplay?
14:30 The Resource Network
18:30 Multicrew Ship Roles
24:00 Who is the Tuner?
32:10 Who is The Mechanic?
43:45 Who is the Manager?
51:45 Does This Kill Solo Gameplay?
01:08:00 Is This Good or Bad for Capital Ships?
01:15:30 Less Pilots in Star Citizen
Audio Podcast: podcasters.spotify.com/pod/sh...
Video Podcast: • Launch Sequence Podcas...
Support Space Tomato & SEE THESE LIVE:
Patreon: / spacetomato
Paypal: paypal.me/SpaceTomatoPays?loc...
Gaming Community: / discord
Star Citizen Organization/Guild: gii.spacetomatogaming.com/
Start a Star Citizen account with 5000 extra credits in your pocket with the link below.
www.jointomato.com/
#starcitizen #spacetomato #servermeshing

[@Farrister]

Really interesting conversation, on a topic I care a lot about! Thanks for sharing your thoughts

[@SpaceTomatoToo]

Hey, I know you! Thanks Farrister

[@JClif]

As a mostly solo player, this topic was very interesting and eye opening to me. My fleet that I have purchased with real money has been focused on, "Is this ship solo flyable?" I mainly focus on 1-3 person ships. I would like CIG officially expand on their ideas of NPCs and blades for ship engineering/turrets. If I had more confidence in their visions of NPCs, I would be more willing to gamble on bigger ships.

[@ikkeheltvanlig]

You are absolutely not alone. I believe short range missions and spending more on ship shop expenses can compensate for not having an engineer. I'm hoping it keeps being a risk / reward / cost balance more than a question of required minimum crew, so you can choose to get good at running a medium ship solo rather than crewing it to recommendations

[@michaelives5729]

That's exactly where I'm at as well .

[@elixxx]

I get that people are worried, but tbh, i dont think it will be such a fast decay on components unless you run into fights all the time. If you are mostly like me who run none combat stuff, i would not panic just yet.

[@Dorm_]

A couple of ISCs back they said a ship require 100s of hours before we need to do maintenance, and even though we wont be able to solo capital ships in 3.23 we will be soloing them in the future for sure. No need to worry

[@SpaceTomatoToo]

I agree with you there.

[@UnderdogSMO]

mmmmm maybe, there also going to add environmental hazard. such as electric storms or Acid clouds

[@FunkThompson]

Well, some of the gun wear mechanics seem... entirely too fast and extreme, thus far. So we'll see how they balance it. Look at wear and tear on ships; you can look like an ancient rusting hulk in a few hours of play right now. That is just a visual effect right now, but you can see how players might fear the real deal will be similarly rapid degradation.

[@LucidStrike]

@@FunkThompson Some things are tuned specifically for testing rather than for the intended experience, so there's that.

[@ulvemann43]

These podcasts have started to become a very pleasant thing to listen to in the background while doing other stuff. But yes, engineering is certainly going to change up the game. I hope that CIG will manage to create a dynamic there, where stuff up to a connie in size can still be well done solo, but a bit tricky, but something bigger needs a dedicated engineer to be able to do stuff long-term. Also i don't think we can expect to see quite the same feature influx after 3.23, since these are mainly a lot of SQ42 features being ported over. However i do still expect to see a significant increase in progress from past years, since of the extra manpower.

[@SpaceTomatoToo]

Thank you! I think with a lot of major systems initially being implemented over the last year more "visible" progress can be made, too!

[@lorgan9595]

People are living in dream land. Players are not gonna line up to sit in your ship and wait for things to break. Its already very hard to find people willing to man a turret. Finding people willing to man some kinda engineering posts will be near impossible for most people.

[@JohnLovig]

Are you in an org? My org always has willing participants and we have a lot of people who love engineering gameplay. I think most engineers will love the management, repair, and tuning aspects. Also most ships will have a trade off. For example: a Carrack has 6 max crew and 4 turrets. That means pilot and one other crew member. I envision the pilot and captain being the other crew. The captain can monitor the engineering station and the mechanic can be assigned to bottom turret for combat scenarios. If repairs are needed it’s a less necessary turret. Same thing with needing a doctor…a doctor isn’t need all the time so someone won’t be sitting in the doctor’s office during combat, but they might be there during down time analyzing data, etc.

[@lorgan9595]

@@JohnLovig How can they love who love engineering gameplay when its not even in the game yet? I get that some people like the idea of it. However when they are sitting around in a ship waiting for something to happen its gonna get old fast. That is my prediction anyhow.

[@JohnLovig]

@@lorgan9595 they love the idea of it correct. Remember this person is likely also thinking about power management on the journey, rate of fuel consumption. Any role will be somewhat boring during long distance travel unless you’re the pilot and scanning. The rest of the crew might be in the mess hall chatting, or we could be planning our mission. Taking inventory of stock, tuning a snub/vehicle. Plus long term there is still the idea that we can have sim pods on our ships so people can race, play arena commander, or star marine during downtime.

[@JakoMacro]

I would love to be an engineer if the gameplay is rewarding. My ideal role would be a lead engineer for a small team of 6-7 engineers and direct people while sitting on a console and reporting directly to ship captain or bridge lieutenant of a Kraken or other Capitol ship. If the engineering gameplay is “go to sector C6 panel 2 and beam it to full health”, you’re correct, no one would want to be an engineer. It needs to be actual parts changed out or some sort of engaging puzzle. Fuses, capacitors, motherboards, wires, etc. or a puzzle like matching wires or rotating pipes to connect a flow from one end to another.

[@lorgan9595]

@@JohnLovig I understand the fantasy. But even if they managed to make such complex systems. It would be very rare for people to come together and engage in this type of gameplay. Organizing such things is a pain in the ass and only hardcore guilds could pull it off.

[@JakoMacro]

I am an engineer for hire! I hope the gameplay comes with some sort of veterancy where proficient engineers are distinguished for their efforts rather than the job being so simple a monkey could do it with a repair beam. It needs to be engaging in a way that an expierenced engineer can complete puzzles/repairs much quicker than someone learning the gameplay. If it’s a heal beam or fire extinguisher, no one will want to work toward bettering themselves at their job duties because it’s boring and brainless. We need engineering to satiate strategy minded folks like me that like to triage multiple ongoing issues. Maybe something like how FAA certifies pilots irl. “I have engineer certs for C2, Hull E, and the Idris.” They have spent x amount of hours in each of those ships in that role in order to have those badges. The certs aren’t required to join that role on a new ship, but when people are looking at resumes for 10 different players, the proficient engineers need to stand out. You want to hire that engineer because their skill set could allow you to win a ship duel of an equally equipped ship that has a less proficient engineering crew.

