I feel like the removal of the shuttle is an interesting choice. From a community aspect, it encourages learning the game mechanics and provides a gateway to learn the map tools and contribute to the stations. But from a gameplay perspective it becomes annoying to build a shuttle every round or con an engineer into doing it for you. I feel that allowing the QM to purchase a shuttle makes still have a barrier to entry, while being more friendly to newer players on servers like WizDen Grasshopper.
3 Likes
From General to Feature Requests
I think Iâd rather like to see a station shuttle crew role. A single shuttle that is run by service and under the HoP. They do ATS shuttle runs with cargo, drop off and pick up Salv, take SEC out on patrols, and otherwise ferry crew to various points.
I would love to roleplay as part of a shuttle crew.
3 Likes
I think if the pilot is going to be working with cargo and salvs primarily, they should be under the quartermaster rather than the HoP. Otherwise, cargo should still have their shuttle alongside the service shuttle, so that way it doesnât become âcargo steals the service shuttle roundstart and throws the pilot out as a glorified tiderâ
Honestly I think itâs more like there needs to be a partial shell of a shuttle, with flatpacks for major components available for purchase as so far it doesnât seem in most sci rounds they get that far (And I started playing sci just to see what it looked like myself out of curiosity). As it stands, the shuttle isnât just late game content, itâs not content at all. If your typical round runs somewhere between 60 to 90 minutes and rarely to 120, you might have 15 minutes where the shuttle is built if the opportunity ever arose. This requires pretty high determination and coordination to do, too. Even if it were just expensive, I think the ability for a motivated cargo department to find the funds to purchase flatpacks would at least soften the blow while rebalancing is considered.
That said, I think the reworks were a necessary evil but I also fully understand why salvagers are upset by the change and are frustrated. As it stands, itâs effectively just not content in the game anymore that used to be. Adding content is great, but removing content is obviously always going to make people unhappy.
Honestly, with meteors constantly destroying shuttles, a few QM purchasable shuttles isnât the worst way to handle it. I would like to suggest a cheap tiny shuttle as well, designed to carry a passenger and a single crate, for when cargo is out of shuttles and doesnât have supplies to get it fixed
A couple of inconvenient truths on this matterâŚ
- Salvage is specifically designed as a role that takes you off the station.
- To design such a role that is apart from the station and then expect players playing that role to have a high amount of interaction with the people who fill roles ON the station is madness.
- The salvage role is meant to acquire materials to allow the station to produce and purchase what it needs above and beyond what is provided on round start.
- To delay the resources arriving at the station without re-balancing everything else in the game is madness.
- To require the station to provide a shuttle from scratch which immediately puts the station at a net loss that salvage then has to make up for before ever turning a profit is madness.
The argument that salvage was not interacting with people enough, and a change needed to be made to force people in the salvage role into interaction is based on the false premise that all people are the same, and will act the same if put in a given role. That the level of interaction is based on the role and not the person. If youâre trying to build a video game without introverts⌠you might want to reconsider building a video game, because introverts are the target audience for such a product.
In short, someone shit the bed when they removed the salvage shuttle, and itâs probably time to admit that, and put it back in the game.
1 Like
Okey. Now that a cool new role. Role-playing as alcoholic pilot flying people on spacebus would be cool
I think youâve got some egomaniacs on the dev team that get off on trying to force people to act a certain way through their all powerful game design skills.
The whole point of space station 13 /14 seems to be âgive them a highly interactive world and let them do what they want with itâ.
In a game like this manipulative design is not going to end well. If you think it stops with a shuttle youâre mistaken. Control these people or remove them, or you can probably forget about Steam.
Iâm just gonna drop my unpopular opinion; Starting w/o shuttle is more fun that starting with one as salv.
Iâve not experienced much of the side that starts with a shuttle, since iâm relatively new player. But on server where shuttle does exist like Goob, I felt it was⌠very strong? too good? I donât know.
I just remember first time getting into salv and nervously chuckling as iâm told the primary way to get around is to use fire extinguishers (in the lack of jetpacks) and FEELING like iâm a straight up scavenger, finding the loot and providing for the station.
Then, on rounds whenever a shittle was built, it was great since in one round you experienced the âlowâ of salvaging without one and the âhighâ of having a ship that makes your job so much more easier.
In contrast, albeit goob is goob, having a shuttle from the start did feel like it made salv way more disconnected with the station;
(not that itâs a bad thing, but what Iâm trying to convey is that it makes you feel less âpart of the crewâ given you now have a fully independent ship and are left with it for your own needs)
and made the salv experience be less âscuffedâ? It made salv feel more âprofessionalâ or capable of course, but I kinda really enjoy the experience of starting without resources and having to make do.
Iâm also certain that if I started salv with a shuttle, it would have taken me longer to learn the intricacies of space traversal and orientation, (sounds minor but as a newbie I feel like youâre less likely to pick up on stuff like throwing things to propel yourself, using gps and keeping sense of direction, if you just have a ship with a mass scanner that can just pick you up whenever)
Last point, you can get a LOT back with a shuttle theoretically. Travel to a place, haul things in it as fast as you can, then get back. Whereas I like the time trial and shuffle of âfuck it get what you can carry on you or stuff it in a lockerâ sort of experience you typically get now.
I do think there needs to be some middle ground though. Setting up shittle from scratch does take too long for a typical round, but Iâm still not sure what to think of a fully kitted shuttle given to salv immediately (I could just not be used to it since I havenât had it), a middle-ground like finding derelict but repairable ships, smaller less-capable shittles, or something alike would be nice.
Donât play that much salv lately so dont take these as robust takes, but thatâs just my thoughts.
1 Like
Honestly, I agree with this more than your new opinion. Salvage needs a way to acquire a shuttle without having to build one each round. The ability to buy one is ideal. And the removal of the standard salvage shuttle should be reverted until this is figured out.
1 Like
I agree with powder here. You can kleptomania shuttle on LRP, but it`s take a bit too long.
What if salv had a starting shuttle that is literally 2 seats. and 1 cube of space and that it. No walls, nothing. A shuttle from wish incorporated. The most budget piece of garbage possible.
And thatâs salvage job to upgrade it into something OKâish.
Would allow salvage to actually play gameplay they enjoy, instead of building one for 15-22 minutes by kleptomaniacing parts on LRP. Or going through bureaucratic hell on MRP for 40 minutes
1 Like
Honestly this seems like the most ideal solution. Ideally this would allow salvage to actually salvage parts to upgrade the shuttle. And provide value to nanotrasen. However I disagree with 1 spot of free space, it should be at least 5 spots of free space to carry space junk. As Fulton beacons are not always ideal.