The Star Citizen Thread V2.0

[Voivod]

Whenever i see a "dogfighting is so cool" thread over there i ask for a video. either no video is provided or the video that is, is just no cool dogfighting ...

I haven't found a single AC dogfighting video which I find skilful.
This might have to do with the infancy of the flight model so I'm hoping sometime they'll add means for tactical fighting.

There seems to be a lot of delusion among the SC videomaking community however about what constituted skilful flying.
Especially that "advanced combat training" video showcasing on how to shoot at the centre of mass of the enemy spaceship

I'm sure all this will change as the game gets more complex.

 

[Griever_XIV]

I haven't found a single AC dogfighting video which I find skilful.
This might have to do with the infancy of the flight model so I'm hoping sometime they'll add means for tactical fighting.

There seems to be a lot of delusion among the SC videomaking community however about what constituted skilful flying.
Especially that "advanced combat training" video showcasing on how to shoot at the centre of mass of the enemy spaceship

I'm sure all this will change as the game gets more complex.

I'm suuuuuper anxious for the next SC patch. I defend SC when I think it deserves to be defended, but when it comes to "skillful flying" I 100% agree. It hurts me to watch people playing and just wobbling back and forth doing nothing but point and click. I find all the training video's from the community pretty funny too, its like theyve never played a game that had any sort of newtonian physics "wow look at me circling an asteroid! Im so advanced, bet you guys can't do that!".

Im sure .09 will add a lot of flavour to the flight model though, I particularly like the manoeuvring thruster boosters idea. One thing is for sure though, no matter what they deliver, it will drastically change before release.

 

[Voivod]

Im sure .09 will add a lot of flavour to the flight model though, I particularly like the manoeuvring thruster boosters idea.

Yeah I also like the idea of boosting thrusters, it's particularly "sim-like" but as long as it's tactical or fun I'm fine with it.

 

[psyron]

...
What the heck is the fuel in SC, where is the magic fairy dust stored and why does a space-faring behemoth with anti-gravity and no fuel need to deploy vertical thrust turbo-fans to land as in the Gamescom exploration video?

In SC you seem to have anti-gravity. For example in the racing module you will have floating buildings in the middle of the sky.

It's therfore very strange to see that space ships need to use their vertical thrusters to land and take-off. It's like they don't really have a clear vision on how things work in SC.
I am happy to know that there is nothing like anti-gravity in ED - except for the hyper-drive, but since hyper-drive gets mass-locked it makes sense that it can't be used close to other objects or on planets. I think this is a good compromise.

 

[dumbo]

I haven't found a single AC dogfighting video which I find skilful.
This might have to do with the infancy of the flight model so I'm hoping sometime they'll add means for tactical fighting.

SC has chosen a flight model that is similar to ED without the blue bar. If your opponent can always rapidly turn to face your ship, there is very little reason to be in one place over another.
(in ED being behind/above/below your opponent whilst facing them is "good", in AC it doesn't really matter where either ship is).

So, "skill in flight" is instead coming from obstacle avoidance.

Quite how that works in the persistent universe is unclear (or are these ships only flown in AC?)

 

[Zargor]

SC has chosen a flight model that is similar to ED without the blue bar. If your opponent can always rapidly turn to face your ship, there is very little reason to be in one place over another.
(in ED being behind/above/below your opponent whilst facing them is "good", in AC it doesn't really matter where either ship is).

So, "skill in flight" is instead coming from obstacle avoidance.

Quite how that works in the persistent universe is unclear (or are these ships only flown in AC?)

The question then is - why aren't the ships round? Wouldn't that make more sense? Why do they look like helicopters, what's the point?

 

[Tiggo]

The question then is - why aren't the ships round? Wouldn't that make more sense? Why do they look like helicopters, what's the point?

simple: they sell better.

 

[Voivod]

SC has chosen a flight model that is similar to ED without the blue bar.

Erm no.
In AC you can turn in any direction in much much less time than you can in ED+blue bar optimal speed. You still need a lot of planning and prediction even when you're "blue-baring" not to mention the constant going in and out of "blue-bar status".

So, "skill in flight" is instead coming from obstacle avoidance.

Huh? Skill in flight is not crashing into an asteroid?

Quite how that works in the persistent universe is unclear (or are these ships only flown in AC?)

I don't see why the flight model in AC will be different to the one in PU.

 

[dumbo]

Erm no.
In AC you can turn in any direction in much much less time than you can in ED+blue bar optimal speed. You still need a lot of planning and prediction even when you're "blue-baring" not to mention the constant going in and out of "blue-bar status".

That's true I guess, I was perhaps trying too much to simplify things...

"AC is akin to ED with faster turn rates and no blue bar".

Huh? Skill in flight is not crashing into an asteroid?

If you watch a 'skill' video they will inevitably show players flying around dodging asteroids/using them for cover.
If they aren't doing that, then it's very hard to see any flying that makes any difference to the outcome of a battle.

I don't see why the flight model in AC will be different to the one in PU.

Because the AC flight model "works" due to those asteroids.
Take a look at ED - how much of the universe is an asteroid field?

Crafting the entire universe so that fighters have obstacles everywhere might be a bit boring? /shrug - I don't know what they're planning.

 

[Toumal]

SC has chosen a flight model that is similar to ED without the blue bar.