[@SpaceDad42]

What will you buy with you money earned? Eventually a big ship of your own? Then you will no longer want to be an engineer and will need to find a crew of your own, and the cycle continues. This is the flaw of forced multiplayer. NPC crew is VITAL to this game surviving very long after launch.

[@JakoMacro]

@@SpaceDad42 not everyone wants to buy a large ship and captain a crew. Yes you are right that the only money sink in game rn is ships but engineering isn’t in game yet, so this is a discussion of future prospects. Hopefully by then we have things like property ownership, Org/faction ownership of trade stations and outposts/stations or what not. Like end game Eve

[@jebidyah]

"The maths of multicrew doesnt really stack up at the moment". Nail on the head. Multi crew effectiveness needs to be multiplicable otherwise no one will do it outside of just forcing it once in awhile to make you feel like you havent wasted all that money on the large ships...

[@1RedDwarf]

I would not be so sure. Look at the ridiculously short thirst intervals. Leave it up to CIG to screw things up.

[@slider799]

I think manual cargo will sort that out. If you have to touch every box... then multiple people matter. It scales per person involved.

[@PolBlanesCebrian]

They really have their backs covered if they want to make multicrew a requirement for large ships. The amount of crew was always stated on the store page and, while in 2/3 man ships it's understandable, there's no reason why it should be possible to fly a 50 crew ship alone. Multicrew will only be optional in ships with a very small crew requirement and will still mean you won't be able to be effective in combat because you'll be out of the fight as soon as a component on your ship is disabled or a fuse breaks. You will be able to cargo run on a C2 alone, you won't be fighting on a HH alone.

[@Emerconha]

They need to add more things to do inside the ships that is not around combat, like the usage of the scan/exploration modules, drones, medbay, something to do with the components like repair or tweak them manually, rather then just replace for new ones

[@FunkThompson]

Eh.... so long as solo is "viable" and multicrew is "better, faster, easier" - things should be fine.

[@Dorm_]

They said a ship needs to be hundreds of hours "old" before it needs engineering. They also need to take into consideration that 80% of the playerbase mostly play solo, they wont make small/medium ships useless for solo play.

[@NotUnymous]

They should, tho. Whats the reason to enigneer if not beeing able / necessary to engineer.

[@Dorm_]

@@NotUnymous To min/max, you can overclock and make the ship go faster, make tighter turns, guns fire quicker etc. It will have its advantages. For me when i am on a solo delivery mission, i might look into how to make components last longer.

[@SpaceTomatoToo]

Do you recall where it was said a ship would need to be hundreds of hours old? Do you mean under very light load?

[@Dorm_]

@@SpaceTomatoToo It keeps deleting my comment because of the link, it was here: Star Citizen Live: Ask the Devs - Resource Management, at 35:53. Thorston gave a really good answer to the question.

[@korbentherhino]

small to medium is fine for solo. But its a sticky situation is solo players start demanding that large ships up to capital become easy to solo. That is where I absolutely draw the line. There must be a price if you want to solo.

[@michaeljbryant]

Love listening to these when I'm up at 2am to feed my 6 week old heh. I hope they take advantage of environment variation with tuning and repair. For example you tune your components for space or atmo and if you don't you'll have issues with heat buildup or lower jerk/peak accel from thrusters. This adds a strategic aspect to preparing for you destination which could be alot of fun. Anyone else like that idea?

[@Tentacl]

I played Warframe for years. Th obligatory multicrew ship was a FIASCO, it's still the least played part of that game, and people only played it AT ALL when NPCs to multicrew were added. Of course, diferent games, but pretending this gameplay is something completely new and has no issues is NOT the way to go.

[@csdigitaldesign]

I also play warframe and the rail jack missions and I have to completely disagree. It's a good fun game mode. People just don't like change and it's different from the rest of warframe gameplay.

[@TiredEyeBags]

I just hope it's not too complicated and I hope it's not something that needs done alot if you're just cargo hauling or something. I won't be too upset if after hauling a bunch , I can just pull into my hanger and work on my ship and get it ready for the next haul

[@SpaceTomatoToo]

I think the complexity will scale like other aspects, but for folks like yourself I certainly wouldn't want things to take time away from regular gameplay often.

[@Luffy-rf1ek]

I doubt it will be complex lol look what they did to the flight model

[@nuvankstrickland9223]

Cig since the beginning had always maintained that people will be able to higher npc Crew and blades etc for larger ships at the cost of efficiency etc. if that changes to near inviability there will be huge push back as most people who bank role this game are people who have been running under the expectations that they can play with the bigger ships with just a few friends and do stuff etc. not being able to do that will piss off alot of people by content locking larger stuff to orgs which is not smart. So im betting cig is going to stick whith what they have said. After all no one is saying that a large/huge ship with only like 1 or just a few players should be as good as a ship with full just players. But i hate the argument that content should be effectively content locked on the basis that people dont like the idea of a player emplying npcs to do it for them at the cost of efficiency and effectiveness etc. after all some people want to play with the larger ships they shouldnt be forced into an org or a butload of people you need to wait on irl just to explore a section of content you have worked towards. Because lets be honest getting a buch of players to do somthing whilst including irl responsibilitys is like herding cats. Sure some people have better luck at that than others.. its still a big ask when everyone has jobs etc. i know i dont want to be locked to only moving my capital ship if/when i have one to Saturday only or what ever day like once a week or month. The surest way to alienate your players and devide them is by locking content behind a wall of some kind and that will kill your game fast as all hell.

[@MrSolLeks]

And i hate the idea of everyone soloing javilens with ai. If you can do that, then large orgs will do that. Even if its not as good as player crewed, 5 javs is better than one, and that is a terrible idea.

[@nuvankstrickland9223]

So? If they can afford to do that they should be allowed to. Ita not like they will be an issue for you. Star citizen will be huge the likely ness of you running into them would be low and more often than not they would be locked in fights with other orgs. It's like if you don't wanna get jumped by a big group the just stay away from places like JT but hey if you want to mess with them then you can. At least you get to make that choice rather than it be locked from your decision making. After all the points of a space MMO sandbox is to make your own choices if you can't what's the point? And if your worried about getting bullied by big orgs them being able to solo or not caps won't change that. It just changes the scale and locks you out of caps completely if u can't solo and don't want an org. If anything with out solo you make the game way worse since you are effectively giving orgs a monopoly over an entire section of content of the game.

