The Star Citizen Thread V10

Viajero

Volunteer Moderator
I actually hoped ED was going to implement sitting in the ship. The current method just sucks. They may as well implement 3rd person for flying as well and be done with it
How does IL2 make it fun?
WW2 related turret simulations are fun imho because of a few reasons: To start with most planes involved fly most of the time in a straight line (or close enough to it) especially the ones with turrets, airplanes can not 6DoF and also their relative speeds are pretty close. In WW2 aswell, a single hit event was pretty much definitive for effect, so players in manned turrets can actually do meaningfull stuff. At least WW2 actual bomber designers seemed to think so too.

In games like SC or ED, ships twist and turn and accelerate/decelerate in a dime (more so in SC), turrets time to kill is measured in eons, ships also 6DoF (incluiding the one you are in the turret) making manual targeting without assist a nightmare and windows of opportunity really small. All that contributes to not being very fun at the core in both games.

Now, while SC has kept the feeling of a cool WW2 bomber turret forcing the player to physically be in a fixed unique spot with his own ship obstructing a large chunk of the view, that only manages to exacerbate all the problems listed above. Like it or not, I think that FDEV at least has actually put some thought into all this and tried to design it to minimize and alleviate some of that, whereas CIG does not really seem to give a darn about real gameplay and pretty much just wants you to remember the battle of Britain, weather you can shoot something or not.
 
Last edited:
CIG does not really seem to give a darn about real gameplay and pretty much just wants you to remember the battle of Britain, weather you can shoot something or not.
Makes sense. It was the first game series Chris stole “was inspired by” wholesale, and got into legal trouble for, so I'm sure it has some kind of nostalgic glow to it…
 
Last edited:
WW2 related turret simulations are fun imho because of a few reasons: To start with most planes involved fly most of the time in a straight line (or close enough to it) especially the ones with turrets, airplanes can not 6DoF and also their relative speeds are pretty close. In WW2 aswell, a single hit event was pretty much definitive for effect. Players in manned turrets can actually do meaningfull stuff. At least WW2 actual bomber designers seemed to think so too.

In games like SC or ED, ships twist and turn and accelerate/decelerate in a dime (more so in SC), turrets time to kill is measured in eons, ships also 6DoF (incluiding the one you are in the turret) making manual targeting without assist a nightmare and windows of opportunity really small. All that contributes to not being very fun at the core in both games.

Now, while SC has kept the feeling of a WW2 bomber turret forcing the player to physically be in a fixed unique spot with his own ship obstructing a large chunk of the view, that only manages to exacerbate all the problems listed above. Like it or not, I think that FDEV at least has actually put some thought into all this and tried to design it to minimize and alleviate some of that, whereas CIG does not really seem to give a darn about real gameplay and pretty much just wants you to remember the battle of Britain, weather you can shoot something or not.
This, so much this. Because it looked effective during subsonic Era, or cool in a fantasy movie you can't help but pillage, doesn't mean it will be a good thing gameplay wise.
The problem when "cool" and a whimsical pre-teen are ruling everything.
 
You know - I still cannot work out this whole “servers are full but we have all this new content we want to show you, but can’t because our servers can't handle it” nonsense.

How many states can be represented in one byte?
 
Viajero is spot on with the TTK and short time on target.

I was a multi-crew bomber pilot in Planetside 2, which I also used for Air-to-Air combat.
Old 3 minute video for reference:

Not quite 6DoF, but all aircraft were VTOLs and specifically fighters had strong vertical thrusters which made strafing fights and dodging standard for fighters. The aircraft were quite maneuverable (my bomber in the video has a boost/afterburner loadout!) and the TTK was extremely low.
For example: The belly gunner could 1-shot fighters and 2-shot other bombers.

The time-on-target only gets worse the more turrets you have — and the number of turrets you can stick on ships in Elite or Star Citizen, could result in putting SEVERAL gunners in "the boring seats".
This was a massive problem for the guys I played with in Planetside 2. My bomber had two gunners (+fixed nosegun for the pilot), but in a 1 aircraft vs. 1 aircraft fight, only one of them would have a perfectly clear angle to shot. The same even applied to bombing runs, but the fixed the tailgunner angle in later patches.
The most fun multi-crew battles was when everyone on board could shoot at something and get kills from doing so.

I think Elite went the right direction by giving 1 gunner control over all turrets but the TTK problem remains, the interface is horrible and the gunner can only shoot at 1 target at any given time, despite having potential control over half a dozen turrets.
What little multi-crew I played of Star Citizen, out of trying the Superhornet, Retaliator and Constellation — the Superhornet was the most fun because both me and my gunner could focus one target, or split our attention.
 