That statement is just wrong on so many levels.

EDIT: Ok now that I was ninja'ed by your clarification, let me put it this way: The lack of a strong yaw really changes the way combat handles in ED towards a more gratifying game experience. It's true that the turn rates are also different, which can be kinda sorta also justified by the much larger ships in ED, but I think yaw is the big differentiatior here.



I completely agree about the asteriod thing. SC's flight model is utterly boring when you're in open space.

 

[Jenner]

The combat in Elite definitely has a more 'old school' feel than in Arena Commander at present. I realy enjoy flying in ED.... I suspect that I'll come to terms with whatever Star Citizen eventually settles on. Frankly I'm willing to put up with a lot just for the sake of experiencing the story in SQ42 and being immersed in that universe.

 

[Pomerlaw]

I
Im sure .09 will add a lot of flavour to the flight model though, I particularly like the manoeuvring thruster boosters idea. One thing is for sure though, no matter what they deliver, it will drastically change before release.

The flight model is perfect and I wish it stays the same. You just don't get it. Practice more.


Just kidding.

 

[huzeeta]

In SC you seem to have anti-gravity. For example in the racing module you will have floating buildings in the middle of the sky.

It's therfore very strange to see that space ships need to use their vertical thrusters to land and take-off. It's like they don't really have a clear vision on how things work in SC.
I am happy to know that there is nothing like anti-gravity in ED - except for the hyper-drive, but since hyper-drive gets mass-locked it makes sense that it can't be used close to other objects or on planets. I think this is a good compromise.

Mep, The buildings do have giant thrusters, but AC is an in-universe game, so the maps don't have to have to make sense scientifically... even in the SC universe.

Edit: I don't like the masslock in ED because the gravitational force of a space station would be too small to drastically affect the ships.

 

[1500]

Mep, The buildings do have giant thrusters, but AC is an in-universe game, so the maps don't have to have to make sense scientifically... even in the SC universe.

Edit: I don't like the masslock in ED because the gravitational force of a space station would be too small to drastically affect the ships.

Well no one has said that ED is realistic.


With 0.9v I predict an age of circle stiffing. It will be interesting to see if CIG can balance the game were some ships joust while other circle strife, and then balance between them. I don't expect that flight sticks will be the norm, perhaps in the off hand instead of a keyboard, but the main hand will be using the mouse to shoot.

 

[Neo-ST]

Edit: I don't like the masslock in ED because the gravitational force of a space station would be too small to drastically affect the ships.

I agree, it should be renamed to safety lock or something like that.
Warping around near stations would be dangerous.
It's the same with real life ships and ports, there's speed limit (usually around 3-5knots) in the port.

 

[psyron]

Mep, The buildings do have giant thrusters, but AC is an in-universe game, so the maps don't have to have to make sense scientifically... even in the SC universe.

Edit: I don't like the masslock in ED because the gravitational force of a space station would be too small to drastically affect the ships.

"Giant thrusters for the buildings", seriously? You are kidding right?

I agree, it should be renamed to safety lock or something like that.
Warping around near stations would be dangerous.
It's the same with real life ships and ports, there's speed limit (usually around 3-5knots) in the port.

Was about to write the same. The masslock is a savety lock to protect others from the effects of the hypersace drive.

 

[huzeeta]

"Giant thrusters for the buildings", seriously? You are kidding right?

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Spoiler

 

[Pomerlaw]

hahaha I didn't notice that before. Those can't be thrusters!?!?

 

[psyron]

"We reached another over the weekend with a seemingly-impossible $52 million in crowd funding. Thank you for your support in recent days; I know the Constellation sale was a big deal… but the Constellation only matters because backers understand the vision for Star Citizen!"
- Chris Roberts

Can someone please explain me what exactly CR mean with
- "the Constellation sale was a big deal" and
- "but the Constellation only matters because backers understand the vision for Star Citizen!"

Was it "a big deal" in terms of "very expansive" or "very important" or "an important step" or ... "asked too much"?

And "but the Constellation only matters because backers understand the vision for Star Citizen!" sounds for me like:
"Yeah, we know, ship sales have been criticized a lot but only because those haters don't understand this project! But YOU do understand! The only thing that matters is that you still believe in us! Continue to give us more money!"

Just guessing ...

Edit:
And another clear statement:
"Like all stretch goals, that’s just an indication of the kind of feature we can add with ongoing funding.
...
thank you for your support
...
We can’t do this without you!"

Sound for me like this:
"Only if you continue to give us more and more money can we continue to produce this game!"

 

[1500]

"We reached another over the weekend with a seemingly-impossible $52 million in crowd funding. Thank you for your support in recent days; I know the Constellation sale was a big deal… but the Constellation only matters because backers understand the vision for Star Citizen!"
- Chris Roberts

Can someone please explain me what exactly CR mean with
- "the Constellation sale was a big deal" and
- "but the Constellation only matters because backers understand the vision for Star Citizen!"

Was it "a big deal" in terms of "very expansive" or "very important" or "an important step" or ... "asked too much"?

And "but the Constellation only matters because backers understand the vision for Star Citizen!" sounds for me like:
"Yeah, we know, ship sales have been criticized a lot but only because those haters don't understand this project! The only thing that matters is that you still believe in us! Continue to give us more money!"

Just guessing ...

Glade I am not the only one that read it that way.