[@rooster1012]

@@nuvankstrickland9223 CR himself already stated that you will need other players to man certain stations, he used pilot captain and shield operator as examples that ai won't be able to do as that would be to difficult to program ai for. Ai are intend to fill gaps in your crews not be the entire crew, remember you will need to issue orders to your ai crew members and that itself will require a single person on a large ship.

[@nuvankstrickland9223]

​​​​@@rooster1012no that's not the case as afterall the npc ships will be constrained to the same systems so logically they have to be capable of performing similar tasks or at least cheat at them to be effective. After all it would destroy immersion to be fighting NPCs down the line and have them die near instantly due to not being able to damage control etc. so regardless of multi crew the ai have to be effective at those jobs just to make the gameplay balanced. Wether that means the AI will be able to do the jobs the same way players do them though is a toss up but they will be able to perform those jobs as they have to for ship combat to function properly even if it means the AI functionally cheats a bit. Also regardless that's roughly like 3-5 specialized people compared to 12-30+ people for larger ships most people argue for. Which is a lot more feasible but still somewhat demanding for specific content. Especially when you add in that capital ships will be persistent. Not to mention "fill"? Fill what what position even would you need NPCs for if u can't use them for those slots what would even be the point?

[@CitizenScott]

Based.

[@IrisCorven]

"How do you make overclocking fun?" As someone who spent years playing Star Wars Galaxies, and fiddling with experimentation values when crafting items, using specific resources to get higher durability or shock absorption, handcrafting the best possible speeder bikes for long term use vs. throwaways that were cheap to make, but you could buy for a handful of credits? There are a LOT of ways to factor something like Tuning into the eventual Crafting/Base Building systems. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised - if it is a case of "You're basically a ship maintainer/tuner" - that it would be similar to that, where you have to decide which material to use based on a handful of stats that resource offers, when it comes to deciding how to craft a component, or knowing what the limits of a component are when tuning based on what it was made with, etc. There's a lot of people who really enjoy crafting gameplay, and I could see people losing their minds trying to become the guy who has the stockpile of *blank* that is perfect for shields with slightly higher HP, or the guy who just has a knack for getting an extra 5-10% out of your engines. It'd really round out the industrial gameplay, and when stuff like player markets crop up on things like the Kraken, would give those kinds of players a specific role and a drive. Just like with there being a competition to be the best dogfighter or fleet commander, there'd be an equal competition when it comes to "who's the best merchant/tuner/ship component engineer".

[@MysterClark]

I think one perk of running solo or under-crewed is that you can run around like Han Solo and Chewbacca trying to keep the Falcon in one piece in the middle of a battle. Most likely why that ship is barely hanging on most of the time. Could be a fun bit of RP doing that with your ship in game. At least until you get the time to do all of the repairs or getting back to a hanger and just get everything fixed up. Not sure if they'd allow us to not be able to fix things up unless we're failing all of our missions. Speaking of solo though, I've been playing solo so far in this game. I'm a bit of a sufferer of social anxiety and don't typically hit up people. It sounds fun but I'll probably stay solo as long as I can. To be fair though, I've never really flown any of the bigger ships. Eventually I'll probably end up with a bigger ship but it'll be a while before I have something I couldn't handle by myself. I'd probably sooner join someone else's crew than have my own big ship.

[@Odenryo]

I don't like that ide that they forcing people to have party or be in a org to play the game, what happend to Ai npc that which you would be allowed to take with you is not on the table anymore?

[@JL-rj9fl]

Nothing has happened to it, that's still the expectation. NPCs have always been part of SC, you even see them mentioned in ship Q&As. I can't check them all at the moment, but I know the MOLE Q&A referencing hiring them to operate mining lasers.

[@justwords3882]

They are not forcing anyone to play how they don't want to.

[@MrSolLeks]

I dont understand playing a mmo solo lmao.

[@misstressscarlet]

@@MrSolLeks Just because I play along side others doesn't mean I want to be forced to play with others.

[@HunterSteel29]

Star Citizen from the beginning has always been about community gameplay. They have solo aspects but you generally will want to have bigger ships controlled by players in your Org or a group of friends as they'll be better than your NPC crews.

[@Spike.SpiegeI]

I love the idea of having different ships for different roles. There should be some ships that are optimized for multi crew. It encourages group play and orgs. We need plenty of smaller ships for solo players too, but it's so unrealistic for a solo person to be flying around in a carrack or a polaris. One thing people aren't thinking of is the cost to refuel, repair, rearm, and maintain these large ships. I really don't see how one person will be able to continually afford it.

[@realnerdethan]

This was a great conversation. Thanks so much!

[@EliteCustodes]

Short answer : yes, it will. Longer answer : it will mostly affect the multi-crew ships. The questions isn't whether or not it will ruin solo play, but from which size of ship it will. Let's take a C1, corsair or constellation as examples. All three ships are multi-crew, but they can also be considered as daily drivers for solo players. If engineering affects them too much, it will be a huge issue for solo players. Same issue with mid-size cargo hauler (freelancer, caterpillar, etc.). I think it should only affect the much bigger ships that really need many people to work as intended.

[@LucidStrike]

No, it won't, generally. Literally just get to a safer space where you can taake the time required to deal with the most urgent issue(s) and then seek assistance for anything you can't handle on your own.

[@rooster1012]

CIG clearly stated that if you currently like flying large ships solo your gameplay will not change but if you multicrew your survivability in a fight will significantly increase, they also were clear that components won't just be randomly breaking.

[@Haegemon]

The C1 is a 2 crew ship max. Won't be as bad. It's different with other ships which are intended to be manned by 3 or more.

[@stevenflaton2693]

I love that you guys talked about this. I’ve been playing solo with the occasional friend hopping in for the ride: I have tried all the big ships by purchasing in game mostly, (Reclaimer, Hammerhead, 600i, Mole, 890 Jump, Carrack, C2 and A2 and even the MSR) and have discovered I find bigger ships to be too much ship for just me to fly them. I don’t find it realistic, but some of the features were great, bigger storages, bigger shields and weapons and multiple vehicles. I found that the freelancer Max was a perfect blend of ship for me because it can house my two preferred ground vehicles for bunkers and roc mining and gives enough storage for hauling my refined goods. I feel at times with it being set up for “4” people, that it seems a bit too big for just one person to solo, but that’s where I drew the line with realism, I could see one person manning the Freelancers. As a solo player, I have not done any combat intentionally and typically don’t do bounties, I did however feel more confident going into those bounty missions with a C2, Connie or 600i where the shielding and bigger weapons made it easier, but besides that, I find myself always keeping my fleet small, which consists of a prospector, Nomad, Cutter, Cutlass and a Freelancer Max. I can’t help but feel engineering won’t change peoples opinions, however with a few posts I’ve seen and all the comments stating “well you won’t enjoy bigger ships when engineering hits” or “it’s going to be impossible to fly the C2 solo after the update hits!” I feel you’d have the same risk of being killed and or under staffed in a small ship as you would in a big ship. Especially if you don’t engage in fighting, it can still happen and you won’t survive no matter what ship you’re in. I’d still have to get up and go to the back of the cutter to fix something and by then I’d still be dead. Excited either way to see how the gameplay changes and I feel this will, for solo players make it even more immersive by giving it an added thing to think about before jumping in your ship and going out into the verse. Love your guys content. Keep it up! o7