Viajero is spot on with the TTK and short time on target.

I was a multi-crew bomber pilot in Planetside 2, which I also used for Air-to-Air combat.
[…]
Another problem PS2 had that it inherited from PS1, but which they at least knew of and considered was the effective use of manpower, where the game mechanics often dissuaded the use of certain multi-crew vehicles because it was just a waste of people.

If you stuck Y people in a 2, tanks, you'd get, say, 8000 hitpoints and 600 DPS on the field. if one of them was blown up (because 8000 HP doesn't last all that long), you'd now have 300 DPS and a single target for everyone to shoot at. If you instead stuck them in Y solo vehicles, you'd instead get, Y×2000 HP and Y×200 DPS, not to mention Y individual targets that the enemies had to deal with. Consequently, it was often hugely inefficient to roll the fancy multi-crew vehicles, because they just meant you lost more people quicker while doing less damage to the enemy. On the other hand, you couldn't massively increase the capabilities of the multi-crew vehicles, or they'd be nigh impossible to defeat no matter what.

The more complex the setup, the larger the headache to make it remotely balanced and worth-while to play.

e: Maths r hurd. :(
 
Last edited:
You know - I still cannot work out this whole “servers are full but we have all this new content we want to show you, but can’t because our servers can't handle it” nonsense.

How many states can be represented in one byte?
Non technically oriented people trying to relate technical issues to other non-technically oriented people, and having a bad time of it.

But whatever.

The servers are actually full. Pretty much constantly.
Despite all the bugs and crashes, it's just fun.

People are complaining about the game feeling empty because Jumptown got the nerf bat, but Star Citizen never feels empty.

After the trip to BP for DG2, it feels like a breath of fresh air to play SC, and to have people to shoot almost everywhere I go.
 
Non technically oriented people trying to relate technical issues to other non-technically oriented people, and having a bad time of it.

But whatever.

The servers are actually full. Pretty much constantly.
Despite all the bugs and crashes, it's just fun.

People are complaining about the game feeling empty because Jumptown got the nerf bat, but Star Citizen never feels empty.

After the trip to BP for DG2, it feels like a breath of fresh air to play SC, and to have people to shoot almost everywhere I go.
This is only because everyone is currently forced into a bottle neck of one system. Wait for the 100+ systems to be released later on :unsure::ROFLMAO: then it will feel a lot emptier
 
Re. The servers are full comment.

They're saying that they cannot add any more content on the servers because of RAM limitations. This is with about 1:1000th of the content they have said the game will have. They have to rewrite a ton of existing code to work with SS:OCS, another feature that is still in design/prototyping phase.

Non technically oriented people trying to relate technical issues to other non-technically oriented people, and having a bad time of it.

But whatever.

The servers are actually full. Pretty much constantly.
Despite all the bugs and crashes, it's just fun.

People are complaining about the game feeling empty because Jumptown got the nerf bat, but Star Citizen never feels empty.
But SC is not going to feel empty when there is only a single system and limited areas to explore and travel times that dissuade people from venturing out and about. I remember Elite's premium beta also feeling full when they only had a small number of star systems.
 

Viajero

Volunteer Moderator
Re. The servers are full comment.

They're saying that they cannot add any more content on the servers because of RAM limitations. This is with about 1:1000th of the content they have said the game will have. They have to rewrite a ton of existing code to work with SS:OCS, another feature that is still in design/prototyping phase.



But SC is not going to feel empty when there is only a single system and limited areas to explore and travel times that dissuade people from venturing out and about. I remember Elite's premium beta also feeling full when they only had a small number of star systems.
Yeah, also I presume the comment about "servers are actually full" and equating it to "fun", is a bit misleading. I would imagine the main SC server aggregates players into servers by default (as opposed to creating 1 server per player) so roughly 10,000 concurrent players would fill up 200 servers of 50 cap. If there were only 100 concurrent players they would also fill 2 servers. In all cases the games would feel "full", but only in one of those two scenarios the game is actually a ghost town and clear indication of not much fun...
 
Last edited:
Our servers are full, we cannot put anymore content on them.

Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9zPhpxYD7f8&feature=youtu.be&t=1453
The best part of the stream is where they talk about how Roberts is an "amazing programmer" and they imply that he is actively working on the codebase.

Q21) What technical challenges need to be overcome to bring Ship-to-Station and Ship-to-Ship Docking online?