[@IrisCorven]

This is how I feel about the C1 - It's just big enough to give you a decent amount of cargo space, the "house in space" area, and good flyability and such. I think both it and the Nomad are the ideal "solo" ships. And seeing the changes coming for cargo via the Distribution Centers, I foresee more focus on utilizing the "time/distance" for us industrial players. With that focus on using larger "freight" ships like Hull C's to deliver cargo to stations, then smaller ships to Distribution Centers, and then smaller for Distro Center > Settlement/City, I think we'll finally start to see more use out of those older/smaller ships, instead of everyone grabbing a C2 and calling it a day.

[@stevenflaton2693]

@@IrisCorven that’s a ship I haven’t given a go on yet, the C1, I keep forgetting about it. I’ve recently picked up a Corsair to test its “solo” ability, and feel it’s on the larger side still, BUT, with 6 piloted weapons I feel like it’s a bit more aimed for someone by themselves or a second person. I’ll have to get the C1 and give it a go. Think I’ll pick one up today. 🫡

[@IrisCorven]

@@stevenflaton2693 Be warned - it can hold its own in a fight if you can fly it, but the shields are DEFINITELY not up to snuff, and the second they pop, the wings are an instant liability in atmo.

[@Aethid]

Hopefully, the small-ish “daily driver” ships will be entirely usable solo (up to ~C1 sized), medium ships are viable solo but you would appreciate help and might be better off using a smaller ship (~Connie sized), and large ships are possible but not practical to use solo (~Carrack sized and up).

[@MrSolLeks]

C1 is too big for solo imo. If you take a c1 or zeuse out you should be quite handicap.

[@HunterSteel29]

@@MrSolLeks Nah, C1 is perfectly usable solo. You only have two guns to use, can manage shields relatively easily and components are easy to access as well. You could get a second player but it only has one bed so its meant to be used as a solo flyer.

[@MrSolLeks]

@@HunterSteel29 c1 has 2 beds... its litterally a duo ship. It has a tractor beam instead of a turret, but its a duo ship. You can fly it solo but your going to get smacked by game systems. Right now every ship is solo, it wont be that way for long

[@EdmundRobinson]

It will only upset those who have gotten used to solo crewing multi-crew ships. You'll still be able to fly solo in multi-crew ships. You'll just have a hard time if anything goes wrong while you can't leave the pilot seat.

[@CitizenScott]

People are always upset when new things come into game, from general operating costs to claim timers, but the "tedium" is what sets SC apart. The game is not meant to be simple, easy, and convenient. Things like QT times are a big part of SC, as are trams, manual loading, physical shopping, etc. All these "tedious" things that ground you in the world are what make SC feel like SC, and not like other games. If you don't like CIG finally implementing what's always been part of the plan, then those other games are all out there waiting for you. That said, I'm a pure solo player, as are most SC players, and I really hope they get the balance right between solo and multicrew playstyles. It's weird is how so many multicrew/org type players seem to really wanna legit punish solos, while most solos don't want multicrew punished, just balanced with tradeoffs and not OP. I've yet to hear any actual argument for why ships should be literal force multipliers beyond "that's what I want" or "iTs An MmO dUrRrr."

[@CMDRKetchup]

Thank you! All I keep seeing is orgs will spam ai cap ships and its like so what if they really wanna stop that then make it so the amount of capitol ships a specific org can have is capped problem solved. I mean after all we are star citizens not star military I'm fine with them caping the amount of big ships orgs can have as long as I as a solo player can have my own as well. I really don't get why people in orgs get butt hurt that we want our own big ship to play with they act as though a single player is gonna be a threat to them.

[@turbo111777]

great to see loud guns on here, engineering will be great for getting some of my friends on who dont want to fly or dont want to "only do combat"

[@Roboticus_Prime_RC]

Ship armor. That will make most of the small ships useless against larger ships. I disagree with LG's take on large ships. They should make us use the salvage tool for repairs.

[@RatikusuCh]

49:57 One thing i'd like to see is being able to purchase functional furnishings for a ship, not unlike Lethal Company. Like a player client tracker for player-run deliveries to supply outposts/hangars/player shops. Of course, this is when we get player-run shops.

[@XxTavoRxX]

Dont know how i missed this session, 2 of the 3 main people i watch to learn as much as possible about SC (i am a new backer, but ive been following SC for a while now) Nice to hear you both give your insights on this

[@UnderdogSMO]

For Long trips there is also the question of how much of space environments will be actively hostol to your ships health and up how much it needs to be mantaineed

[@HunterSteel29]

For me, so long as I can take my Perseus out with some friends and have a blast, I'll be happy.

[@thebrokenman6860]

I've said it before and I'll say it again, Loudguns is Star Citizens Madseason. He's our monotone Hero. ❤

[@XxTavoRxX]

Just in regards to engineering, squad and arma already have this where during a fight engineers heal the tank for instance. This can make the difference between a win and a loss. I agree having two or three mechanics to make it interesting, using a wrench for some areas, using a beam at other areas, maybe a tool belt with extra wires to replace. I'd actually really like to be that person making sure the ship "stays up"

[@MrCaptainWTF]

I think engineering gameplay for solo people should be part of regular maintenance when you land. But not during fights.

[@MichaelDBruce]

I think that a place like Stanton is going to be easy to move around in without too many problems. There are lots of stations, lots of parts... you dont go to far before youfind a place to repair and refuel you. When you get to bigger places, fuel economy, wear and tear is probably going to be more of a forethought.. also in a place like pyro, are you going to be able to get a quality repair when the ststion is falling apart around you. I think for multicrew, we are already starting to see some of the drawbacks. If im trying to solo a reclaimer, it takes longer to do those things than it does with a crew. Maybe i can still solo it, but if a fire breaks out or a part starts to go wonky, i have to go find a safe place to park, run a diagnostic, pull the part, do a fix... Im glad you brought up sea of thieves... in that game i typically run solo and use the smallest ship. If i get into a fight, i have to balance steering, the canons, patching holes and chucking out water. While ships like the hammerhead require you to have multiple people on board to be viable, i can see ships like the c2, or around that size where you could do it solo and it would take a long time, and youd have to balance what to prioritize first vs being more efficient with more people. Ive also been playing Elite a bit, which i havent since Odyssey came out. They have you balance certain tasks by your space suit loadout. (Im not saying this is a good idea, but its a concept), if i am going to do pure combat, i take one type of space suit. It has a better shield, better armor and has more weapon slots... but it doesnt have access to the cutting tool you need for salvage jobs. When im doing a salvage mission, and enemy soldier start dropping, that mission is now a lot harder because my salvage suit isnt as effective in combat. Maybe if im running solo i need to think about having a multitude of tools around to meet a number of different situations, like replacing a component or fixing an engine... they have hinted at this being through a repair beam, like the cambio attachment... what they havent said much on is where the beam gets its material from. Are we going to have to get 20-30 full canisters going to repair components and will i need to contact a slvage team to get that material going? Im not too worried as a mostly solo player and i feel like i am going to grt a lot of benefit out of being in a support role. While i dont answer as many support beacons as id like, when im out with strangers, youd be surprised on how many dont bring medpens or a med gun, or did and dont know how to get thier friend up. One other thing ive come to enjoy a out elite is that the space travel is reasonably complicated. If i take a combat mission to fight off raiders at a settlement, i can pay an npc service to drop me off and pick me up at the place. I can see this being a future loop

[@justalex4214]

My only worry with engineering is that it is a very situational gameplay loop and might have long stretches with absolutely nothing to do for a dedicated engineer. A good example we have rn is medical gameplay. A medic might be on standby for an unknown amount of time before a beacon comes in. But they can at least kill time with random contracts, unlike an engineer who will be stuck on a ship for hours without much to do. This is less of a problem for smaller ships since players would likely fill multiple roles, but for bigger ships this might be an issue, especially with bigger star systems and longer travel times. Imo solo players might end up getting the most out of engineering cos they'd have to do all the different aspects of engineering themselves (if they wanted to) and thus have the most varied gameplay that keeps them busy on a long qt route.

[@hIGH_aND_mIGHTY]

hopefully at some point they can combine the cases tech they've exhibited holding medguns, different medpens, multitools, and attachments into ship components that can be opened up and have various parts replaced. There is an awesome space survival game called TinCan that implements something like this.

[@luke5g230]

Great podcast thank you both

[@LordOfFlies]

I want engineering so complex it takes hundreds of hours to master like combat piloting. Every career should have the same depth available. I want to be able to spend tens of hours tuning my ship like if it was a project car. Imagine getting an old MKII connie and fixing her up.

[@Luffy-rf1ek]

They took them hundreds of hours away tho with mm.. they clearly don't want game play too deep so I doubt it will be that complex

[@LordOfFlies]

@@Luffy-rf1ek MM can still be tuned vastly differently so we will have to wait and see.

[@Luffy-rf1ek]

@@LordOfFlies I mean I was playing live for a year and still improving but I'm basically maxed out my skill in MM after 2 weeks lmao I doubt they will make it more complex because bobs really enjoy it

[@JL-rj9fl]

I don't think it will ruin solo play at all. NPCs have always been part of the plan and they're still part of that plan. I like multiplayer a lot, but there's no reason the game can't facilitate solo play. I'm sure the lack of efficiency for things like damage control should more than make up for a NPC versus a Human Engineer. The developer, I think it was Thorsten if I recall, said that regular wear and tear won't happen quickly - so as long as you keep up on maintenance a solo player should be fine. I certainly wouldn't suggest anyone try and solo a combat ship - I think having a human for damage control will be essential for success. Even still, players should be able to accept that loss of effectiveness and be able to have fun their way.

[@ArterialCanine]

Would love to hear your view on the entry level modularity. To me as a Retaliator owner I see little gain / choice in regards to having the Torp module verses 40scu of cargo! With so many better and larger cargo options it does not really offer a choice. Drop ship and hospital module might give some choice but? Interesting choice of two initial modules imo?

[@AUserName-fv8zj]

21:16 This is a very important point. If engineering is complicated and requires training this is good and not necessarily bad UX. There’s an old saying in UX based on a book called “Don’t make me think”, where friction in a feature should be avoided at all costs. The reality is that actually some experiences require friction. If there is no artificial levelling system gating the effectiveness of players, it needs to be instead skill based. We cannot have one engineer better than other engineers if engineering is overly simple caused by a warped belief that “Good UX is always easy”. Engineering is a complex topic, make it a complex experience. If players complain its too hard on day 1, I’d call that a success.

[@sly567]

Great show tomato. I’m not that excited about engineering but I like to be a backyard mechanic.

[@davidpitman9941]

I really like the idea of doing things while travelling. But they gotta fix the problem of falling through the ship as soon as you get out of the pilot seat while in quantum first... (I never get out and walk around in QT because of this bug). We're also going to need some sort of HUD or audible warning that we are coming up on our destination ("exiting quantum travel in 30 seconds") so we can get back to the flight deck or otherwise get ready for when we exit QT (you don't want to be down in the bowels of the ship when the ship comes out of quantum and there's an asteroid 100m directly in front...).

[@BlakedaBull]

You can calculate the travel time (you’ll have to do the maths for you) set a timer on your phone , and fold your laundry do some yoga , really improved my time with star citizen and home chores (roughly 4-6 min per long system travel, twice roughly if flying small ships)

[@darebmowe6765]

I’m fine with how salvage is to a degree. I like the way I can turn on some music and turn off the brain with it. If I want skill stuff mining it is not everything needs to be e to involved.

[@Roboticus_Prime_RC]

This. I WANT the relaxed gameplay of just using a beam to gather resources. Salvage scratches that itch.

[@LucidStrike]

Yeah, people talk about engineering like all multicrew ships will constantly be on fire. The demonstration at CitCon was a worst case scenario, people. And with inexperienced players. Relax. Also, if you don't think single-seaters will ALSO have urgent engineering issues, you don't understand the resource managements system much at all. There will be some matters you can deal with solo and some you can't, but also issues will differ in urgency and severity. It's always BETTER to have crew, but the idea that it's sudden;y going to be all but required is just from folks misunderstanding the system being introduced here.

[@ArterialCanine]

No significance. 150 awesome man. Love your content, chill chats. Nice to have LG on board watch his vids to. As long as it won’t exclude all solo use of large ships life will be good, I do hope it achieves its aim.