TL;DR
Chris has done a significant amount of work on Docking that needs to go through QA and polishing. Despite that, they still need to make sure that when ships are Docked, they can persist even if they're streamed-out (so if two ships that are docked together are streamed-out, then need to still be docked together when they're streamed back in). It's also unknown what should happen to the interior atmospheres when Docking, which will need to be addressed.

One thing stopping it that MA can think of is "CR's magical stream". Mark goes on to say that CR (Chris Roberts) is an amazing programmer who has a nice little stream (of code I presume?) where he's changing a lot of the underlying ways of how they attach things, and he has the support of a lot of the Lead Programmers and Engine Tech. So in this stream, he's changing how the Devs attach things to-and-from different things, and one of the problems with the current tech is that, if they want to attach a ship to another ship, a whole slew of problems arise because the ship has an interior physics grid with a bunch of Object Containers, and if you attach it to another one of those, the code doesn't handle it very well and it has problems. So in that stream, he has provided a way to fix those issues, so that a ship could be attached to another ship and it would work as you would expect. If that tech gets past QA and they fix some of the bugs that have resulted from it, it would open up the doors to give them the ability to attach a ship to a ship, so you could dock a ship directly on another ship. For example, on the Constellation there's a fake Merlin atm because they don't have this docking ability yet, but if they get this tech in and working then they could do this properly. The other part of the problem is persistence, where if they do Dock two ships then they have to have some sort of game code understand that they have some sort of ship docked to another, so that when they're streamed-out and streamed back in, the states and connections are established. Then there's the other aspect of gameplay: what does it mean to dock a ship to another ship? Does the interior atmo need to be vented, or do they need to decompress? So it's coming, and once all the pieces are together then more might be said about Docking.
Credit: u/Nauxill

There is no way Roberts is actively coding anything. As they progress through their careers, senior programmers tend to move on to management, tech review or team lead type roles. I would imagine that very few people actively code past the age of 40 (in an enterprise context).

This is just ridiculous. I also wonder what exactly they mean by "a nice little stream." Sounds like to me.
 
This is only because everyone is currently forced into a bottle neck of one system. Wait for the 100+ systems to be released later on :unsure::ROFLMAO: then it will feel a lot emptier
Re. The servers are full comment.
They're saying that they cannot add any more content on the servers because of RAM limitations. This is with about 1:1000th of the content they have said the game will have. They have to rewrite a ton of existing code to work with SS:OCS, another feature that is still in design/prototyping phase.
But SC is not going to feel empty when there is only a single system and limited areas to explore and travel times that dissuade people from venturing out and about. I remember Elite's premium beta also feeling full when they only had a small number of star systems.
I don't actually have any faith that they'll pull off more than a few star systems. The ship balancing seems to point towards a somewhat smaller than commonly imagined gameplay area imho.

Carrier gameplay development will be interesting to watch.

Yeah, also I presume the comment about "servers are actually full" and equating it to "fun", is a bit misleading. I would imagine the main SC server aggregates players into servers by default (as opposed to creating 1 server per player) so roughly 10,000 concurrent players would fill up 200 servers of 50 cap. If there were only 100 concurrent players they would also fill 2 servers. In all cases the games would feel "full", but only in one of those two scenarios the game is actually a ghost town and clear indication of not much fun...
You have quite the imagination.

But I see the same people at random less often than I did in E: D, despite frequenting CG's for years, and refusing most friend requests.
It's hardly a ghost town.
Despite a few people wishing desperately that it was.
 
I don't actually have any faith that they'll pull off more than a few star systems. The ship balancing seems to point towards a somewhat smaller than commonly imagined gameplay area imho.
It would probably be a good idea to only have a few systems. To be fair I would buy it if the released it with one well made system
 
They're saying that they cannot add any more content on the servers because of RAM limitations.
Really? That's interesting - because even on beginner-tier servers you can shove a couple of Tb of sticks in - and even in the most wasteful way possible you could "give" 128 players 16Gb of pool each, which is likely to be greater than or equal to local pool.
 
So the narrative will go from "you'll see how awesome SC will be when we'll have 1000 player + 9000 lifelike NPCs on 50 fully-fledged systems" to "SC is perfectly fine with a handful of systems with 50 players max, because it is sooooo much full of life than any other game ever made before"?

And they're still hoping server side OCS and server meshing will make everything possible, just now they're less arrogant. They're preparing the narrative switch. And we will be told any true believer already knew this since long.
 
Top Bottom