[@mracicot]

13:20 SC combat damage math has always bothered me. Consider any sci-fi show or movie you've ever seen. There is always enough time after shields fail before total destruction for the hull to absorb a LOT of damage, giving a ship's crew to initiate defensive and repair procedures. Gameplay examples so far seem to show that the time between shield failure and destruction is so short that there is not enough time to really do anything of consequence. I'm not sure what the solution should be. One rationalization might be to say that energy weapons have better effectiveness against shields because energy cancels energy. Once shields are down, there is lower effect against hull than against shields because the metal frame can dissipate some of the energy blast, though with a slightly larger chance of applying damage to any ship system module close to the impact point. If targeting specific systems (once that mechanic is online) or if randomly hitting a system, more damage applies compared to hull damage, or the targeted system is at risk for being knocked out. Ballistic weapons would continue to enjoy easier shield penetration, but being so small, it would take lots of rounds to do any significant hull damage. And like with energy weapons, aiming at (or randomly hitting) a ship's system carries a chance of knocking out that system. All of this should allow increased survival time for the crew to effect some sort of emergency repairs, whether to hull sections or to a ship system, thereby making the Engineering gameplay VERY relevant in combat. Every "Scotty" out there suddenly has a reason to be on the ship beyond replacing fuses (or relays, or whatever they're called).

[@jackpowell9276]

Id really like to see particularly the very large ships require a proper crew but also as a result be worth doing. But in return, they'd need to rebalance income rates and gameplay at the solo level to remain engaging. If they're slowing combat down in master modes, this might make turrets more effective against smaller ships too, making cargo ships, carrack, HH etc better able to defend themselves against a 1 or 2 man team of chancers, and require a proper coordinated ambush to take out. The point about a multi crew ship being able to seal off damage and repair it is a good one, where a fighter couldn't and would be a great way to bring a huge amount of EHP and damage mitigation to a big ship, able to self sustain and repair where a fighter cant and is one i didn't think about. I don't mind some ships being better than others. Thats fine, its a game, we work towards the better ships, but they have a cost risk associated. In eve online, you can fit your super expensive ship with super expensive stuff and likely beat someone who didn't, but equally you can get dog piled and lose it. Sometimes you make enough money per loss to account for it + good profit, sometimes you mess it up and take a loss, especially if you go TOO far on the expensive kit so the ROI is weeks instead of hours or days. Thats your call to risk. At the same time, particularly medium ships are a lot of fun, so multi crew needs to not hinder these too much. Im thinking around the constellation type size, these should remain soloable, but also provide a nice boost in multi crew.

[@LucidStrike]

It helps to give some sort of reference point for what you mean by "very large". The Connie seemed "very large" to me back in 2017 -- and Size 4 ships are technically consider the 'Large' ships -- but you could mean 600i and up, Reclaimer and up, 890 and up.

[@michaelives5729]

The game needs to be fun for solo players not just orgs players .

[@Killingblaze]

My concern is on ships like the Connie, C2, or the Zeus that has a min crew of 1 up to a max of 3 I solo my Connie and C2 a lot and I am hoping engineering won’t end that, I am all good about stuff like the Carrak not being solvable anymore, I just don’t want to be forced into a fighter only

[@Julien_Fedon]

In the conversation about tuning, it immediately sparked, “can a player t tune components and sell them to other player?”

[@Ruby_Medic]

Do they need to do a Gold standard pass on every ship before we can get engineering in live? If that is the case, I feel like engineering might be much further away.

[@VFW-Mayer]

Engineering Armor will need to Brace you while you move around the ship. Magnetic Boots and Supports so you are not constantly falling over when someone hits the Boost. Server Meshing will let us properly test the game play.

[@Fragnatix]

It doesnt make sense to solo a javelin, but it make sense to solo a Corsair. So Not sure how this will be balanced. At the same time, they want multicrew/org playstyle in capitals, while they can't provide a framework for orgs to proper manage their member/features in-game like any other MMO out there lol

[@dalesolo100]

Engineering could be like star trek Bridge crew. With the power management and what systems get more power and what systems get more people working on over other systems

[@Pharesm]

CIG has a persistent way to introduce new "features" in the most uncomfortable way possible. NPC crews should be first with the chore generator following afterwards. This time, it may actually affect their bottom line, as players shrink back from bigger ships!

[@metalmeltdown31]

I love solo running my Connie. I hope this does not ruin it. Would really make me lose interest in playing more often

[@Furnace2552-cz8iy]

I'm hoping the engineering is going to mean the end of a persistent solo experience on larger ships. Size one and even a lot of size two shift I think we'll be just fine solo but if you want to take some bigger size two or size 3 plus ships into any kind of combat you're going to have to have a crew

[@IrisCorven]

Yeah. Personally, I see no reason someone should be able to solo something like a C2, or a Carrack, etc... without a crew/NPC crew/Blades.

[@raven9ine]

All I'm worried about right now is, that MM will ruin the space flight experience. I will gladly elaborate if there's interest to why I'm rather certain that it will unless it's changed significantly, and I believe I know exactly what it needs.

[@C4R1TON]

There has also been the idea mining has gotten to tedious with all the different components and gadgets needed.

[@davewills6121]

Well, i suppose for a solo gamer, its just CIG adding immersion, slowing the process down and adding additional grind, yet for an Org, being part of a team, you don't have the luxury of choice...you just do it, i myself don't enjoy Salvage/Cargo/Bounties/Mining or towing, yet i'll need to suck it up and become a team player, exploring is what i enjoy, yet again, in Pyro i'll need to buddy-up. It was so simple 4+ yrs ago

[@ZackSavage]

I hate that idea so much. Like Mining is the only system in the game with any kind of real depth to it.

[@C4R1TON]

The reclaimer would be boring to a survival game player. Having a crew on board stacking boxes and someone working the claw is fun. Don’t over complicate it.

[@rooster1012]

Claw operator is not fun at all as there is NO claw and control of the magic beam should just be pilot controlled as just sitting there while people scrape is utter garbage gameplay.

[@SeaRaven227]

@@rooster1012 You won't need to just "sit there" when the drones and the scanners are online. The claw is only in it's 1.0 version too, things will most likely evolve quite a bit.

[@luke5g230]

Salvage gameplay need chargers/ vibration emitters that need to be strategically placed to achieve optimal break up of the ship

[@CecilIsANerd]

I'll definitely be doing engineering gameplay as well as industrial gameplay loops, don't get me wrong; I'm happy to go pew pew with the ole space planes and occasionally FPS but I'm much happier doing other game loops in SC..

[@Throwhandsbuddy]

I am STOKED for engineering gameplay. Just like PvP piloting, there SHOULD be a skill gap between a good engineer and a novice or average one as far as being able to keep a ship together. Knowing the relationship between components on a ship, which areas they can afford to lose and shrug off, which ones NEED to be protected. And probably some good managerial/leadership skills on top of that because larger ships will definitely require a couple engineers under that 'manager' to execute functions in a timely manner. It 100% should not be something so simple anyone can do it very well, these are space vessels. Not go-karts.

[@kennethjensen730]

You overthink engineering. As LG says, armor, shield, etc is gonna make hammerhead different vs vanguard. Engineering is just a little chill job.

[@MILSPECMOM]

Solo players aren't a huge part they're the biggest part, don't lose sight of that. o7

[@MrSolLeks]

They are not

[@CMDRKetchup]

​@MrSolLeks they definitely the largest part you are delusional if you think that's not the case

[@JayAndre562]

35:23 as a salvager I disagree with my organization leader Loud Guns here fully. Salvage is a lot more than click a laser and wait. The minigame is in the efficiency and movement across the hull. @loud guns

[@Anonnymouse53]

I'm hyped for 3.23, but reality check - just like every patch there will be plenty of bugs in 3.23.0 and server performance will probably leave something to be desired. This isn't some new pace, this is the integration of years of work. I'm in no rush to draw conclusions on the pace of development until 2 or 3 patches after 3.23.

[@wafflesinsanity]

After messing around with the engineering we have in Evo, I believe engineering will almost always be a benefit over a detriment. Unless you are purposefully damaging your ship or components, the wear on each piece is arguably minimal. A lot of people are coming at engineering as if combat and ship metrics won't change with Maelstrom. People forget that the future of ship combat will not be *doing damage until you beat the HP* it will consist of a cat and mouse game, with an attacker attempting to shoot at vital components or players within a ship, or simply doing enough damage to cause engine failure and whatnot. In turn the defending ships crew will be doing their damndest to mitigate the damage caused by the enemy ship. Whether this consists of a medic healing people in pilot seats and turrets so they can maintain their positions, or an engineer repairing components while under fire. Right now, engineering won't have nearly the same level of use as it will in the near future. But this really speaks volumes on the BENEFIT of multi-crewing a ship. As LoudGuns has said, there really is no reason to Multicrew at the moment. Aside from the odd Redeemer now and then, there simply is no moment where it would be beneficial to a crew. Once engineering comes online, we begin to see opportunity for dynamic adjustment in ship necessity. An example would be Heavy fighters. Right now there is all the talk of the F8, and while this is an amazing single seater with incredible firepower, once we start to see engineering come online, you then have a much more powerful choice. Would you rather have 8 people in F8s where damage cannot be repaired but you have a ton of damage, 2x4 in something like a Hurricane or a Scorpius, where you have more people but both are seated and cannot really do repairs other than what is accessible via MFD and still great firepower, or 2x4 again, in the Vanguard hull where the pilot has firepower and the turret gunner can either man the turret against lighter ships OR run around and make repairs as an engineer onboard the ship, simple extending the "life" of the vessel in a fight while retaining good firepower. Lastly there is the Hammerhead option. And this is where CIG has to get it right. There NEEDS to be a reason to have 8 people in that ship, and that ship should last 8x longer than a single seat ship of a similar career design. If not, people will always choose to run MORE ships with more use for that exact reason. This is similar to industry ships as well. Right now, people love crewing on Reclaimers. Why? Because the Vulture, our single seat Salvage ship, is not nearly as efficient or capable as a Reclaimer. There is bonified reason to crew a Reclaimer. This NEEDS to happen with combat ships as well. A Hammerhead is an anti "swarm" corvette, opposite of the Perseus which is an anti large ship corvette. The Hammerhead with 8 people should function BETTER than 8 separate anti fighter single seat ships. I still think its too early to make assumptions based on the plans CIG have in store. 3.23 has with it PARTS of the MM system, weapon rebalancing, HP balancing across the board, shield changes, and more. Its really hard to make a call on what engineering really will bring to the table until we have Master modes completed and Maelstrom as well.

[@DaBestEmperor]

I agree with a lot of what you said here. Multi-crew ships need reasons to actually be crewed by multiple people. Not by making them unplayable solo, but by making them much more powerful when crewed as opposed to a bunch of people using smaller single seat ships. If that is not considered for the purpose of balance, than multicrew ships will have no real purpose, at least from a competitive perspective. I really hope what you are saying is true in that engineering will be a buff to larger ships, rather than a detriment.

[@wafflesinsanity]

​@@DaBestEmperori hope so too. Honestly, thats how it should be. Engineering shouldn't make daily flight of any veseel difficult, as long as you are being safe and keeping it within *normal* parameters, i.e. not boosting or hovering in hot atmospheres, not constantly cycling your air in zero G, not consistently overheating your weapons, etc. If you treat your ship well, engineering should be only a net gain. Allowing you to tinker for petter personalized performance. On top of that, engineering should really make large ships more formidable by allowing these ships to *last* longer by way of field repairs. But, CIG needs to just come up with an idea and make it happen. They keep trying to appease every facet of players instead of just sticking to their guns and making the game THEY want to make. So, we will see.

[@TairnKA]

I (character), like most "Spacers" (born in space) have an innate sense of the universe, thus feels the need to be alone within it. ;-) With that said, I hope existing and new processes, ie: hanger repairs and scheduled component replacements, will be able to maintain my ship(s) and prevent "emergency" repairs?

[@lyonking2223]

A point: In the Who is the Mechanic section you said something to the effect that you wouldnt be getting into fights every day. I would disagree, in the case of career combat pilots like myself who is only interested in combat and nothing else.

[@TheDarkMarkNeHNc]

48:00 I still play atlas every once in a while lol. There was just so much potential.

[@RatikusuCh]

52:55 Waiting for AI blades so that even 2 Emergency Medical Holograms can even defend themselves in a capital ship. See Star Trek Voyager episode, "Message in a bottle"

[@Kevlar-78]

Hey love these interviews ! LoudGuns is awesome as well. Love the channel mate !💪

[@williamrow1378]

How to make tuning fun? Hell I will be opening up a garage and just tinkering with anyone's ship that comes in.

[@staybussin]

100i has a refinery?

[@richardweyland2467]

SC is building a game for organizations with the engineering skills. It is an exciting moment in gaming as current game play is all about small combatants. I look forward to engineering and armor coming into the ship types. Tactical planning will be very important with all the various types of ships in the game.

[@andrewfanner2245]

"How big is your cargo hold?"sounds to me like the ultimate inductiral player Bar Citizen chat up line, cheesy or successful needs to be scienced :-)

[@bigleshawn]

NPC crewmen with engineering skills may be able to repair and take commands to configure presets. No need for solo players to worry about this.

[@SpaceTomatoToo]

That freakin' sun...

[@rockon88888888]

Loud Guns voice sounds like Captain Picard. o7

[@UnderdogSMO]

if anythings going to "ruin" solo play it will be the Deadly NPCs that are apparently a thing in Evo

[@hawkzulu5671]

ROFL i thought it was just me.. i joined Arena Commander Pirate Swarm and found myself getting owned by 2 npc Aurora LN- so i had to sit up and sharpen up xd

[@UnderdogSMO]

Tomato keeps saying that this is going to be optional... that's probably bullshit unless you stay in really really safe civilised space

[@benmoi3390]

we are supposed to have access to NPC crew... of course an AI won't be as performant as players... nor as worst... depending on the player they are also supposed to allow to have players character stay persistent in-game while offline.... controlled as a NPC I dunno why people are so hype about personnal hangar!!! I would rather have a crew manifest screen on the each ship's MSD to manage the crew... and not have to use bed... simply managing the the crew as you would manage a guild... giving rank and access... so the engineer would have access to the engineering... pilot to the pilot control etc... you should have a crew limit way 3 to 4 time bigger than the current limit of multicrew ships. Bed should be a place to set where your character rest... and clicking on it would should the schedule... meaning... everyone need a 8h rest (optimal) thus crew member would select a time of the day where they would sleep... so a bed could be used by multiple people but the more people are using a bed..(max 4) the more they have some drawback (hygene, and 6h sleep if 4 are using it) so then your crew could manage when they log in time would be and thus set their sleep accordingly... and ship would replace the Hangar and the org... as the basic of the Guild... so like a Carrack could have like 24 players in the crew list... you could have more aswell but as visitor... or reservists (inactive crew)... which wouldn't have bed place... but those bed could be added with hangar ship like carack with an aurora.... then all those active crews would be 24/7 on board... as NPC... with duty... as gunner... pilot... engineer medic... mining/scavenging oeprator... cargo technician, etc... you could also manage the stock inventory of the ship... defining weapons clothing food and all... so that it could be automated at a station like for refueling and so one... it would had fews and timer delay... so ya people could use multiple account to crew their ship... I think that to monetize it they should allow only battlepass subscriber's ship to have their crew be persistent online... so therefor for org leader to pay a battle pass gonna be mandatory to allow org members to have permanent access to some of the leader's fleet... each ship crews log would be separated... so you could give access to specific ships to specific players... the rank system would be also individual by ship... one could be made lieutenant of a ship and not of any other... thus having most of the power than the capitain( the owner of the ship) that's just a simple spreadsheet with rank name and power attribution... access to what MSD control... doors etc... it doesn't need much work in-game to be done... it's just access restriction mostly... and that would then open up the mechanics for hacking for pirate... which would be mandatory to take control over any ship or just boeard it... otherwise you would have to blow up doors... and repair those if you plan on keeping that ship... or selling it to a legit buyer who could be suspicious if all the doors are blown up ...

[@TypicalDutchSaysHi]

People are worried about every change. Be it food, master modes, engineering, death…

[@First_Chapter]

As an IRL pilot I got into SC to fly, so engineering looks like it will be a chore but not fun.

[@wilddoggamer6167]

Just from the headline. I hope it does ruin solo in large ships. 100%. It should be a giant pain to run the reclaimer solo.

[@korbentherhino]

people wanna solo bigger ships are gonna have a bad time.

[@PineapplePinesol]

This can easily be fixed with with AI crewmates to gun and to help repair

[@Frazec_Atsjenkov]

Common guys, when talking about engineering in space. How about some name-dropping and their different approaches to space engineering: Han Solo, Geordi La Forge, Scotty, Chief Galen Tyrol, Kiith Somtaaw... Engineering is very exciting, even for me as a solo player. One of my most memorable experiences in SC. I don't remember how I got there, but I was floating outside Baijini Point in my space suit and I was trying to get back in. I stumbled upon this derelict C8R, and I had a feeling it was salvageable; that I could use it to get back in the station. In the end I couldn't, but it was all very exciting nonetheless and it would have been great if I had been able to fix it somehow. These moments of emergent gameplay will provide a new level of immersion. That is what makes SC so special. I don't see how it would kill the single-player experience. Yes, as a single player piloting and maintaining a ship will be a handful, but that is the thing! That is what I am hoping for.

[@BlakedaBull]

Freelancer can finally be a meta ship; very low failure rate for engineering.

[@Sovorious]

I'm guessing they will be balancing Engineering as they go but you will still need a crew to play large ship's properly. Edit: I don't think they will give us lots of bots to fill our ships with due to performance. We might be able to stack bots up between players though.

[@wraith511802003]

It will limit the solo player to a ship they can handle themselves.

[@zpilot4523]

fix planes for a living, excited to fix spaceships for fun

[@First_Chapter]

Loud Guns: lambing?

[@EmanuelSpader]

I can't wait for engineering!! Also i want CIG to make it as deep and complicated as they dare to. Easy to learn hard to master please! Give us something that we can actually become good at!

[@beardedbarnstormer9577]

Honestly good. People trying to solo large ships is stupid.

[@robertjt_]

Let's be real engineering is not coming anytime soon regardless of the C2 engineering coming to ac tons of ships need a component rework we have no time scale.

[@andrewwilliams9973]

Yes. Yes it could.

[@NotUnymous]

A ship with a Engineer should always be superior to the same ship without an engineer. signigicantly. Same goes with solo vs multicrew.

[@ptech8439]

If they add ai crew then any ship could be solo.

[@gunsmoke9030]

It not only could, it most likely will.

[@SpaceTomatoToo]

Howso? We came to the conclusion solo players in small ships likely won't notice it and will benefit from the system

[@gunsmoke9030]

​@@SpaceTomatoTooi guess we will have to wait and see what ships this affects, i assumed it was all ships. Npc crew is necessary with engineering so we at least have an option to stay somewhat functional if our corp/friends are not online, which is often. So i see it as hindering ability to enjoy most of the ships most of the time in this current state.

[@rock2k14]

I honestly hope it does turn multiplayer ships on their head, and that's from someone that has a very hard time socialising, they're SUPPOSED to be large crewed ships that require the multiple people to get the most out of them, they've always been listed as multicrew ships, if you want a solo experience, there's plenty of ships out there that only require one person.